You don't answer my question, so let me try again under a different way.
Our Constitution provides for the freedom of religion. I like that.
If Christians get to say Christian prayers at a public meeting, why can't another religion?
Because they weren't invited.
The prayers are said on behalf of the legislators, assemblymen, or whatever term is appropriate for the body being assembled. Rabbis are often called to give such a prayer, so there goes the "Christian-only" element of that debate.
If any official member of the body wants to identify themselves as a Wiccan, then Wiccan prayers might be appropriate. Until then, they really aren't, are they?
I'mn pretty big on original intent. We can surmise what the founding fathers thought of witchcraft. Calling that coven of quackery a religion is an insult to not only Christians, but all time-honored and God-respecting religions. But have it your way - witches prayers to Satan, pot and porn. Hey it's the libertarian way!
"If Christians get to say Christian prayers at a public meeting, why can't another religion?"
First of all, Wiccans are not a religious sect. They are a bunch of sexually confused, birkenstock wearing, henna tattoo getting, patchouli-scented, Cherry Garcia eating, tree-hugging losers, who think that if they wear enough black and say the right incantations, the lord of darkness will appear and get them a date. That is why you never see blond cheerleader types going for the occult.
Second, fine if they want to say their little prayers to some goddess or a fern or whatever, let them. However you'd have to give the opportunity to every mental patient and crackpot out there.
This doesn't fly. Using this logic, based on freedom of speech, I could argue that everyone who wants to has a right to testify before any congressional committe which invites people to appear and testify for or against any pending issue. I mean, it isn't fair to let some give their opinion to congress and not others if we have freedom of speech - congress would be discriminating against my point of view. No one should buy such a stained interpetation of freedom of speech nor should they buy the same strained interpetation of the establishment clause.
Hush! You're being extreme!! There are some religious bigots here, no question. They're like a Judeo-Christian Taliban. It's an embarrassment to those who support Freedom of Religion regardless of how hair brained or "modern" it might be.
Because the people's elected representatives have decided to not offer such an invitation. This does not restrict the freedom of religion for the uninvited party in the least.
If the uninvited party does not like being uninvited, they are free to peacably assemble and petition their fellow citizens to elect representatives who will invite them.
That's what happens in a free society. In a tyranny, you go to the local dictator and convince him to force the people to do what you want.