Jump to content

Menu

Should I say something? Prayer at public charter homeschool event.


Should I write a note to discourage future public/official prayers?  

  1. 1. Should I write a note to discourage future public/official prayers?

    • Yes.
      181
    • No.
      239
    • Other.
      11


Recommended Posts

I don't know if the incident the OP described/elaborated on would be illegal, since a parent said the prayer. I do think it was inappropriate. As a member of the majority faith in my area, I feel uncomfortable when prayers like that occur in places where there is no question they're allowed. I wouldn't like it at a public school event. If a school official had said the prayer, I think it would be illegal. If a student had said the prayer, I don't think it would be, but I still don't see the need. It's just awkward at best.

 

That being said, I think student prayers at public school graduations and baccalaureate events before said graduations are great and should keep going.

 

I agree with some pps that America was not built on prayer - it was built by some religious and some non-religious people, and any religion in the creation of America was lip service, IMHO. That being said, we do have a history of public religion at the state level. Before the Bill of Rights was ratified, there were quite a few states with religious requirements for state office, for example. IIRC there were more of those states than there were states that had freedom of religion. That does not mean that we should have public religion today, however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 340
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm Jewish. I'd say something if it was a very specific prayer for one faith. I would not say anything if it was one of those vague, higher-power-thank-you-for-this-concert type of deals.

 

But prayer isn't allowed at public schools or public school events, so I'm surprised they're doing it.

 

Actually prayer is allowed at football games, as long as it is a student leading the prayer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the other hand...in this particular case? I don't know whether or not being a charter school makes a difference. It *has* made a big difference with other legal issues we have discussed. Looks like a charter school in South Carolina got in trouble for teaching religion, but it was the state's only charter school at the time, which was cited as the problem. Poking around the internet, it looks like religious charter schools and prayer within charter schools are allowed as long as there are other options for non-religious people. These are not just Christian schools either, some of them are Muslim charter schools. I would provide a link, but most of the links are anti-Muslim rants on conservative political sites. But, it looks like it might be allowed for charter schools.

 

I believe it would depend on the charter school rules in the particular state. Here's something from "Edweek" magazine in 2007 mentioning the Tarek ibn Ziyad Academy in Minnesota http://www.edweek.org/ew/section/tb/2007/06/19/2714.html I found the following interesting:

 

In short, the school should be designed "to teach the ethics and history of the faith, but not to practice it."

 

And the website from the school had a link to the following (from an editorial by the executive director to their local paper, apparently after being accused of being an Islamist school and linked to terrorism) http://tizacademy.com/content/view/89/77/:

 

"Any suggestion that TIZA is an Islamic school is false. Religion is not part of the curriculum. In addition, while approximately half of our students -- not all -- fast during Ramadan, and many girls wear Hijab, they are exercising their rights as they would in any public school.

 

The Minnesota Department of Education and other agencies inspect TIZA regularly. We are in complete compliance to ensure, among other things, that we are not a religious school.

 

While TIZA does not ask about the religion of our faculty, one of our senior teachers can provide insight. "It's obvious that we're not a religious school because most teachers here are not of the Muslim faith," said Heidi Pendroy, a teacher at TIZA....It is probably true that most TIZA students are Muslim, based on requests for religious accommodations, but we do not ask about religion. And while Arabic is taught as a second language, all other courses are taught in English. "

 

This is a far cry from assertions that it's okay to require attendees at a school function to participate in act of sectarian worship because a majority of families at the school follow that religion. It's also different than the issue we have locally in our public (non-charter) high school where last week two girls were told they could not wear the hijab (which they had been wearing all year) because of separation of church and state. *That* is an example of infringing on their right to religious freedom (as well as them being told students are not allowed to wear crosses or kippot either).

 

In any case, there was no indication that this particular charter school we are discussing in this thread is designated a religious charter school affiliated with a specific religion, so I don't see that it necessarily applies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually prayer is allowed at football games, as long as it is a student leading the prayer.

 

This is factually incorrect. See the ruling in Santa Fe Independent School Dist. v. Doe, 530 U. S. 290.

 

Such prayer is unconstitutional.

 

Bill

Edited by Spy Car
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is not permitted is the school itself sanctioning religion in any form, including leading a prayer at a public event. In the US, majority does not "rule" in areas covered by the Bill of Rights, including religion. Those who are "different" don't have to suck it up and ignore the prayer, deferring to the majority. A state religion is not allowed by the constitution, and therefore no public institution is permitted to favor one faith over another, "majority"'or not.

 

Neutrality is the only permissible action here which means no prayer at public school events. You can pray on your own, you can pray in a small group on your own, but you cannot use the tax payer funded sound system to say a prayer at an event...even if you're a student. Period.

 

Case law is pretty clear on this and I'm quite frankly surprised that the same folks who get all in a dither about what "their tax dollars are spent on" when they go contrary to their own convictions seem to have difficulties understanding why this is inappropriate.

 

Nothing changes unless someone steps forward.

I hate it when I hear "we've always done it this way" or "what's the big deal?" about things like this. It's because most people are used to living in a homogenous environment and don't think about others different from themselves and ASSUME it's OK.

 

I absolutely agree with this. It's easy for folks to be blinded by their privilege as members of the majority and who would (regardless of how gracious they may feel in theory) not appreciate it if the shoe was on the other foot.

 

When it comes to religion in this country it is not a case of majority rules. Even if a majority of folks identify as Christian or as a people who believe in the existence of a deity of any sort, you do not get to operate as such within the public sphere.

 

The only fair way of handling things is neutrality which means arguments like "our country was so much better off when we prayed at public events sponsored by our government" don't fly. You may personally hold those convictions, but they are not the basis from which we make our decisions as a non-sectarian society. Like it or not, believe it is true of the past or not, that's the world we live in today.

 

I absolutely would send a letter. There should be resources online that would help you word it if you need some inspiration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have only made it to page 7 so forgive me if this question has been answered but what WAS the prayer? Specifically? That would determne if I said anything at all. Even as a Christian I do not go to a concert for a sermon but if it was a prayer of blessing on those that came to watch and on the performers I would have no problem with it. Even back in my pagan days I would not. To me it would be no different than someone wishing them good luck, but in a more eloquent way. I highly doubt it came across as a fire and brimstone sermon, so that is why I am asking what the prayer was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is factually incorrect. See the ruling in Santa Fe Independent School Dist. v. Doe, 530 U. S. 290.

 

Such prayer is unconstitutional.

 

Bill

 

 

True, but the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta made two rulings after the Santa Fe decision & it has clouded the issue yet again. That court allowed Christian prayers over the intercom before school events in DeKalb County, AL & also allowed graduation prayers in Jacksonville. The stipulation was that they had to be student-led and school officials could play no role.

 

 

Susan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure those who support it wouldnt be quite so 'tolerant' if the prayer in question was, say, Islamic.

 

Anyway, the real issue here is that the charter is public. Because of the Separation of Church and State, formal prayer is completely inappropriate.

 

I think since Congress opens with prayer, it's fine for schools to open an event with prayer.

 

Wendi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True, but the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta made two rulings after the Santa Fe decision & it has clouded the issue yet again. That court allowed Christian prayers over the intercom before school events in DeKalb County, AL & also allowed graduation prayers in Jacksonville. The stipulation was that they had to be student-led and school officials could play no role.

 

Right. The problem with the Santa Fe school was the school officials were approving what the student was going to say ahead of time.

 

I think since Congress opens with prayer, it's fine for schools to open an event with prayer.

 

Most big military events begin with a prayer too. Usually, something like this: "I am going to pray in the tradition of my religion; I invite you to pray in your own tradition. Thank you, Lord, for bringing us together and allowing us this time of celebration and fellowship. Please bless this day and protect all of those here. Amen."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most big military events begin with a prayer too. Usually, something like this: "I am going to pray in the tradition of my religion; I invite you to pray in your own tradition. Thank you, Lord, for bringing us together and allowing us this time of celebration and fellowship. Please bless this day and protect all of those here. Amen."

 

Quite frankly, I think both of those examples are inappropriate as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most big military events begin with a prayer too. Usually, something like this: "I am going to pray in the tradition of my religion; I invite you to pray in your own tradition. Thank you, Lord, for bringing us together and allowing us this time of celebration and fellowship. Please bless this day and protect all of those here. Amen."

 

Well, I think that's really nice. But then again, I like the pledge and the national anthem, so what do I know.

 

Susan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm quite frankly surprised that the same folks who get all in a dither about what "their tax dollars are spent on" when they go contrary to their own convictions seem to have difficulties understanding why this is inappropriate.

 

:iagree:

 

 

(Great post, btw, mamaraby.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure those who support it wouldnt be quite so 'tolerant' if the prayer in question was, say, Islamic.

 

Anyway, the real issue here is that the charter is public. Because of the Separation of Church and State, formal prayer is completely inappropriate.

 

 

Um, I don't think the fact that there is no state-mandated religion in the US means that folks can't/shouldn't pray in public. Unless, of course, you think the separation of church and state means that the state prohibits the practice of religion except in the privacy of their homes and places of worship. But you'd be wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For all those saying it shouldn't be offensive or a big deal. Would you feel the same way if the OP posted that someone led an obviously Pagan prayer at the start of the program, calling on the four elements? What if the person leading the concert had said a prayer to allah? Would you feel the same?

 

If someone prayed a Pagan prayer at the start of an event in this country, I wouldn't be offended. I would be very confused, though;).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OP here. :)

 

 

 

That's how it went, except the school admin invited a parent to say the prayer.

 

Our community is already divided between members of the majority religion (again, I am part of the religion, too) and those who are not. Many members of the majority religion do not interact with the "non-members," which leads to lonely and excluded people. That's why a prayer said specifically in the majority's style and in the name of the majority's diety is so concerning to me. It was so much more than a prayer when viewed in context, even though I'm sure the school admins had no malicious intentions. I believe they simply were not thinking.

 

 

 

They do attend there. My family was at the concert because two of my dds were performing. I'm happy with most things at the school. This bothered me a lot because I dislike the way that many people in the majority faith assume that everyone is part of their faith. There is no thought or consideration given to including or welcoming those who are not (unless they want to convert). It bothers me very much to see other members of my church behave this way.

 

Well then, I would not let it go...is this religion LDS? (I'm just curious from some past experiences, not wanting to criticize a particular religious group)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with some pps that America was not built on prayer - it was built by some religious and some non-religious people, and any religion in the creation of America was lip service, IMHO. That being said, we do have a history of public religion at the state level. Before the Bill of Rights was ratified, there were quite a few states with religious requirements for state office, for example. IIRC there were more of those states than there were states that had freedom of religion. That does not mean that we should have public religion today, however.

 

Agreed, having a history of something is not always a great indicator that it is right, in line with the Constitution or should be allowed (much less encouraged) to continue. There are many examples in American history ;). There's an interesting article from the Smithsonian about the history of religious tolerance in America http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/Americas-True-History-of-Religious-Tolerance.html?c=y&page=1

 

It would be nice if case law would take immediate effect rather than decades of continued controversy by people who find those laws inconvenient. We've had recent (as recent as 2009 at least) arguments in NC because the state constitution disqualifies for public office anyone who doesn't believe in God (article 6 section 8) despite the ruling of Maryland's similar clause being unconstitutional in 1961. The person in question (an atheist) was eventually allowed to serve, but not without a lot of argument back and forth from what I've read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um, I don't think the fact that there is no state-mandated religion in the US means that folks can't/shouldn't pray in public. Unless, of course, you think the separation of church and state means that the state prohibits the practice of religion except in the privacy of their homes and places of worship. But you'd be wrong.

 

We can pray in public. The prohibition of prayer in public schools has to do with public school "officials" encouraging or leading prayer in a public school function.

Edited by priscilla
grammar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Other. If it specifically offended you, then yes, email.

 

If you feel that you 'public rights' were stepped on (separation of Church/state), then, sure you can email saying that you want your public rights honored.

 

BUT, If you feel offended for some hypothetical person, (who may or maynot have even been offended) then no, it is not your place.

 

 

The people who attended who were offended, are capable of speaking for themselves and it is their obligation to do so, if they want the next event to be 'prayer free'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite frankly, I think both of those examples are inappropriate as well.

 

Well, the court has already decided that such prayers are allowed, as long as they are not proselytizing. Look up Marsh v. Chambers. My husband didn't get all offended or up in arms when a soldier told him she was going to "say a blessing for him" when he gave her a day off based upon her Wiccan religion.

 

Um, I don't think the fact that there is no state-mandated religion in the US means that folks can't/shouldn't pray in public. Unless, of course, you think the separation of church and state means that the state prohibits the practice of religion except in the privacy of their homes and places of worship. But you'd be wrong.

 

Right.

 

We can pray and public. The prohibition of prayer in public schools has to do with public school "officials" encouraging or leading prayer in a public school function.

 

Was it a school official or was it a student, parent or someone else? That is one question.

 

Do charter schools operate under different rules? This question is still in contention, as far as I can tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. 70% of the population where I live is LDS.

 

 

Well then, speaking from a minority POV (as I am not LDS whatsoever) a simple prayer would not have offended me. In fact, if that is the norm in the area, it wouldn't have taken me off guard at all.

 

 

Susan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm quite frankly surprised that the same folks who get all in a dither about what "their tax dollars are spent on" when they go contrary to their own convictions seem to have difficulties understanding why this is inappropriate.

 

I don't know why it should surprise you that people find it difficult to understand that they have to pay for things they don't support, but can't speak up about what they do support.

 

Ms. Religious can't legally object to paying for Ms. Secular's public service, but Ms. Secular can legally object to listening to Ms. Religious's public prayer. Pretty sweet deal for Ms. Secular, huh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether it's illegal or not, I think it's unkind to make others feel isolated and uncomfortable.

It is not possible to predetermine ahead of time who will or will not feel isolated or uncomfortable. Someone will always feel isolated or uncomfortable. We cannot cease doing things just because random people will feel isolated or uncomfortable. Perhaps the person who feels that way should remind himself that this, too, shall pass, and let others enjoy it. Tolerance goes both ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know why it should surprise you that people find it difficult to understand that they have to pay for things they don't support, but can't speak up about what they do support.

 

Ms. Religious can't legally object to paying for Ms. Secular's public service, but Ms. Secular can legally object to listening to Ms. Religious's public prayer. Pretty sweet deal for Ms. Secular, huh?

 

Actually, you are free to object to paying for public service via free speech and lobbying your congressmen to change laws:D

 

I, however, think a civil society needs a certain amount of government services such as roads, the military, schools, etc.

 

You are also free to practice your religion but are not free to have public officials endorse your religion by practicing or encouraging said religion in public functions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not possible to predetermine ahead of time who will or will not feel isolated or uncomfortable.

 

I don't think that's true. I think it is very easy to know when one might step on other people's religious beliefs. Public school events are not the place to have people leading group prayers. It is not appropriate.

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure those who support it wouldnt be quite so 'tolerant' if the prayer in question was, say, Islamic.

 

Anyway, the real issue here is that the charter is public. Because of the Separation of Church and State, formal prayer is completely inappropriate.

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, you are free to object to paying for public service via free speech and lobbying your congressmen to change laws:D

 

Which change is easier to effect: changing a tax law or changing the local charter school's policy about public prayer? Which could conceivably be done with a single complaint by a single person?

 

You are also free to practice your religion but are not free to have public officials endorse your religion by practicing or encouraging said religion in public functions.

 

One of the questions here, then, is who is a public official? An elected member of our state government? Anyone who gets their paycheck from the government? Or any yahoo holding a mic at non-religious event? The OP did not say (at least in the original post) who said the prayer.

 

Another question is, what constitutes practicing one's religion at a public function? If the mayor attends her town's homecoming BBQ and is seen closing her eyes and crossing herself before she digs into her burger, she is practicing her religion at a public function. Should that be discouraged?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know why it should surprise you that people find it difficult to understand that they have to pay for things they don't support, but can't speak up about what they do support.

 

I don't know why it should surprise you that people find it difficult to understand that they have to pay for things they don't support (prayer in a public/taxpayer-funded school), but can't speak up about what they do support (removing prayer from a public/taxpayer-funded school).

 

You want to use the argument to support yourself, but you don't want those who have an opposing viewpoint to be able to use the same process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know why it should surprise you that people find it difficult to understand that they have to pay for things they don't support (prayer in a public/taxpayer-funded school), but can't speak up about what they do support (removing prayer from a public/taxpayer-funded school).

 

You want to use the argument to support yourself, but you don't want those who have an opposing viewpoint to be able to use the same process.

 

 

Then you see that the two ought to go together, right? Paying for "whatever" means (or ought to mean) that we need to listen to "whatever" as well. Sounds like we are in agreement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another question is, what constitutes practicing one's religion at a public function? If the mayor attends her town's homecoming BBQ and is seen closing her eyes and crossing herself before she digs into her burger, she is practicing her religion at a public function. Should that be discouraged?

 

So you are saying here that there is no difference whatsoever between the following scenarios:

1) an individual attending a function quietly bows her head and crosses herself before beginning her meal. She does not involve any other individual in her action.

2) an individual is invited up to the front by the organizers, handed a microphone with (likely) the words, "Mayor Johnson will now lead us all in prayer," takes the microphone and says something along the lines of, "Let us pray. Dear Father in Heaven, we ask that you bless this food and lead each of us in the paths of righteousness. Bless our town as we continue to do your will. In Jesus' holy name we pray, Amen." (basically a paraphrase of the kind of prayer our mayor has used to open a town council meeting, and, yes, I have complained)

 

You truthfully cannot see any difference in how one might be coercive to another person while the other is not? That one is an instance of individual worship while the other is corporate worship expecting participation by all there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which change is easier to effect: changing a tax law or changing the local charter school's policy about public prayer? Which could conceivably be done with a single complaint by a single person?

Both should be equally easy or difficult to change. Charter schools are public schools and hence have laws regulating them. It is against the law for public schools to endorse religion in this way.

 

 

One of the questions here, then, is who is a public official? An elected member of our state government? Anyone who gets their paycheck from the government? Or any yahoo holding a mic at non-religious event? The OP did not say (at least in the original post) who said the prayer.

 

An official would be an employee of a government entity acting in their capacity as a government worker. Said employees are free to pray all they want outside of this official capacity.

 

Another question is, what constitutes practicing one's religion at a public function? If the mayor attends her town's homecoming BBQ and is seen closing her eyes and crossing herself before she digs into her burger, she is practicing her religion at a public function. Should that be discouraged?

 

The example of the mayor is individual prayer which is legal and acceptable and protected under freedom of religion. Students or teachers doing the same sort of prayer is also legal. A teacher leading the class in prayer or inviting a student to lead a class in prayer are not legal.

 

Huge differences in the examples above.

 

 

My replies are in blue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't agree with the interpretation the law has made (I prefer that everyone should be able to practice their religion, not that no one should be able to), BUT the law is pretty well established here. If it's illegal they should NOT be doing it, no matter how comfortable most of the parents are with it. It's not their choice to make if it's against the law. I'd say something (gently).

 

ETA: Saw you sent an email. Good. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BUT, If you feel offended for some hypothetical person, (who may or maynot have even been offended) then no, it is not your place.

 

 

 

I have sat through many many an inappropriate, "in the name of Jesus" prayer. This is the bible belt, and that happens all the time whether people like it or not.

 

I am a Christian. I love to pray. I don't have any trouble praying with someone in public, right in the middle of a restaurant. If you ask me to pray for you, there is a good chance I am going to say, "Can I pray with your right now?" even if it's a public place. All this to say that I just absolutely believe people have a right to play in public.

 

However, I don't like someone leading me or my children in prayer when I don't know them and don't know their heart and don't know who they are accountable to. In this part of the country, being a Christian bestows social credibility. I don't want someone posing and trying to look good as they lead my children or I in prayer. I think it's spiritually dangerous. Prayer in public school seems like a much greater threat to me than no prayer in school. I am always surprised when Christians think otherwise.

 

And I am not a pot stirrer, so I tend to overlook these things, but I don't think it's wrong at all for someone to defend the constitution whether they are personally impacted or not. In fact, I think the BEST person to write that letter is someone who shares a theological background with the powers that be, but gently points out that there are others who should not have to sit under being lead in group prayer in a public, secular forum.

 

Also, we are not a Christian nation and never were. Weren't, aren't. We are a nation of people who have benefited socially in various ways by paying lip service to God. I am thinking of what Jesus says in Matthews 7.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you are saying here that there is no difference whatsoever between the following scenarios:

1) an individual attending a function quietly bows her head and crosses herself before beginning her meal. She does not involve any other individual in her action.

2) an individual is invited up to the front by the organizers, handed a microphone with (likely) the words, "Mayor Johnson will now lead us all in prayer," takes the microphone and says something along the lines of, "Let us pray. Dear Father in Heaven, we ask that you bless this food and lead each of us in the paths of righteousness. Bless our town as we continue to do your will. In Jesus' holy name we pray, Amen." (basically a paraphrase of the kind of prayer our mayor has used to open a town council meeting, and, yes, I have complained)

 

You truthfully cannot see any difference in how one might be coercive to another person while the other is not? That one is an instance of individual worship while the other is corporate worship expecting participation by all there?

 

 

Of course I see a difference. The question was, what constitutes a practicing one's religion at a public function. I intentionally chose an extreme example to illustrate the idea that that concept is a very, very broad one. You--helpfully--drew a distinction between "religious acts done in a public spot" and "religious acts that invite participation." You also--less helpfully--conflated "invitation" with "coercion." They really are not the same thing at all. The only thing the attendees are forced to do is stand around and waste their time while the religious person prayed. Some people might call that tolerance, not enforced worship.

 

I did, however, appreciate your introduction of the concept of worship into the discussion. I am not a huge fan, actually, of people leading prayer in contexts where the group gathered is not a religious one, but it's related to ideas around worship, not to ideas around the separation of church and state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A mayor *can* legally say a prayer while serving in his/her official capacity. City counsel meetings can open with prayer.

 

The Supreme Court ruled on this issue in Marsh v. Chambers[1] in 1983, finding that the opening prayer is not an "establishment of religion" prohibited by the 1st amendment, but merely "a tolerable acknowledgment of beliefs widely held among the people of this country."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, I completely understand what you mean about the culture. That would probably come across as just another insensitive act to the non-majority, almost more BECAUSE they didn't think about how it would affect others. The assumption that everyone would approve and love it might be very hurtful when this sort of thing happens all over this area, and sadly some people just forget that there are non-members around--a lot of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

CLARIFICATION & UPDATE:

 

1. A school official asked a parent to give the opening prayer.

2. The prayer was in the specific style of the majority religion and in the name of the majoriy's deity.

3. Many members of this majority religion in my area have a history of excluding people who are not their religion.

4. Although I am a member of the majority religion, I found the prayer to be inappropriate given the public school setting and the history of the community. I do not like the way many members of my faith behave toward "non-members" and I want our community to be more inclusive of everyone.

 

I sent an email to the director of the program, who also directed the concert and introduced the person giving the prayer.

 

 

I think it's awesome to be concerned and speak up about how people in your faith interact with people outside your faith. That is laudable--good for you!

 

Context for my earlier posts: I still don't think prayer in public schools is a fabulous idea . . . it's more that I'm not sure that a parent praying in a public school assembly constitutes a threat to the separation of church and state, as many here seem to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that's true. I think it is very easy to know when one might step on other people's religious beliefs. Public school events are not the place to have people leading group prayers. It is not appropriate.

 

Bill

As I said, tolerance goes both ways, especially in this country, where people have been praying at public events since its founding.

 

People are way too sensitive.:glare:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's awesome to be concerned and speak up about how people in your faith interact with people outside your faith. That is laudable--good for you!

 

Context for my earlier posts: I still don't think prayer in public schools is a fabulous idea . . . it's more that I'm not sure that a parent praying in a public school assembly constitutes a threat to the separation of church and state, as many here seem to.

 

 

I agree. And there is nothing wrong with giving a heads-up that not everyone is religious. There is nothing wrong with stating that sectarian prayer is going to make some people feel unwelcome. I am just saying that I don't think it is illegal, given the circumstances. Those are different arguments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a very conservative, devout Christian.

 

I would very likely NOT participate in such a prayer; the reasons for which are kind of hard to explain on-line.

 

I very well might say something if I were you. At the very least, I likely would not have participated in the prayer.

 

I don't care if the prayer was supposed to be Jewish, Christian, Islamic, Buddhist, etc. It would still likely not be a prayer I would be comfortable participating in.

 

Just my $0.02.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A mayor *can* legally say a prayer while serving in his/her official capacity. City counsel meetings can open with prayer.

 

The Supreme Court ruled on this issue in Marsh v. Chambers[1] in 1983, finding that the opening prayer is not an "establishment of religion" prohibited by the 1st amendment, but merely "a tolerable acknowledgment of beliefs widely held among the people of this country."

 

 

Hey. That's sensible. I'm still not wild about praying in contexts where many/most are not believers, BUT as we ponder the meaning of freedom of religion and choose between . . .

 

freedom of religion = quashing public expression of religion to the extent that opening prayers are illegal

 

and

 

freedom of religion = sometimes I hear a prayer to the deity I worship and sometimes I hear a prayer to a deity I don't believe in and sometimes there is no prayer at all

 

. . . guess which one actually sounds like freedom? Sign me up for the latter, please!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said, tolerance goes both ways, especially in this country, where people have been praying at public events since its founding.

 

 

:iagree:

 

i am not LDS, but if I were at a predominantly LDS school event and a parent led a simple prayer before the concert it just wouldn't bother me. that would be true for any function that was of a predominant faith honestly, even on gov't property. i don't have to snuff it out completely in order to not participate. there are many things in life that i tolerate but disagree with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't ask to stop it. If I didn't like it, I would either not go or respectfully not join in. There's a lot of things in this world that I don't like but other people do. If I tried to go around stopping everyone from doing something I didn't like, I would be caught in an endless cycle of anger, frustration and disappointment. Unless it's downright offensive or dangerous, I usually just mentally shrug my shoulders and get on with my life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


Ă—
Ă—
  • Create New...