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.
Here are the religious demographics of Huntsville (does not equal 100% due to rounding):
Southern Baptist = 41%
United Methodist = 14%
Catholic = 10%
Church of Christ = 7%
Primitive Baptist = 6%
Seventh Day Adventist = 4%
Presbyterian = 3%
Episcopal = 2%
Mormon = 2%
Other = 13%
So about 89% of the population of Huntsville is some sort of Christian. Other religions in Huntsville include Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Wicca, Bahai, Confucian, none, etc. Wiccans are ~0.2% of the US population (and probably less in Huntsville).
The Huntsville City Council rotates the opening prayer among different faiths and allows the Interfaith Mission Service to pick religious leaders for the prayer. The City Council meets about 50 times per year (mostly weekly on Thursdays). There are over 300 churches in Huntsville. So if each religious leader gave an opening prayer, they could be expected to give it once every six years.
From the OP's link:
Quote:
Blake is a practicing member and clergy in the Wiccan faith, and surprisingly the man at the center of this controversy has given an invocation in front of city council in Huntsville before.
“I gave the invocation earlier this year..." Blake told WHNT News 19...
I doubt that he was excluded because of his faith, but because he had already given the opening prayer this year (which also argues against him being excluded for his faith).
IMO it was unfair to all of the other religious groups for this group to be overrepresented in the prayer rotation. Let him wait six years until it is his turn again.
I spent 30 years in the Canadian Forces, as a military police officer. On two occasions I was seconded to a US Military unit, on a cross training assignment, for a year. Once with the USMC and once with the US Army. I was a senior NCO in the CF, and my rank would have been equal to a US E7. So I wasn't a rookie by any means.
I was astounded to see a briefing before a large field exercise end with a "prayer circle " of the assembled soldiers. I'm talking about around 40 Officers and enlisted, all joining hands and the senior officer leading them in a Baptist prayer service. I walked out.
I was approached later by a Captain, who asked me why I left the room. I said that I didn't think that I was required to lie about my beliefs, and that I am not a religious believer, at all. He was shocked, and seemed to think that "everyone " in Canada was a " Christian ". I said that was not the case and one of my past Commanding Officers in Canada, had been a Jew, and another had been a Jain. He didn't even know what a Jain was .
To me it was a clear example of " group thinking " in action. How dare you be "different " from all of us ?
Atheists (and all non-Christians, and sometimes even Christians for the wrong denomination) are really just satan worshipers
Wow - Really? That's like me, as a Jew, saying that all Christians "are really just idol-worshipers."
As for the OP, I think any faith should be welcome to open a meeting with prayer. If the speaker doesn't represent your faith, you can internalize the sentiment with your own prayer/words, or ignore - it's what all of us non-Christians do in these situations *all the time*.
I do hope all prayers in this context are short, classy, and not beating those congregated with the ideology stick in secular situation such as this. I hope the Wiccan has the presence of mind not to hold up a pentacle and start praising Hecate, just as I hope the Christian offering a prayer does not hold up a crucifix and start ranting about how Jesus died for our salvation. A few words with a simple appeal to Providence to grant focus and wisdom is sufficient, and likewise those present should be able to *endure* the adversity of hearing those few words without making it being an *issue*.
Wow - Really? That's like me, as a Jew, saying that all Christians "are really just idol-worshipers."
As for the OP, I think any faith should be welcome to open a meeting with prayer. If the speaker doesn't represent your faith, you can internalize the sentiment with your own prayer/words, or ignore - it's what all of us non-Christians do in these situations *all the time*.
I do hope all prayers in this context are short, classy, and not beating those congregated with the ideology stick in secular situation such as this. I hope the Wiccan has the presence of mind not to hold up a pentacle and start praising Hecate, just as I hope the Christian offering a prayer does not hold up a crucifix and start ranting about how Jesus died for our salvation. A few words with a simple appeal to Providence to grant focus and wisdom is sufficient, and likewise those present should be able to *endure* the adversity of hearing those few words without making it being an *issue*.
We're all adults, right?
I think you might be right and I might concede to you as a personal matter. Like I said in another post, when I started thinking about "how weak is your faith if it cannot stand exposure to another faith" it made me reconsider my stance a bit. I probably should be able to "internalize the sentiment" as you say.
I But it obviously is an issue and people (I am also a people) in practice are not that reasonable or patient. I just don't think you'll get people to come together and be civil in that manner. It was just in May that the supreme court decided that sectarian prayer is ok in government meetings, and lots of people then knew that these issues would arise with it. This CNN article addresses the same concerns that we have in Huntsville now. It also pointed out to me that 5 of the justices are Catholic, and it makes sense that they see prayer as a ceremonial thing anyways. Doesn't the whole thing just seem a bit unnecessary? If it is good enough to "internalize sentiment" (Again, I agree that this is the right thing to do on a personal level) then why is it not good enough to just pray privately before the meeting?
zenjenn - pretty sure that the "satan worshipper" comment was trolling.
Unfortunately, some prayer leaders at public events do inject their ideology into their prayer. For example, I attended an event with Senator Sessions and someone asked if they could provide a prayer - what followed was a way-too-long leftist rant. That's why I advise politicians to bring their own preacher to events.
Why can't public places simply have a moment of silent reflection with folks being able to direct their reflection, meditation, hope (or prayer) to where-ever they want to?
It is a perfect example of why religion should be kept out of public meeting and public schools. No matter what religion it is, someone will be offended. Therefore, lets just all do our worshiping in private.
It is a perfect example of why religion should be kept out of public meeting and public schools. No matter what religion it is, someone will be offended. Therefore, lets just all do our worshiping in private.
Just as a side note, I wish people were not so easily offended. Be offended when offense is intended, and rarely at any other time.
My primary concern is when religion isn't just gracefully avoided in public venues, but when it becomes taboo. As a person raised in a secular home and who attended public school in California, I knew embarrassingly little about any religion until my late teen/adult years. I specifically felt the need to enroll in a world religious course in college because my ignorance was glaringly awful. A successful honors public school student and it was new information to me that Easter was a religious Christian holiday at around age 16. There's something wrong with that.
I don't necessarily think prayer in these situations is a vital element in addressing my concern, but my concern remains. Whether someone is "offended" or not should not be a deciding factor when eliminating a religious element. The deciding factor should be constitutional - if the existence of that element might arguably be the government acting in a manner that favors establishment a government-endorsed religion. Allowing the Wiccan or Christian prayer does not, as long as all prayers are allowed. If it offends someone, they're welcome to be vocal about it; that's covered by the 1st amendment too.
Now if the government allows Christian prayer but forbids other prayers all else being equal.. then there's an issue.
Frankly I don't think the goal should be to create a theologically sterile government environment in which all discussions on the matter are moot. I think it's OK, and possibly even desirable, if we have a society in which these circumstances continue to come up and warrant discussion. Freedom is messy.
Quote:
I think you might be right and I might concede to you as a personal matter. Like I said in another post, when I started thinking about "how weak is your faith if it cannot stand exposure to another faith" it made me reconsider my stance a bit. I probably should be able to "internalize the sentiment" as you say.
Just as a side note, I wish people were not so easily offended. Be offended when offense is intended, and rarely at any other time.
My primary concern is when religion isn't just gracefully avoided in public venues, but when it becomes taboo. As a person raised in a secular home and who attended public school in California, I knew embarrassingly little about any religion until my late teen/adult years. I specifically felt the need to enroll in a world religious course in college because my ignorance was glaringly awful. A successful honors public school student and it was new information to me that Easter was a religious Christian holiday at around age 16. There's something wrong with that.
I don't necessarily think prayer in these situations is a vital element in addressing my concern, but my concern remains. Whether someone is "offended" or not should not be a deciding factor when eliminating a religious element. The deciding factor should be constitutional - if the existence of that element might arguably be the government acting in a manner that favors establishment a government-endorsed religion. Allowing the Wiccan or Christian prayer does not, as long as all prayers are allowed. If it offends someone, they're welcome to be vocal about it; that's covered by the 1st amendment too.
Now if the government allows Christian prayer but forbids other prayers all else being equal.. then there's an issue.
Frankly I don't think the goal should be to create a theologically sterile government environment in which all discussions on the matter are moot. I think it's OK, and possibly even desirable, if we have a society in which these circumstances continue to come up and warrant discussion. Freedom is messy.
And see? These discussions are not pointless.
I think these are very valid points, but kind of blur the line between being exposed to religion, and having be a part of official government business. I think its fine to have things like class ABOUT religion in school. I admittedly would be very skeptical about this in most schools, given that most teachers will surely impart their opinions. However, in concept if you could have someone coming from a neutral viewpoint (not for any particular religion or against religion in general) then I think this would be a good high school class. I also agree that some secular folks are touchy about religion. If you wish me a merry xmas or whatever, then that is a good thing. Whatevr you want to wish for good wills' sake is fine. You don't have to cover all your bases. If you're christian than wish me a happy easter.
However, that's different than having it being part of official gov't business. It's perfectly fine to have a "theologically sterile environment" in a situation that has nothing to do with theology. There are a lot of issues people don't learn about until later, or never really learn about, regarding race, class, gender etc... We don't need to incorporate all of these as an introduction into gov't board meetings. These are not the places to have "teaching moments" about these issues.
I also think you didn't know the underlying religious reason, isn't related to this. Most people don't necessarily understand religious, or any holidays. People definitely don't know the history behind every holiday we have. Why and how it exists in the form we have it. Furthermore, it has been found that atheists know not less, but more about religion. (Who Knows What About Religion | Pew Research Center's Religion & Public Life Project) I was raised in Jewish household in public school in California as well. While I knew what Easter was for in the roughest sense, I didn't know a lot about Jewish holidays. I don't see that as a big issue. I even think there can be an advantage at seeing what its like being somewhat of an outsider in a culture. Especially in America, where such a large portion of the population is from different places. The fact is we are very much a mostly Christian culture. There is no lack of a celebration and knowledge of that.
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.
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.
