Posted on 10/11/2005 5:23:40 PM PDT by wagglebee
A practicing witch who sought to have her prayers heard at government meetings in a Richmond, Va., suburb had no magic before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Justices rejected an appeal by Cyndi Simpson, a Wiccan priestess and member of the Broom Riders Association, who wanted to offer a generalized prayer to the "creator of the universe" in Chesterfield County, Va.
"I wasn't going to talk about the goddess," Simpson said previous to today's decision. "I was going to call the elements, maybe offer up an invocation to the highest being."
Simpson had argued that Christians and members of other faiths were allowed to provide invocations before county meetings, but she was being excluded because of her pagan, polytheistic beliefs.
Wicca is regarded as a natural religion, "grounded in the earth." Followers of its many different forms generally believe all living things, as well as stars, planets and rocks, have a spirit.
American Civil Liberties Union lawyer Rebecca Glenberg said the county "issues invitations to deliver prayers to all Christian, Muslim and Jewish religious leaders in the country. It refuses to issue invitations to Native Americans, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Wiccans or members of any other religion."
Some 235 congregations, the bulk of which are Christian, were on the county's approved list in 2003. The Islamic Center of Virginia is also on the list, and its imams have been involved in giving prayers occasionally.
In a letter of explanation to Simpson, County Attorney Steven L. Micas said, "Chesterfield's nonsectarian invocations are traditionally made to a divinity that is consistent with the Judeo-Christian tradition."
With help from the ACLU, which ironically often opposes most expressions of prayer at government events, Simpson sued and initially won before a federal court judge who ruled the county board violated Simpson's constitutional right of equal and free expression of her religious beliefs.
But at the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, she lost when jurists found Chesterfield County had amended its policy and directed clerics to avoid any mention of Jesus Christ.
The legal precedent covering most government assemblies is the 1983 Supreme Court case of Marsh v. Chambers, where justices noted:
In light of the unambiguous and unbroken history of more than 200 years, there can be no doubt that the practice of opening legislative sessions with prayer has become part of the fabric of our society. To invoke Divine guidance on a public body entrusted with making the laws is not, in these circumstances, an "establishment" of religion or a step toward establishment; it is simply a tolerable acknowledgment of beliefs widely held among the people of this country. As Justice Douglas observed, "[w]e are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being."
Someone need to tell that moonbat that if the country had been founded on her values, we'd all be digging in the dirt for food with our bare hands, and she would be slave to some overlord. Judeo-Christian principle are what give us all the freedom to walk around without fear. She should be pointed to what happened recently to that guy in India that 67 women of the village thought was guilty of practising witchcraft. She should be thankful that here in the US, Christian don't run around committing murder on witches anymore. And if they do, the law will come down on them with its full fury.
Don't be too happy. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
I'm less wary of Wiccans than the (approved) Muslims
This was not, technically, a decision. The Supreme Court just refused to hear the case (as they refuse to hear 98% of the cases they are asked to hear). The Supreme Court wrote no opinion, and its action is not citeable as precedent (but the lower court's decision stands).
"I fail to see any sanity in this decision."
Silly you - sanity in a court ruling ? ? ? ?
Next you will be expecting justice.
</sarcasm>
"Creator of the universe" sounds like Intelligent Design to me. I don't see a problem.
How about Pastatarians?
Ever heard of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monsterism
When this witch nut turns and sues using that point, she will wind up winning.
This is one of those victories that opens the doors to courts to ban expressions of christianity.....its also the type of thing college professors use to cite the "intollerance" of chrisitians and used as the chief arguement of why religion should be excluded from the public.
"I don't think they should exclude any religion. If they aren't going to allow all prayers, they shouldn't allow any."
Selling that idea to Americans was one of Satan's major victories in the 20th century.
I have a 20x30 poster of FSM over my couch. It's genius and perfectly illustrates my point.
And your point is?
"She should be thankful that"
She should be thankful that there is no principle of "too nutty to live" in English common law.
In this country we have freedom of religion. It isn't right for the government to tell her she isn't allowed to pray at these meetings, especially when others are allowed to. I hope you'll rethink your position on this.
I think you are confusing the doctrine of "word magic" with "prayer". They are different.
I'm pretty much afraid of all religions to a certain extent. I agree Islam is probably #1 though.
I learned about FSM from my kid who pestered me until I broke down and bought him a FSM hoodie.
He is now a trendsetter and the envy of the high school.
Freedom of religion does not mean that a local government can be compelled to allow anyone to say a prayer at one of their meetings.
Also, selling the idea of Satan to other humans was one of man's major victories of the 0th century.
Even while holding government office people are allowed, in the US, to adhere to their own religious beliefs and standards.
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.