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.
What 'the Founding Fathers intended' is a red herring of an argument.
The Founding Fathers were a very large group. They include those who drafted the Declaration of Independence, an irrelevant document when it comes to Constitutional law. They also include those who drafted the original Constitution itself, as well as the many hundreds of state legislators who then ratified that document. They include those who cobbled together the Bill of Rights (and the critical Establishment Clause of the First Amendment) and, again, the many hundreds of state legislators who ratified that block of amendments. Finally, they include those involved in further changes to the Constitution (such as the Fourteenth Amendment) that changed the effect of the Establishment Clause. There was some overlap in these groups but in total number these men who founded the nation and its constitutional directive and then shaped it in subsequent decades surely runs into four figures.
Most of these men left no record of their opinions on the Establishment Clause, so any claim as to what they intended is to make a claim with no basis. At best, we can know what some small portion of them, those that clearly recorded their relevant thoughts, held. Further, the phrase of what 'the Founding Fathers intended' suggests a uniformity of thought. But we know that the opinions and interpretations of the Founding Fathers often were contradictory. At best, on this topic we know various disparate viewpoints held by a minority of those who erected the relevant law underpinning the doctrine of the separation of church and state in the United States.
Claims to the contrary - that there is a known and consistent stance on this issue that was held across the decades and throughout this large group - is unequivocally false.
Strict government neutrality on religion/irreligion is good for everyone. It's good for the non-religious. It's good for religious people of minority faiths. It's even good for people of dominant religions, though some of them are blind to this obvious fact.
As much as I respect and even admire a number of the Founding Fathers, I also try to keep in mind that they laid the foundations for the Civil War and helped codify slavery.
My freedom ends where yours begins? Why? We cannot both have freedoms simultaneously?
The OP is not about public prayer, not even sure what that is. It is about atheists who prayer schools and other publicly owned places such as at a council meeting.
Look at the two words in your own sentence. Are you dense?
My freedom ends where yours begins? Why? We cannot both have freedoms simultaneously?
The OP is not about public prayer, not even sure what that is. It is about atheists who prayer schools and other publicly owned places such as at a council meeting.
All I'm saying is some people may want to pray out loud, usually to the Christian God. I'm saying I don't need to hear it and although I'm not personally offended, I think about others in attendance who may be. Yeah, you can pray, but I don't think it needs to be out loud in a public meeting.
Last edited by trobesmom; 04-18-2021 at 02:37 PM..
Extreme intolerance is objecting to a short silence that discriminates against no one just because you hate religion or God or any indication of reverence for life.
Showing off WHAT???? It is silence!
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
Public prayer is usually NOT silence.
But my suggestion was and I said any objection to it would be extreme zealotry. Badlander took exception to it and I responded. Any objection to a silent period for prayer (or picking your teeth or whatever) would be extreme zealotry.
All I'm saying is some people may want to pray out loud, usually to the Christian God. I'm saying I don't need to hear it. Yeah, you can pray, but I don't think it needs to be out loud in a public meeting.
But my suggestion was and I said any objection to it would be extreme zealotry. Badlander took exception to it and I responded. Any objection to a silent period for prayer (or picking your teeth or whatever) would be extreme zealotry.
Silent prayer is a great alternative. It respects all kinds of sentiments other than zealotry.
Worship takes many forms, some of it performative, within sacred spaces. I doubt a muslim would want to bring his prayer rug to a public meeting or perform for you. But he may be able to say a blessing asking for guidance and success for the task being undertaken. Yeah, I am good with it.
Our annual town meetings are a big affair, often contentious, and we make important decisions about spending funds that will have long term consequences to the finances and the town. Yeah we can use some divine guidance if it is available. The meeting begins with a rabbi or minister from local institutions saying such a prayer.
I agree that Muslims most likely would be uncomfortable praying on a prayer rug in public.
My experience with town meetings, public meetings, etc., is the prayer is always Christian in nature. I've always wondered why officials feel the need to do that since not everyone believes in the Christian God. Why don't the attendees just pray for divine guidance at home before they come to the meeting? I feel it's presumptuous. I'm not offended, but others may be. Why not just take care of the business that you're there for without having to invoke deities?
All I'm saying is some people may want to pray out loud, usually to the Christian God. I'm saying I don't need to hear it. Yeah, you can pray, but I don't think it needs to be out loud in a public meeting.
There is usually one one person, such as an invited religious official such as a minister or rabbi or someone like. They do a brief invocation. I have never seen anyone pray out loud while this is going on.
How would a Christian God be invoked? They just say god.
Have you ever been in some kind of public meeting when this has happened?
There is usually one one person, such as an invited religious official such as a minister or rabbi or someone like. They do a brief invocation. I have never seen anyone pray out loud while this is going on.
How would a Christian God be invoked? They just say god.
Have you ever been in some kind of public meeting when this has happened?
I have lived in the deep south my entire life. The last job I had was a government job. There would be a prayer before a public town meeting and even before meals if it was a group event. The prayer was directed to Father God, Lord, Jesus, or some permutation thereof. And always, always the prayer ended "in Jesus name" without fail. At other times there would be religious discussions, i.e., bible studies on these same government premises, during work hours, often led by the supervisors.
As far as praying out loud, I was talking about the rabbi, minister, etc., offering an invocation, not everyone praying out loud at once. In my area it was never a rabbi though.
I agree that Muslims most likely would be uncomfortable praying on a prayer rug in public.
My experience with town meetings, public meetings, etc., is the prayer is always Christian in nature. I've always wondered why officials feel the need to do that since not everyone believes in the Christian God. Why don't the attendees just pray for divine guidance at home before they come to the meeting? I feel it's presumptuous. I'm not offended, but others may be. Why not just take care of the business that you're there for without having to invoke deities?
Muslims wont just be uncomfortable it will be a disrespectful kind of worship for them. It is not public performance it is a personal spiritual act done in a sacred place.
I don't know how others feel, but for me there only one god, the one in my head and heart. So any prayer is to my god.
Some people feel beginning an important meeting where tasks need to be accomplished with a blessing is a good thing. It makes them feel empowered.
That atheists fight prayers at such a meeting is not because they are worried about offending people of other religion. They fight it because it goes against their belief - belief that there is no god.
I don't know why they cannot just step outside for the few minutes of the prayer. Or just plug their ears.
Or just show some tolerance for community.
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.
