Day of Prayer Ruled Unconstitutional

[TheGreatOne]

Not going to comment here much, except to say that the idea that Obama is an actual Christian is laughable.  He disdains western culture.

Can I ask you what you beleive Western Culture entails? 

[Free Palestine]

Obama: "We are NO LONGER a Christian Nation"

Hmm, now when did Obama say this? I'd obviously applaud him if he did but you are just fabricating things as usual aren't you?

True.  Obama did say that, sort of.  Stumbling over his words and initially forgetting to say just.

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_obama_say_we_are_no_longer.html

Umm, okay.

There is a tape out there of Obama saying exactly what jfcmst claims he did - if edited out of  context.  Taking remarks out of context... .

Actually, here is the exact quote, I did NOT edit his words: "Whatever we once were, we are no longer a Christian nation – at least, not just. We are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, and a Hindu nation, and a nation of nonbelievers."

Imagine if King David had proclaimed that to Israelites and lifted up other gods to the same level of the one true God- God would have wiped him and them off the face of the earth.

What do you expect him to do, proclaim all the other gods false and have their followers burned at the stake?  He's simply acknowledging that there are non-Christians in America who are Americans.

[TheGreatOne]

Obama: "We are NO LONGER a Christian Nation"

Hmm, now when did Obama say this? I'd obviously applaud him if he did but you are just fabricating things as usual aren't you?

True.  Obama did say that, sort of.  Stumbling over his words and initially forgetting to say just.

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_obama_say_we_are_no_longer.html

Umm, okay.

There is a tape out there of Obama saying exactly what jfcmst claims he did - if edited out of  context.  Taking remarks out of context... .

Actually, here is the exact quote, I did NOT edit his words: "Whatever we once were, we are no longer a Christian nation – at least, not just. We are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, and a Hindu nation, and a nation of nonbelievers."

Imagine if King David had proclaimed that to Israelites and lifted up other gods to the same level of the one true God- God would have wiped him and them off the face of the earth.

Why is this so terrible?  He's giving every person a stake in the country, not just Christians.  I don't know why Republicans have this elitist attitude that Christianity ideology must remain Supreme.  We shouldn't have to interpret constitutional law based on the religions of the Founding Fathers.  We don't know if their opinions would have changed or stayed the same.  For god sakes many of the Founding Fathers intended slavery to be a legal institution, and a large minority didn't beleive in the Freedoms of Speech we currently have.   The interpretation of the Constition should be interpreted the way modern society sees fit.   

[dead0man]

I'm with the Red staters on this one.  Lets kill Christmas next.

[cinyc]

cinyc, that's an appeal to tradition. It's a logical fallacy.

Not when interpreting the constitution.   Who do you suppose we're supposed to give thanks to during Thanksgiving?  How many national prayer days did George Washington pronounce?  How can something that the founders also proclaimed be unconstitutional?

The Alien and Sedition Acts were clearly unconstitutional, for instance.

The constitutionality of the Alien and Sedition Acts was questioned by the Anti-Federalists immediately after they were passed.  Two state legislatures denounced them.  And the most odious provisions of the Alien and Sedition Acts were never passed again.  No Supreme Court case was brought against the law, but Marbury v. Madison hadn't been decided yet.

The sheer number of Presidents who have proclaimed days of prayer or fasting - including Washington, Adams, Madison and Lincoln - suggests it is constitutional if not mandatory.

No matter how common something is, it can still be unconstitutional. "Commonness" is not a constitutionally relevant criterion. Segregation was quite common and actively supported by many Presidents, but it was ultimately ruled unconstitutional.

Commonness is absolutely a relevant criterion when interpreting the Constitution, especially when what is common was so back around the time of the founding.  Original intent matters to the Supreme Court - and what the Founders did is highly relevant.

I suppose this doesn't matter to liberals who believe that the Constitution should be read to mean whatever they think it means in light of current circumstances.  But the current Supreme Court doesn't think that way.

[opebo]

...Imagine if King David had proclaimed that to Israelites and lifted up other gods to the same level of the one true God- God would have wiped him and them off the face of the earth.

Well, bring it on!

[Free Palestine]

cinyc, that's an appeal to tradition. It's a logical fallacy.

Not when interpreting the constitution.   Who do you suppose we're supposed to give thanks to during Thanksgiving?  How many national prayer days did George Washington pronounce?  How can something that the founders also proclaimed be unconstitutional?

The Alien and Sedition Acts were clearly unconstitutional, for instance.

The constitutionality of the Alien and Sedition Acts was questioned by the Anti-Federalists immediately after they were passed.  Two state legislatures denounced them.  And the most odious provisions of the Alien and Sedition Acts were never passed again.  No Supreme Court case was brought against the law, but Marbury v. Madison hadn't been decided yet.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I may be forgetting my Old Testament, but I don't believe God smote Solomon.

I King 11:11   Wherefore the LORD said unto Solomon, "Forasmuch as this is done of thee, and thou hast not kept My covenant and My statutes, which I have commanded thee, I will surely rend the kingdom from thee, and will give it to thy servant. 12    Notwithstanding in thy days I will not do it for David thy father's sake: but I will rend it out of the hand of thy son. 13    Howbeit I will not rend away all the kingdom; but will give one tribe to thy son for David My servant's sake, and for Jerusalem's sake which I have chosen."

Solomon was the cause of Israel splitting into two nations, which didn't turn out well

[John Dibble]

Good. Taxpayer money shouldn't be wasted in any form by encouraging prayer. It's the job of pastors, priests, and other such people to encourage people to pray, not the government.

[fezzyfestoon]

Good, it was an explicit pronouncement of Christian preference.  It's understandable that so many Christians are apprehensive about their steel grip being eased off this country.  But they have to remember that it is not just their country and an appeal to majority is not a legitimate claim to dominance.  That's the same logical fallacy used against black people getting rights as well.  It's a real test of character to be able to stand for what's right even when you don't have to.  And we all know Christians could easily force us down an even more insane path, but we thankfully have well-rounded Christians like Obama in high posts.

[cinyc]

Good, it was an explicit pronouncement of Christian preference.  It's understandable that so many Christians are apprehensive about their steel grip being eased off this country.  But they have to remember that it is not just their country and an appeal to majority is not a legitimate claim to dominance.  That's the same logical fallacy used against black people getting rights as well.  It's a real test of character to be able to stand for what's right even when you don't have to.  And we all know Christians could easily force us down an even more insane path, but we thankfully have well-rounded Christians like Obama in high posts.

There is nothing inherently Christian about prayer or the National Day of Prayer.  And your distrust of Christians is extremely disturbing.

As for Obama:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[fezzyfestoon]

Good, it was an explicit pronouncement of Christian preference.  It's understandable that so many Christians are apprehensive about their steel grip being eased off this country.  But they have to remember that it is not just their country and an appeal to majority is not a legitimate claim to dominance.  That's the same logical fallacy used against black people getting rights as well.  It's a real test of character to be able to stand for what's right even when you don't have to.  And we all know Christians could easily force us down an even more insane path, but we thankfully have well-rounded Christians like Obama in high posts.

There is nothing inherently Christian about prayer or the National Day of Prayer.  And your distrust of Christians is extremely disturbing.

Because history is sure on the side of Christians being peaceful and restrained in the hands of extreme power.  What is it about my distrust so "extremely disturbing"?  Those are some strong words.

And let's not pretend it isn't all about Christians, that much is obvious.  Regardless, there is something inherently religious about prayer, something the United States is not.  Every American should be able to call the government theirs, millions cannot with things like this in place.

[cinyc]

Good, it was an explicit pronouncement of Christian preference.  It's understandable that so many Christians are apprehensive about their steel grip being eased off this country.  But they have to remember that it is not just their country and an appeal to majority is not a legitimate claim to dominance.  That's the same logical fallacy used against black people getting rights as well.  It's a real test of character to be able to stand for what's right even when you don't have to.  And we all know Christians could easily force us down an even more insane path, but we thankfully have well-rounded Christians like Obama in high posts.

There is nothing inherently Christian about prayer or the National Day of Prayer.  And your distrust of Christians is extremely disturbing.

Because history is sure on the side of Christians being peaceful and restrained in the hands of extreme power.  What is it about my distrust so "extremely disturbing"?  Those are some strong words.

And let's not pretend it isn't all about Christians, that much is obvious.  Regardless, there is something inherently religious about prayer, something the United States is not.  Every American should be able to call the government theirs, millions cannot with things like this in place.

Because it is extremely irrational in the US context.  Christians have never been anything but peaceful and restrained in the US, and never really had extreme power.  And because it's a sign of disrespect for people with legitimately held religious beliefs, one step up from anti-Semitism.  

A day of prayer ISN'T all about Christians.  It's about prayer - OPTIONAL prayer.  No one is being forced to pray to anyone. I suppose by your logic, millions of Christians and other religious Americans and even the not-so-religious who still pray at times ought not to be able to call the government theirs since it cannot even call for an optional day of prayer.

Let's ban Thanksgiving, too, while we're at it.  And forget about Christmas.  That's just another day - so let's force government employees to work it.

[Joe Republic]

What the heck is the point of a 'day of prayer' anyway?

[Verily]

What the heck is the point of a 'day of prayer' anyway?

To... promote prayer. Which is an inherently Abrahamic (if not necessarily Christian) notion. Although of course in the United States it is tantamount to a day of Christian prayer.

[Scam of God]

Good. Taxpayer money shouldn't be wasted in any form by encouraging prayer. It's the job of pastors, priests, and other such people to encourage people to pray, not the government.

Precisely. How is it that our resident theocrats can, on the one hand, denounce the size of the Federal government, and then, breathlessly, turn around and argue it ought to prop up their preferred denomination with the other?

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Good. Taxpayer money shouldn't be wasted in any form by encouraging prayer. It's the job of pastors, priests, and other such people to encourage people to pray, not the government.

Precisely. How is it that our resident theocrats can, on the one hand, denounce the size of the Federal government, and then, breathlessly, turn around and argue it ought to prop up their preferred denomination with the other?

And the Obama administration is too afraid to take such a stance......

[Scam of God]

Good. Taxpayer money shouldn't be wasted in any form by encouraging prayer. It's the job of pastors, priests, and other such people to encourage people to pray, not the government.

Precisely. How is it that our resident theocrats can, on the one hand, denounce the size of the Federal government, and then, breathlessly, turn around and argue it ought to prop up their preferred denomination with the other?

And the Obama administration is too afraid to take such a stance......

It's all a political ploy, of course. We'll see what happens as Obama more and more positions himself as a populist, which has in fact been happening belowgrounds. We'll see the wheat fall away from the chaff then, as the mobilized Christian masses abandon all pretense to a small-government philosophy.

[John Dibble]

Christians have never been anything but peaceful and restrained in the US, and never really had extreme power.

Are you kidding? Tons of evil has been done by Christians with their religion as justification in the history of this nation, some of it even against other Christians!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Let's suppose we accept the notion that the day of prayer wasn't established for Christians. So what? I'm an atheist - why should even a cent of my tax dollars be used to encourage an act that is entirely religious?

If people want to pray, they can. Nobody is stopping them. Nobody is stopping churches from holding their own prayer day either. Besides, isn't prayer supposed to be something you do year round?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Thanksgiving and Christmas are secularized enough that it really isn't necessary to do that.

[Brittain33]

This lawsuit and ruling on this crucial issue are so, so helpful to progressive causes.

[Scam of God]

Moreso to the libertarian cause, I should think.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Moreso to the libertarian cause, I should think.

     I would agree. While it helps reduce the role of religion in government, it can also be seen as an expression of the libertarian notion that no person should be coerced into action by the government, in this case into funding a project that s/he does not wish to fund.

[Verily]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Thanksgiving and Christmas are secularized enough that it really isn't necessary to do that.

Also, part of the point of government holidays is to avoid being open on days when your employees will not want to work/take sick days if they're not given the day off. Consider what happens in NYC offices on Rosh Hashanah, and imagine that taking place all across the country. Not worth being open.

[cinyc]

Christians have never been anything but peaceful and restrained in the US, and never really had extreme power.

Are you kidding? Tons of evil has been done by Christians with their religion as justification in the history of this nation, some of it even against other Christians!

Name one thing.  Your attitude towards Christians and religious people is extremely intolerant.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Let's suppose we accept the notion that the day of prayer wasn't established for Christians. So what? I'm an atheist - why should even a cent of my tax dollars be used to encourage an act that is entirely religious?

If people want to pray, they can. Nobody is stopping them. Nobody is stopping churches from holding their own prayer day either. Besides, isn't prayer supposed to be something you do year round?[/quote]

It costs NOTHING more to proclaim a day a national day of prayer than it does to proclaim it Martin Luther King Day, Lincoln's Birthday or Hispanic or Womens' History Month.  In fact, those cost more to declare those holidays because government offices are closed.  If I don't like Martin Luther King or Lincoln, or if I'm not Hispanic or a woman why should one cent of my tax dollars be used to encourage days honoring those people or groups?

Atheism IS a religion.  By making the mere mention of other religions in a proclamation taboo, the government is establishing atheism as the state religion.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Thanksgiving and Christmas are secularized enough that it really isn't necessary to do that.
[/quote]

Who are we giving thanks to?  What's Christmas about?  Those holidays aren't secular at all - especially CHRISTmas.

[Scam of God]

Name one thing.  Your attitude towards Christians and religious people is extremely intolerant.

Why is "tolerance" made into a virtue with you? Both Dibble and I are libertarians, not liberals; we don't feel the need to refrain from stepping on the toes of your precious special interests. I've noticed that the whining of Christian Dominionists has taken on an increasingly cosmopolitan tone in recent years - it stinks of special pleading. There's no reason to be tolerant towards the dominant group in American society.

We ought to treat religions like competitors in a market; what's good for the goose is good for the gander. What we do not need is the State supporting one or the other and thereby monopolizing the marketplace of ideas.