Posted on 07/30/2013 4:03:03 PM PDT by robowombat
Tuesday, 30 July 2013 14:32 Texas City Stands up to Atheists Over Prayers at Government Meetings Written by Dave Bohon
Texas City Stands up to Atheists Over Prayers at Government Meetings The Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) appears to be losing its intimidating touch as it goes about its business of trying to stop people from praying and expressing their faith in public. The atheist group's latest attack has come against the city council of League City, Texas, which has included prayer by local clergy in its regular government meetings since the early 1960s.
In a July 15 letter to Mayor Tim Paulissen and the League City Council, the FFRF went through its customary paces in attempting to browbeat the city fathers into submission. Appealing to the First Amendment's supposed “separation of state and church,” the godless group's staff attorney, Elizabeth Cavell, called the city's tradition of allowing both local residents and government officials to open the meetings in prayer of “dubious legality,” insisting that such prayers are “unnecessary, inappropriate, and divisive.”
Cavell advised that while government officials “are free to pray privately or to worship on their own time in their own way,” they “do not need to worship on taxpayers' time.” Cavell complained that inviting council members and locals to offer invocations at the government meetings “is coercive and beyond the authority of any government.”
While citing a selection of court cases to buttress the FFRF's case against public prayer, Cavell conceded that there is no clear precedent for her group to demand that the city end its tradition, since courts have issued conflicting opinions that make the legal landscape on the issue “unstable.” The only warning she could muster was that prayer at government meetings “continues to be litigated, divisive, and problematic for local governments across the nation precisely because of this instability.”
She dubiously suggested that the “best course” for the city would be “to halt the prayers. If you wish to pray prior to the meeting, do so on your own time in your own way — do not make it part of the secular business of your local government.”
As it happened, Mayor Paulissen and the city council appeared to be disinclined to follow the FFRF's self-serving advice. Paulissen told the Houston Chronicle that he and the other city fathers had no plans to drop the 52-year tradition of opening council meetings with an invocation.
“The city has been doing this since 1962, and nobody has ever complained, to my knowledge,” Paulissen said. He added that “it's not just my stance. I have the full support of those on the city council, too.”
The Chronicle noted that the city council “has a rotating list of pastors and laymen that pray each meeting. Paulissen doesn't see this as a waste of taxpayers' money, as the FFRF alleges.” Said Paulissen: “It's not a waste of taxpayers' money. Everybody supports the prayer. It's non-denominational in content.” He added that “this is what our forefathers did, too,” recalling that the first Continental Congress prayed before it began its historically important business.
Those who have followed the FFRF's ongoing attacks against communities and school districts might remember its unfruitful assault in 2012 on a group of high school cheerleaders in Kountze, Texas, who displayed inspirational Bible verses on huge banners during high-school football games. While the atheist group had intimidated the Kountze school district's superintendent, Kevin Weldon, into prohibiting the cheerleaders from displaying the banners, the students got some legal help of their own from the Dallas-based Liberty Institute, which secured an injunction allowing the cheerleaders to continue displaying the Bible verses while an FFRF-inspired lawsuit against them moved forward.
However, a month before the scheduled June 2013 trial for the lawsuit, a Texas judge ruled that the students were well within their constitutionally guaranteed rights to continue to make and display the Christian banners. In his written opinion, District Judge Steve Thomas found that no state or federal law “prohibits cheerleaders from using religious-themed banners at school sporting events.”
Among those who cheered on the cheerleaders was Texas Governor Rick Perry, who said that he was “proud of the cheerleaders at Kountze ISD for standing firm in the knowledge of these endowed rights and their willingness to be an example in defending those rights, which a secular group has needlessly tried to take away.”
The hardcore atheists have really adopted a religion of nothingness.
I proved this point on Twitter the other day during a discussion with my buddy, who is actually an atheist. As soon as we started discussing religion/atheism, literally 25-30 atheists descended upon my timeline, complaining how Christianity ruined the world, and how my faith is so anti-logical.
They are a pathetic bunch. They spend their days, trying to ruin everyone else’s fun.
The “government” can not be used as a mechanism to force the people to listen to “your” speech or “my” speech, nor can they silence either of us.
That is a function reserved to the people, in a civil society.
Our society is quickly becoming uncivil, due to radical elements of our government acceding to the whims of a vocal radical minority, in defining civil society down to absurd deviant levels.
The correction will be bloody, as it has always been, as it is now in other places, and has always been, throughout human history.
Sigh.
Yes Islam promotes the initiation of force against non believers. Is is totalitarianism. I think that it crosses the line and should be treated as a danger. I don’t mind saying that I am prejudiced against Muslims for rational reasons. I can coexist with Christians because in a free society I don’t have to deal with them. You get enough Muslims in a society and freedom starts to go the way of the Dodo bird. Pretty soon you have no choice but to deal with them as they try to impose Sharia.
Yes I didn’t read the article just the headline. I mistakenly thought it was about another story in Texas where some atheists wanted to put up a display and were forbidden by the government because it would be offensive to Christians. I think these radical groups should get a life.
They already did, in Bradford County, Florida. The monument is actually a bench, which I think it is hilarious. I can't wait to go to Florida and place my rear end on the atheists monument!
Really? Really? You'll let them do that? Oh, thank you!!!
Well, ya know what? Stuff it, Cavell, because government officials and others don't get their rights from you. You can't give them, and you can't take them away.
And which religion are our laws derived from, and our countries principals based on? Certainly not the KKK or the atheists.
That was somewhat rhetorical, but I am really curious what the atheist plaque had on it? The founding principals of atheism? The ‘golden rule’ of atheism?
I’ve read a number of articles about this, none of which had any mention of what they said.
Yes, and may He keep us from the libs' attempts to take Him out of Texas.
“Allowing the atheists to put up a monument is no different than letting Pepsi put one up on the court house grounds.”
Your logic is unassailable. But it’s the wild fervor, anger, & determined stance of the atheist that make his views seem like those of an established religion. In other words, often a disease is diagnosed solely by its symptoms in the absence of solid bacteriological evidence.
Isn’t today the anniversary of the Dwight D. Eisenhower “In God We Trust” order ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_God_we_trust
It was declared the official motto during the Cold War to counter soviet state atheism .......
Stay safe !
I remember when Christine O’Donnell (sic?) was debating the idiot Democrat during the Delaware Senate Race.
They were at a Law School, and when the Democrat started going on about the Separation of Church and State, Christine said it wasn’t in the Constitution, which of course it isn’t.
The Students in the Audience laughed at and booed her. These are future Lawyers, and unfortunately future Liberal Politicians, and they actually believe the made up crap.
The Students in the Audience laughed at and booed her. These are future Lawyers, and unfortunately future Liberal Politicians, and they actually believe the made up crap.
Yes indeed. I have been called a ‘racist MFer’ for pointing out that while the Constitution does make the Prez the Commander in Chief of the armed forces it specifically says that Congress has both the power of the purse and is responsible for approving the regulations and laws that shall govern the armed forces, i.e. DADT. So that BHO could not unilaterally void DADT. The respondent believed I was dissing ‘his’ president by stating this.
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.