Posted on 08/09/2005 6:45:50 PM PDT by Crackingham
The American Civil Liberties Union has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review a decision that allows the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors to exclude a local witch from leading the prayer at open meetings.
The ACLU of Virginia yesterday filed its petition with the court seeking to reverse a Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decision, said ACLU attorney Rebecca K. Glenberg.
"Our position is that the 4th Circuit did something really extreme in its decision," she said. "It held that it was acceptable for a government body to treat people differently because of religion."
Cynthia Simpson, a witch who lives in Chesterfield, requested in 2002 to be placed on a list of religious leaders invited to deliver the invocation at meetings of the Board of Supervisors. So far, her request has been denied.
(Excerpt) Read more at timesdispatch.com ...
I personally think prayers in government meetings are stupid.
The town council should be focusing on fixing potholes, not lawsuits about who gets to say a prayer before a meeting.
Whose truth? Yours?
Also, Jefferson wrote in numerous letters that he believed the right to more forcefully indoctrinate citizens into a religion was the right of individual states.
I'd like to see those. Many of his letters are about the dangers of religion getting power in government.
How about majority rules? If the vast majority of Board members want to hear prayers, why shouldn't they? If one person doesn't, and everyone else wants to, why should the one rule the many? One person can (a) leave, (b) come late, (c) not pay attention, etc. If I were attending a religious gathering which preaches some things I do not follow or agree with, I am polite enough to just sit through it, as I sometimes did with my elderly mother. If I were attending a function and a prayer was offered by a religious representative of a religion I do not follow, I would politely sit there. Most well brought up adults would do the same.
People don't know how to be respectful and polite, and respect the religions of others? What's with this hair trigger intolerance?
Since the vast majority of people in the US believe in God in one way or another, why should the tiny minority of atheists rule who gets to say what and when? I don't think so.
And as for witches, when a large percentage of US citizens follow Wicca, get back to me at that point.
Exactly so.
I actually am okay with that. However, the majority doesn't get to dictate what denominations or religions get access to perform public prayers at a government meeting. Either everyone gets the same privilege, or no one does.
If I were attending a religious gathering which preaches some things I do not follow or agree with, I am polite enough to just sit through it, as I sometimes did with my elderly mother.If I were attending a function and a prayer was offered by a religious representative of a religion I do not follow, I would politely sit there.
But this isn't a religious gathering or a private event. It's a meeting of a government body. That makes the situation quite different. This wiccan has no right to demand religious equality at a religious or private event. The case is different if we're talking about a government event.
I also read the Bible - the teachings of the Vedas and much of the essence of the Bible, especially the teachings of Jesus Christ, are extremely similar, and indeed, overlapping.
If you read much about Wicca with an open mind, you will see it is a hodge podge of this and that. If pagans or Wiccans want to be authentic, they should be authentic. But they aren't, it's faddish and done primarily for side benefits (such as the obligatory sexual license) or for effect, a kind of adolescent rebellion. I am not saying some may not be sincere in their search for - well, truth, I guess - but sincere people who do not do their homework are misled in the millions, throughout history.
See post #13.
You state:
"However, the majority doesn't get to dictate what denominations or religions get access to perform public prayers at a government meeting. Either everyone gets the same privilege, or no one does."
Upon what do you base this personal and arbitrary idea? In that case, New Guinea witchcraft practitioners (who make Wiccans look like wonderbread)*, every variety of Native American Indian shaman, peyote swallowers, snake handler people, Kachina dancers, Shiva worshippers, etc etc should all be allowed to do their thing.
The very idea is ridiculous on its face. Obviously those attending the meeting should be able to decide whose prayers they want to hear.
*And in case you say they are only in New Guinea, I'm sure there are a handful or two of followers of their practices - or at least admirers - in the US.)
A world exists outside myself and yourself. Truth consists in the correspondence between our thoughts and the outside world.
So how can anyone know anything about God? We can know God through His effects.
A good Summary of Theology.
On the grounds that it is well-established in this country that the 1st Amendment does not allow the government to dsicriminate based on religion.
In that case, New Guinea witchcraft practitioners (who make Wiccans look like wonderbread)*, every variety of Native American Indian shaman, peyote swallowers, snake handler people, Kachina dancers, Shiva worshippers, etc etc should all be allowed to do their thing.
The board can lay down neutral rules: No dancing, no singing, no animals, no setting anything on fire. 2 minute time limit for any invocation or prayer.
They cannot, however, say "Christians-only" or "no Wiccans."
The very idea is ridiculous on its face. Obviously those attending the meeting should be able to decide whose prayers they want to hear.
Wherever do you get the idea that the majority get to dictate what religion gets to speak in public? This board is not required to allow anyone to perform an invocation before a board meeting. However, once they do, they can't exclude a religion because it is too "whacky."
Or they could use a reasonable standard for acceptable prayer. Since we can all know through unaided reason that God exists, and since we also know that everything depends on God for its existence, we can conclude that prayer to Him is appropriate at public meetings, if not essential.
The fact that the County Board of Supervisors chooses to hear certain prayers and chooses not to hear others is note establishing a religion.
In your scenario, anyone and everyone can make something he/she calls a relgion and demand to be heard.
That's utterly ridiculus.
I agree with your comments 100%.
Sure. Neutral rules as to acceptable prayer would be fine. Things like, no swearing, no threats, no incitement to violence etc. etc.
ping
It is a use of government time and resources for the benefit of only certain religions. That means, the Wiccan woman in question, as a taxpayer, is having some of her tax-money spent for the benefit of another religious group while her group does not receive the same benefit.
In your scenario, anyone and everyone can make something he/she calls a relgion and demand to be heard.
That is exactly what I'm saying. If the board has a problem with this, they can simply discontinue this practice.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.