[yonif]

I don't know about anyone else, but I never said it needs to be designed to fit the audience.

He could have just used another prayer which did not refer to Jesus. Is there not such a prayer that does not mention Jesus in the Christian religion? If not, then I take back all I have said concerning this being inappropriate.

[hellinahandcart]

Is there not such a prayer that does not mention Jesus in the Christian religion?

Well, there's the Lord's Prayer, but in this case we are talking about a prayer of the minister's own composition (that's what ministers do).

I suppose he could have said "*I* ask in Jesus' Name", rather than closing with "In Jesus' Name", and then the complainers would have at least had to admit that he wasn't speaking for them, even if he was asking on their behalf.

I do suspect 'Pod is right about the political (and perhaps staged) nature of the objection to the traditional prayer, which has never occurred before this year. The senator who invited the minister to speak, and the three rabbis to be his other invited guests, seemed really thrown for a loop.

[sauropod]

Actually, I am not sure. I will ask my pastor the next time I see him.

[carton253]

It was a Christian who was praying. Christians believe in Jesus and pray in His name. When you invite a Christian to pray... better expect it 'cause it's coming.

Why should a Christian be less than a Christian... no one asks the Hindu to be less, the Muslim to be less, the Jew to be less...

The Pastor wasn't preaching, he was praying. He wasn't evangelizing, he was praying. Big difference. He was invited... He wasn't imposing anything on anyone.

If the lawmakers are going to get that bent out of shape over this, then perhaps they need to find other careers. They are awfully thin-skinned to be in politics.