U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-22-2011, 03:25 PM
 
Location: Chicago
38,690 posts, read 89,279,412 times
Reputation: 29451

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by nana053 View Post
He's using the government website to promote it.
Politicians use their websites to make personal rather than policy statements all the time. So he posted a press release on his website. Is that really worth picketing over?

Quote:
Originally Posted by catman View Post
Even if the "Prayer and Fasting Event" were inclusive of other religions, it would still violate separation of church and state.
No it doesn't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-22-2011, 08:21 PM
 
2,031 posts, read 2,413,714 times
Reputation: 1376
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drover View Post
Politicians use their websites to make personal rather than policy statements all the time. So he posted a press release on his website. Is that really worth picketing over?

No it doesn't.
Here's a clue -- the Bill of Rights doesn't have a blanket prohibition on "personal rather than policy statements". But it does have a specific prohibition on that which respects the establishment of religion. Which Perry's insipid event certainly does.

Here's another clue -- just because something is done "all the time" hardly means that it isn't running afoul of this or that law. All sorts of unlawful actions happen "all the time" by elected officials here and there around this vast country. Your pathetic logic means we shouldn't care about such things.

And, yeah, Constitutional violations are worth picketing. Well, not to you, obviously... but to some people who actually care about Constitutional principles.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2011, 08:48 PM
 
Location: Chicago
38,690 posts, read 89,279,412 times
Reputation: 29451
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyageur View Post
Here's a clue -- the Bill of Rights doesn't have a blanket prohibition on "personal rather than policy statements". But it does have a specific prohibition on that which respects the establishment of religion. Which Perry's insipid event certainly does.

Here's another clue -- just because something is done "all the time" hardly means that it isn't running afoul of this or that law. All sorts of unlawful actions happen "all the time" by elected officials here and there around this vast country. Your pathetic logic means we shouldn't care about such things.

And, yeah, Constitutional violations are worth picketing. Well, not to you, obviously... but to some people who actually care about Constitutional principles.
Here's the problem: there is no constitutional violation here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2011, 10:43 PM
 
Location: Metromess
11,798 posts, read 21,999,820 times
Reputation: 5074
The Governor, who represents the gov't of the state, is not supposed to take sides. He most certainly is doing so. It is a Consitutional violation, although the Gov doesn't care at all about the federal gov't unless he wants money from it. It is astounding that you don't see it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2011, 08:13 AM
 
Location: Chicago
38,690 posts, read 89,279,412 times
Reputation: 29451
Quote:
Originally Posted by catman View Post
The Governor, who represents the gov't of the state, is not supposed to take sides. He most certainly is doing so. It is a Consitutional violation, although the Gov doesn't care at all about the federal gov't unless he wants money from it. It is astounding that you don't see it.
The governor can take whatever side he wants as long as he doesn't commit government resources to the function or activity or whatever. And he can even do that if it serves a secular purpose.

If you think it's such an obvious violation of separation of church and state, show the supporting case law; I'd love to see it. Better yet, file a lawsuit. I promise it will get laughed out of court.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2011, 11:16 AM
 
1,745 posts, read 1,886,466 times
Reputation: 943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drover View Post
A governor is not "the state." The state is not involved because, well, the state is not involved. There are no state resources involved in this event.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drover View Post
The governor can take whatever side he wants as long as he doesn't commit government resources to the function or activity or whatever. And he can even do that if it serves a secular purpose.
I imagine your tune would change if he was promoting a Muslim prayer event. All the Christians in the state (edit: make that: country) certainly would be up in arms.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2011, 12:52 PM
 
43 posts, read 19,788 times
Reputation: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drover View Post
The governor can take whatever side he wants as long as he doesn't commit government resources to the function or activity or whatever. And he can even do that if it serves a secular purpose.

If you think it's such an obvious violation of separation of church and state, show the supporting case law; I'd love to see it. Better yet, file a lawsuit. I promise it will get laughed out of court.
The Lemon test is paint-by-numbers, and Perry is running afoul:

First, the statute must have a secular legislative purpose; second, its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion; finally, the statute must not foster "an excessive government entanglement with religion."

There is no secular purpose to this. It's having a prayer day for the sake of having a prayer day.

2nd, if, using govt. resources, encouraging an entire state to pray to a Christian God does't "advance" religion, nothing does.

And 3rd, the governor putting aside actual productive duties to conceive, promote, and attend this event is excessive entanglement by any rational SCOTUS standard.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2011, 04:40 PM
 
Location: Chicago
38,690 posts, read 89,279,412 times
Reputation: 29451
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuixoticHobbit View Post
I imagine your tune would change if he was promoting a Muslim prayer event.
Of course you imagine so, because it's easier to make the case against phantom arguments than the facts on the ground.

Quote:
Originally Posted by QuixoticHobbit View Post
All the Christians in the state (edit: make that: country) certainly would be up in arms.
Your intellectual laziness was already on display with the first sentence; no need to compound it with the second sentence. Indeed it must be easier to imagine Christians all behave the same way, have the same reaction to statements/actions/events, etc., than to acknowledge they possess a wide range of beliefs and values.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2011, 04:45 PM
 
Location: Chicago
38,690 posts, read 89,279,412 times
Reputation: 29451
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clownster View Post
The Lemon test is paint-by-numbers, and Perry is running afoul:

First, the statute must have a secular legislative purpose; second, its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion; finally, the statute must not foster "an excessive government entanglement with religion."

There is no secular purpose to this. It's having a prayer day for the sake of having a prayer day.
It doesn't need a secular purpose because the state is not involved.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clownster View Post
2nd, if, using govt. resources, encouraging an entire state to pray to a Christian God does't "advance" religion, nothing does.
The governor can encourage an entire state to do anything he wishes to encourage them to. Encouragement requires nothing of you or of the state.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clownster View Post
And 3rd, the governor putting aside actual productive duties to conceive, promote, and attend this event is excessive entanglement by any rational SCOTUS standard.
This argument is so laughable it's barely worth a response. What the governor does on his own time is his own business. There is no test that requires a governor to dedicate X amount of his resources to anything.

Those of you who believe any involvement by a politician in a religious event or activity is a violation of the separation clause really need to review church/state jurisprudence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2011, 08:54 PM
 
16,105 posts, read 17,927,069 times
Reputation: 15897
Gov. Perry said Americans must call on Jesus to guide them through the “unprecedented struggles” the nation is facing.

How can a governor be a governor to all the citizens and tell them they must call on Jesus. Many citizens of Texas are NOT Christians.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top