She didn't say a personal prayer. Read the article: she gave an “altar call” to the community, asking those in the audience to come forward to accept Jesus Christ.
This is the wrong venue for that type of thing. Absolutely wrong. Now, the article doesn't say, but I assume everyone had enough sense to not accept her ill-timed invitation.
But suppose they had. Was she going to then go through an emotional "come-to-Jesus" stunt in the middle of her ceremony, hijacking the audience and the rest of her fellow graduates?
Selfish and innapropriate.
SD
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie.Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
Suppose you are right and the speaker was "wrong", "selfish", and "inappropriate". (I am leaning toward thinking you are somewhat right.)
There is nothing in the constitution that forbids being wrong, selfish, or inappropriate. The constitution does give the speaker the right to free speech and free excercise of religion.
Even if you are right the ACLU is wrong.
I might agree that it was not the appropriate venue for this type of activity but that only makes it inappropriate, not illegal. The ACLU is simply wrong again.
If you agree that she should be stopped from doing this altar call, what level of violence should the government use against her to make her submit and conform?
If a Muslim student gave the convocation and then asked members of the audience to "join the jihad" FReepers would be jamming the ACLU hotline.
Agreed. She did this for personal glory not God's. This type of whack job gives Christians a bad name.
Maybe, but is the ACLU suing people for selfish behavior now?