Supremes Vote 5-4 To Support Public Prayer

BlazerBob wrote:

LadyJazzer wrote: If it said "Don't thank Allah" (or Buddha, or Lord Shiva), I doubt that you would have a problem with it...

Then you would be wrong.

You would be in the minority...

As are those that think prayer which is overtly Christian is prohibited from being present at or in government activities by the Constitution . . .

What about atheists?

PS seems to think that Christian philosophy is part of our Constitution.

All-inclusive, non-denominational, non-sect, non-specific-religion prayer in the government has been around for a long time. My experiences in the Air Force were: every single get-together, whether it was a base-wide awards luncheon, a unit picnic or party, or a gathering of active duty and veterans for the laying of a wreath at certain events in the local community ALWAYS started with an invocation or benediction. Sometimes it was given by a Southern Baptist Chaplain, sometimes by a Roman Catholic Chaplain, sometimes by a Jewish Chaplain, and sometimes by a Muslim Chaplain--or any other Chaplain that was assigned the event. The Chaplain was usually randomly assigned based on need and request...but usually it was the "next available one".

And the invocation was always announced, so those atheists or agnostics or anyone else could leave the room...otherwise, they were asked to be quiet during the short prayer.

I was wondering what exactly "prayer" and "pray" meant...and as with many words I was wrong in what I thought it meant. One of the definitions of "pray" is to plead...I plead with my son every single day to empty the dishwasher...I pray to my Higher Power that I won't get too frustrated when he doesn't. I don't have a problem with the Supreme's decision...

fly off the handle wrote: PS seems to think that Christian philosophy is part of our Constitution.

And for some unfathomable reason you seem to think that it isn't? Where do you think the concept of all being created equal and endowed by our Creator with the same inalienable rights comes from if not Christian philosophy?

Note that Jefferson selected the phrase "endowed by their Creator" to ensure that it was not specific to the christian God, but encompasses any and all others believed by their adherents to have created their lifeform. In fact that phrase did not even mean what you ascribe to it, since Jefferson obviously did not include women, Africans, Native Americans among others to be "all men". The Constitution makes no mention of a christian God, but did explicitly demand that no religious test would be allowed to hold political office.

That phrase is not found anywhere in the Bible, New or Old Testament. Instead it was derived partly from the philospher John Locke in his seminal work "Second Treatise of Civil Government and Jefferson confidant Phillipe Mazzei who wrote "All men are by nature equally free and independent. Such equality is necessary in order to create a free government.
All men must be equal to each other in natural law"

To claim that natural law is derived from Christianity is hubris. The theory of natural law goes back to the teachings of Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoics.

The Constitution of the United States is based on We, the People, not on superstition.

PrintSmith wrote:

fly off the handle wrote: PS seems to think that Christian philosophy is part of our Constitution.

And for some unfathomable reason you seem to think that it isn't? Where do you think the concept of all being created equal and endowed by our Creator with the same inalienable rights comes from if not Christian philosophy?

I guess I'm just someone that thinks "faith" should not determine our law.

fly off the handle wrote:

PrintSmith wrote:

fly off the handle wrote: PS seems to think that Christian philosophy is part of our Constitution.

And for some unfathomable reason you seem to think that it isn't? Where do you think the concept of all being created equal and endowed by our Creator with the same inalienable rights comes from if not Christian philosophy?

I guess I'm just someone that thinks "faith" should not determine our law.

Would it not be accurate to day that the phrases "what I think" and "what I believe" are both statements of faith?

fly off the handle wrote:

PrintSmith wrote:

fly off the handle wrote: PS seems to think that Christian philosophy is part of our Constitution.

And for some unfathomable reason you seem to think that it isn't? Where do you think the concept of all being created equal and endowed by our Creator with the same inalienable rights comes from if not Christian philosophy?

I guess I'm just someone that thinks "faith" should not determine our law.

:YeahThat:

Or that someone else's "faith" should not be enshrined in law to force on others.