In response to:

‘Jesus Christ’ Banned from Council Prayers

anderson659 Wrote: Mar 07, 2013 9:43 AM
Why are atheists offended by a prayer to a God they do not believe in ? Why do atheists feel that any mention of God offends them ? Why atheists, why are you offended by something you do not believe in? Can't you just get over your synthetic outrage?
Dean197 Wrote: Mar 08, 2013 9:45 AM
It doesn't offend me. It IS illegal, though. Why do so many Christians want to break the law?
Donjindra Wrote: Mar 07, 2013 11:38 AM
"Why are atheists offended by a prayer to a God they do not believe in ?"

Maybe for the same reasons you'd be offended if a Satanist offered his prayers prior to those meetings.
Jack2894 Wrote: Mar 07, 2013 9:48 AM
Not clear on the concept, are you. I am not offended by the mention of a GOd I dont' believe in. I am offended when my government seems to be favoring one religion over another. Let's have teh invocation led by a Muslim imam who defers to Allah and Muhammed instead of jesus for, say....50 years. Would you be happy with that?
anderson659 Wrote: Mar 07, 2013 9:57 AM
Jack:

i am clear on the concept, here is a clue. Any and all prayer spoken by anyone does not have to be listened to. No one is imposing or favoring anything, and what would it matter if they were?

Here is a news flash Jack, head for Dearborn Michigan and you will hear call to prayers five times a day and invocations to Allah everywhere.

NONE of you atheists complain about that, in fact you seem to cheerfully live with it, only Christians seem to offend you.
bmitchell671 Wrote: Mar 07, 2013 9:58 AM
Jack, Islam had no place in the founding of this country and its traditions...Christians did - sorry to break that to you. In addition, seperation of church and state does not exist in the bill of rights, constitution of the Declaration. Try to find that language. If refers to Jeffersons letter to Baptist in Danbury who were worried that the new government would prohibit their church from practicing their faith their way = Jefferson said that there exist a wall of seperation protecting their practice of religion from the governement interference. FREEDOM OF RELIGION NOT FREEDOM FROM RELIGION. Big difference Jack. Please read about it.
Former_Naval_Person Wrote: Mar 07, 2013 10:18 AM
Christians are an easy target. Who will you attack, those who turn the other cheek or those who will hunt you down and kill you?

Of course what the atheists and libs don't quite get is that when sharia is the law of the land (whether de jure or de facto), they will be the ones being attacked.
Carl469 Wrote: Mar 07, 2013 11:12 AM
I am categorically against all organized prayer in a taxpayer-funded setting, Islamic included. Instead of labeling separationists "atheists," maybe you can read up on the works of the American Founders, who most assuredly were not the Pat Robertsons of their time.
Jack2894 Wrote: Mar 07, 2013 11:54 AM
Anderson, when its a formal part of a government meeting, then it is absolutely an imposition.

I have no problem with a private entity broadcasting a call to prayer. Just as I have no problem when a catholic church rings the Angelus. But, a government entity should not be doing it. If that's happening in Dearborn, I am totally against it.
Jack2894 Wrote: Mar 07, 2013 11:56 AM
bmitch, your point is meaningless. Separation of church and state is a shorthand way of describing the body of decisions handed down by the Supreme Court over the years in regard to government involvement in religion. The term is taken from Jefferson, but the concept is the sum of the jurisprudence on the issue.
Jack2894 Wrote: Mar 07, 2013 11:56 AM
WHen SHaria is the law of the land? I can risk it, believe me.
Dean197 Wrote: Mar 08, 2013 9:47 AM
When you go to a council meeting, you have a reasonable expectation that you won't be sent a message that the town council favors Muslims. A Muslim or Hindu or atheist should be able to go to a council meeting with a reasonable expectation of not getting the message that the town council favors Christians.
Dean197 Wrote: Mar 08, 2013 9:50 AM
Fortunately, the Chrisitans then, well aware of the existence of Muslims, Hindus, and Native American religions, and aware of the bloody religious divisions of Europe, saw the danger of entangling government with religion. As our country has grown more diverse, that neutrality has become more important. We don't have a right to freedom from religion...but we do have a right to freedom from government endorsement of religion.
Dean197 Wrote: Mar 08, 2013 9:51 AM
They're an easy target because there are so many of them willing to flout the law in their constant search for government approval and support of their religion.
Dean197 Wrote: Mar 08, 2013 9:52 AM
Like in Louisiana when they found out their religious school vouchers could be used by Muslim schools. There sure was some backpeddling then!
Dean197 Wrote: Mar 08, 2013 9:53 AM
Neither does 'right to a fair trial' or 'right to vote'.
Dean197 Wrote: Mar 08, 2013 9:54 AM
I don't have a problem with council members praying in their offices before calling the meeting, either.

The mayor of a Washington town has directed pastors to stop invoking the name “Jesus Christ” in city council invocations.

Don Jensen, the mayor of Longview, Wash., told the Kelso-Longview Ministerial Association that prayers mentioning Christ were not acceptable because they could expose the city to a lawsuit.

The decision has sparked controversy in the city – located about 50 miles north of Portland, Ore.

Mark Schmutz, who pastors the Northlake Baptist Church, said if they can’t speak the name Jesus Christ, association ministers will no longer provide the invocation.

“We need to be able to speak Jesus’ name,” he told...