It would be nice to see the reasons why said decision is a good or a bad one of course, especially as to whether is is good or bad legal development. I won't hold my breath.
Well, I'm a Christian and, fairly obviously, I like it when the ability of Christians is practice their faith outside of the realm of the home is upheld by the law courts. Secondly, I believe that the act of prayer is one that is particularly unobtrusive (I mean, nobody is being forced to pray or listen to the prayer if they don't want to), and thus does not constitute much of a burden upon the practical business of government. Thirdly, as Justice Kennedy said, these prayers are in keeping with the nation's traditions, and I tend to believe that traditional practices such as this should be conserved. Finally, allowing prayer in local council meetings is the status quo, and I don't believe in altering the status quo unless there is something seriously wrong with it, which I don't think is the case here. Obviously, I'm not a lawyer or a student of law, so I cannot really speak with authority on that question.
