Supreme Court Decides on Town Meeting Prayer

[quote]JR249 wrote:
Having the prayers initiated and recited by members of the public, and thus citizen initiated as opposed to recited and established by the town council itself, appears to have been a mitigating factor in how this particular case was decided.
[/quote]

Edit: I will have to think about this.

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

Edit: I will have to think about this.[/quote]

I think people sometimes forget that very narrow details decide cases like this, and that such legal decisions are sometimes applicable to a very narrow set of circumstances.

In reading three articles on the outcome of the case, it appears that the issue revolved around a) historical precedent for prayer at public, government meetings (already apparently set in an earlier 1980s case involving a state legislature), b) whether or not the prayers were coercive or intimidating to non-adherents, and c) the fact that members of the public were the ones inciting the prayers, even though, as you noted, these were meetings of governing bodies.

If nothing else, I am sure everyone can agree that law is complex and ever-changing, and case law is always tailored to a narrow set of circumstances that are rarely, if ever, the same in any two situations.

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:
However I find this absolutely not “faith intruding on government matters”. Firstly, that is pretty impossible to avoid unless you want a person of faith to be a complete ass hypocrite while in office (not that there aren’t a million hypocrites already). Or unless you think only atheists should be elected to office (I’m fairly certain you’re not that silly). Everybody carries their worldview into office.

[/quote]

Indeed they do carry their worldviews into office, and of course it neither should nor could be any different. But there is a serious difference, as far as I’m concerned anyway, between a governing body made up of people of individual and free conscience on the one hand, and a governing body which prays to a deity during the course of the execution of its official duties as a governing body.

Half of PWI would melt into a puddle of blind indignation and crimson fury if a local government somewhere in the United States began reciting Muslim prayers at the outset of convention. Or, even better, how about a town government that begins its official proceedings with, “We hereby and in good faith promise–to each other–that we will execute the duties of our offices faithfully, because there is no God and there is no plan and we are thus solely responsible for ourselves, each other, and the well-being of our society.” PWI would collapse into a vinegary vortex.[/quote]

Banning prayer IS favoring atheism (or theism that doesn’t believe in prayer).

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

Banning prayer IS favoring atheism (or theism that doesn’t believe in prayer).[/quote]

It’s really a very delicate balancing act. Government isn’t supposed to “respect an establishment of religion,” nor is it supposed to “prohibit the free exercise thereof.” If you allow prayer, it can, under certain circumstances, be in fact found to be respecting an establishment of one or more religious beliefs or faiths, but banning religious expression carte blanche can also, in some circumstances, violate a person’s right to free exercise.

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
As push says distinctions are important.[/quote]

The distinction being, Christians are free under the 1st to run public prayer meetings during their city counsel meeting, Muslims are not? [/quote]

All I’m saying is that nothing in the constitution can possibly be interpreted as a separation of church and state. If people want to allow a Muslim to kneel down, bang his head on the floor and chant in Arabic during a town hall meeting I guess that’s up to them. Personally I’d be against it.

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]cwill1973 wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
If someone is offended by another person praying, quite frankly, that person should be shamefully embarrassed they are so weak that mere words hurt them.[/quote]

It is not about offense. It is about prayer having no place in government convention.[/quote]

What are your grounds for this argument? Surely you realize the words “separation of church and state” exist nowhere in the Constitution or Bill of Rights.
[/quote]

Indeed I am.

I am also aware that my First Amendment right is violated when I am impelled by law to pay for a government meeting wherein prayer to a deity is recited ex cathedra.[/quote]

You’re also impelled by law to pay for the murder of American Citizens via drone strike, murder of babies in the womb and a whole host of other government atrocities any self respecting theist would find disgusting.

I’m not religious, don’t care for prayer, but I can also see a bigger picture and not really give two shits if our elected officials feel the need to have one, as long as they make good choices during governing, I’m not concerned what words as they relate to religion are said.

Because in the end, my money pays for a whole lot of things significantly more awful than 90 seconds of prayer.

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
As push says distinctions are important.[/quote]

The distinction being, Christians are free under the 1st to run public prayer meetings during their city counsel meeting, Muslims are not? [/quote]

Indeed.

I wonder: Are you, Sexmachine, literally saying that you think there are Constitutional grounds to ban Muslim prayer in the relevant circumstance while allowing Christian prayer in the relevant circumstance? Please do point me to the Article and Section wherein I can find the Constitutional justification for such a proposition.[/quote]

Nothing in the constitution forbids it. Are they preventing the Muslim from free exercise of his religion? Not via any rational interpretation. Are they establishing an official state religion? No.

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

Banning prayer IS favoring atheism (or theism that doesn’t believe in prayer).[/quote]

Not if you are also prohibiting governing bodies to convene with an ex cathedra affirmation of atheism. That is simply called, “keeping the whole thing outside of public governance, where it belongs.”

And even if it does favor atheism in a highly indirect and twisted sort of way, it does not do so to an extent remotely comparable to that to which theism is favored when government bodies–whose salaries and meetings are funded, by legal imperative, at the taxpayer’s expense–recite prayer (positive affirmation rather than negative silence) during the execution of their official duties. As far as I’m concerned, anyway.

[quote]JR249 wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

Edit: I will have to think about this.[/quote]

I think people sometimes forget that very narrow details decide cases like this, and that such legal decisions are sometimes applicable to a very narrow set of circumstances.

[/quote]

Indeed they do, me included.

Also, it is almost always more fun to have the sweeping philosophical discussions rather than the actual legalistic debates.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
You’re also impelled by law to pay for the murder of American Citizens via drone strike, murder of babies in the womb [/quote]

Neither of which I’m in the slightest favor of.

And don’t get me wrong, I’m not calling this the end of the world. I’m not exactly worked up about this.

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

Banning prayer IS favoring atheism (or theism that doesn’t believe in prayer).[/quote]

Not if you are also prohibiting governing bodies to convene with an ex cathedra affirmation of atheism. That is simply called, “keeping the whole thing outside of public governance, where it belongs.”

And even if it does favor atheism in a highly indirect and twisted sort of way, it does not do so to an extent remotely comparable to that to which theism is favored when government bodies–whose salaries and meetings are funded, by legal imperative, at the taxpayer’s expense–recite prayer (positive affirmation rather than negative silence) during the execution of their official duties. As far as I’m concerned, anyway.[/quote]

Negative silence IS an atheist viewpoint. You saying my belief about god needs to be outside of politics is no different than me saying praying is the correct way and should be required of others. Basically, you think everyone should govern according to your version of morality and theism, which is no different from what religious states do.

I think right and wrong come from god. I think prayer helps me connect and interpret that right and wrong. You not allowing me prayer is the same as telling me I’m wrong and your belief about prayer should be forced on me. Basically, I need to leave my morality out of governing. Outlawing it and Legal requiring it are the same thing. My morality should hold equal weight to yours in politics, if we are to be theologically free.

[quote]JR249 wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:
I will never understand “freedom of religion” in this country.

The public town hall. Apparently ok. HS football team, not ok.
Ok to do pray-stuff in public town hall, not ok to run your private sector business according to your long-recognized faith belief/practices.[/quote]

I think the easiest way to explain it is that a) the exact set of circumstances always dictate the legal outcome, so no two cases are ever the same and b) the First Amendment applies more to religion and government than it does private property or private practices - i.e., public sector issues. Case law is really complex and it always hinges on how the justices are going to interpret what is oftentimes a very unique set of circumstances specific to one time and place. Yes, sometimes you even see contradictory rulings over time (e.g., Plessy v. Ferguson reversed by Brown v. Board).[/quote]

Then how come it’s permissible for private citizens to lead the prayer of public meetings, yet private citizens are not/might no longer be permitted to conduct their private sector business in accordance with long standing practices (like, since before, during, and the majority of history after the founding)?

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
You’re also impelled by law to pay for the murder of American Citizens via drone strike, murder of babies in the womb [/quote]

Neither of which I’m in the slightest favor of.

And don’t get me wrong, I’m not calling this the end of the world. I’m not exactly worked up about this.[/quote]

lol, fair enough. However some people really flip out about it.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
You’re also impelled by law to pay for the murder of American Citizens via drone strike, murder of babies in the womb [/quote]

Neither of which I’m in the slightest favor of.

And don’t get me wrong, I’m not calling this the end of the world. I’m not exactly worked up about this.[/quote]

lol, fair enough. However some people really flip out about it. [/quote]

If they agree to devote at least part of the prayer to asking for an end to illegal drone strikes, I’m on board.

[quote]JR249 wrote:
b) whether or not the prayers were coercive or intimidating to non-adherents
[/quote]

You mean like:

  1. Stand, facing Mecca. Raise your hands with your thumbs near your ears and say, “G-d is the Greatest”(Allahu Akbar)

  2. Fold your arms in front of you, with your right hand on your left forearm and say, “Glory be to Allah and praise and thanks be to Allah, and there is no g-d but Allah and Allah is Most Exalted and Great”

  3. Raise your hands to about your shoulders and say, “G-d is the Greatest”(Allahu Akbar)

  4. Bow with your hands on your knees. Say, “Glorified is my Lord, the Great” (3 times)

  5. Stand straight up. While in the process of standing, say, “Allah listens to him who praises Him” Once completely standing, say, “Our Lord, praise be for You only,” then raise your hands to about shoulder height and say, “G-d is the Greatest”(Allahu Akbar)

  6. Go down on your knees, face on the floor (forehead and nose), hands just below the shoulders, toes pointing forward (bent, not behind you). Say, “Glorified is my Lord, the Exalted” (3 times)

  7. Say, “G-d is the Greatest”(Allahu Akbar) then sit up on your knees and say, “Oh my Lord, forgive me and have mercy on me.”

  8. Then say “G-d is the greatest”(Allahu Akbar) and return to prostrating (face on the floor). Say again, “Glorified is my Lord, the Exalted” (3 times)

This completes the first rakah. For the second rakah, do steps 1 through 8, and then come to a sitting position. While coming to the sitting position, say, “G-d is the Greatest”(Allahu Akbar)

  1. Sit up on your knees, bottom resting on your heels, hands resting near your knees and say, “All our oral, physical and monetary ways of worship are only for Allah. Peace, mercy and blessing of Allah be on you, O Prophet. May peace be upon us and on the devout slaves of Allah. I testify that there is no G-d but Allah and I testify that Muhammad is His slave and messenger”.

This completes the second raka.

After you have completed all rakat:

Remain sitting with your hands near your knees and say, “O G-d send your mercy on Muhammad and his posterity as you sent Your mercy on Abraham and his posterity. You are the Most Praised, The Most Glorious. O G-d, send your Blessings on Muhammad and his posterity as you have blessed Abraham and his posterity. You are the Most praised, The Most Glorious. Our Lord, grant us the good of this world and that of the Hereafter and save us from the torture of hell.”

Then, turn your head to the right to address the angel at your right shoulder and say, “Peace and mercy of Allah be on you.”

Then, turn your head to the left to address the angel at your left shoulder and say, “Peace and mercy of Allah be on you.”

This completes the prayer.


I would argue that a prayer of this length involving the repetition of ‘Allahu Akbar,’ referring to everyone as ‘slaves’ and talking to angels on your shoulders might make some people feel intimidated.

[quote]Sloth wrote:

Then how come it’s permissible for private citizens to lead the prayer of public meetings, yet private citizens are not/might no longer be permitted to conduct their private sector business in accordance with long standing practices (like, since before, during, and the majority of history after the founding)?

[/quote]

I am not the courts, but what are we talking about specifically with your example about private businesses?

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
I would argue that a prayer…some people feel intimidated.[/quote]

So?

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]JR249 wrote:
b) whether or not the prayers were coercive or intimidating to non-adherents
[/quote]

You mean like:

  1. Stand, facing Mecca. Raise your hands with your thumbs near your ears and say, “G-d is the Greatest”(Allahu Akbar)

  2. Fold your arms in front of you, with your right hand on your left forearm and say, “Glory be to Allah and praise and thanks be to Allah, and there is no g-d but Allah and Allah is Most Exalted and Great”

  3. Raise your hands to about your shoulders and say, “G-d is the Greatest”(Allahu Akbar)

  4. Bow with your hands on your knees. Say, “Glorified is my Lord, the Great” (3 times)

  5. Stand straight up. While in the process of standing, say, “Allah listens to him who praises Him” Once completely standing, say, “Our Lord, praise be for You only,” then raise your hands to about shoulder height and say, “G-d is the Greatest”(Allahu Akbar)

  6. Go down on your knees, face on the floor (forehead and nose), hands just below the shoulders, toes pointing forward (bent, not behind you). Say, “Glorified is my Lord, the Exalted” (3 times)

  7. Say, “G-d is the Greatest”(Allahu Akbar) then sit up on your knees and say, “Oh my Lord, forgive me and have mercy on me.”

  8. Then say “G-d is the greatest”(Allahu Akbar) and return to prostrating (face on the floor). Say again, “Glorified is my Lord, the Exalted” (3 times)

This completes the first rakah. For the second rakah, do steps 1 through 8, and then come to a sitting position. While coming to the sitting position, say, “G-d is the Greatest”(Allahu Akbar)

  1. Sit up on your knees, bottom resting on your heels, hands resting near your knees and say, “All our oral, physical and monetary ways of worship are only for Allah. Peace, mercy and blessing of Allah be on you, O Prophet. May peace be upon us and on the devout slaves of Allah. I testify that there is no G-d but Allah and I testify that Muhammad is His slave and messenger”.

This completes the second raka.

After you have completed all rakat:

Remain sitting with your hands near your knees and say, “O G-d send your mercy on Muhammad and his posterity as you sent Your mercy on Abraham and his posterity. You are the Most Praised, The Most Glorious. O G-d, send your Blessings on Muhammad and his posterity as you have blessed Abraham and his posterity. You are the Most praised, The Most Glorious. Our Lord, grant us the good of this world and that of the Hereafter and save us from the torture of hell.”

Then, turn your head to the right to address the angel at your right shoulder and say, “Peace and mercy of Allah be on you.”

Then, turn your head to the left to address the angel at your left shoulder and say, “Peace and mercy of Allah be on you.”

This completes the prayer.


I would argue that a prayer of this length involving the repetition of ‘Allahu Akbar,’ referring to everyone as ‘slaves’ and talking to angels on your shoulders might make some people feel intimidated.[/quote]

http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/soc.pdf

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
I would argue that a prayer…some people feel intimidated.[/quote]

So?[/quote]

It’s also incredibly intimidating to pray in public. It’s much more intimidating to try to include verbal prayer in your life than it is to hear someone do it.

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

I would argue that a prayer of this length involving the repetition of ‘Allahu Akbar,’ referring to everyone as ‘slaves’ and talking to angels on your shoulders might make some people feel intimidated.[/quote]

Okay, but that had nothing to do with this particular case, nor were any Muslim prayers even an issue here. The High Court had to consider, in part, whether or not any sectarian prayers that had ever been recited before this town meeting were coercive.