Bush administration backs prayer services at library

[Judi Lynn]

Bush administration backs prayer services at library
By DAVID KRAVETS, AP Legal Affairs Writer
Friday, December 2, 2005
(12-02) 15:13 PST San Francisco (AP) --

The Bush administration is siding with a Christian group in its lawsuit demanding rights to conduct prayer services at public libraries.

The case concerns a Contra Costa County policy allowing the public to use free meeting rooms at its libraries, but prohibits "religious services and activities."

The Sierra Club, Narcotics Anonymous and even the East Contra Costa Democratic Club have utilized the county's library facilities. The Faith Center Church Evangelistic Ministries, however, was denied access because of its religious preaching.

"Because the county refused to permit Faith Center to use the meeting rooms solely because of the religious perspective of the activities at its meetings, the county engaged in impermissible viewpoint discrimination," the Justice Department wrote the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco on Monday.
(snip/...)

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/12/02/state/n151319S14.DTL

[rodeodance]

1. bush et al need a civics lesson on the separation of church and state.

[stepnw1f]

2. Nah... They Need to go to Jail

and made the poster children of Christo-Fascism.

[kurth]

3. Next: Sunday prayer service using city hall

Heathens and Hindus not welcome.

[Catch22Dem]

4. What do you mean "next?"

They already have a prayer before city council meetings here.

[sinkingfeeling]

5. Let them and then start your on Heathen Service in the room next

to the one they're using!

[amber dog democrat]

8. That would be too funny

I would love to have a nonsense Satanist ritual complete with pentegrams, a stuffed goat head,
and people in black robes with witch hats chanting nonsense syllables.

Maybe hold a bible upside over a lecturn and read backwards....
Though it might get tedius over time. Some of these 9th commandment x-tians have short tempers, long on narcissism.

[Charlie Brown]

6. Libraries are for research and reading

If you want religious services, GO TO A DAMN CHURCH.

Edit: The fact that an acting President is supporting nonsense that Eisenhower, Nixon, and even his own father would have balked at is evidence of how far into fringe-land the Republican Party has slid.

[Nevernose]

15. Libraries are for a lot more than research and reading

Public gatherings, speeches, art shows, fairs and carnivals, concerts -- all of these things go on within my public library system, and most of the others that I've been a part of.

If the Sierra Club wants to get together and discuss ways of protecting the environment, or NA wants to get together and discuss ways of keeping people off drugs, then why shouldn't people be able to get together and share their religion?

If the public meeting rooms are open to one group, then why shouldn't they be open to another? If the library forced patrons to attend religious services, or spent money out of the library's advertising budget, that would be a violation of the separation of church and state, but that's not what's happening. There's no promotion of religion going on here, only a desire for acceptance as just another group. As long as the library is open to other groups and the prayer services don't interfere with regular patrons, then where's the harm?

[Charlie Brown]

20. Does that include religious "services?"

If Muslims want to have prayer-chants on Fridays at the expense of other's enjoyment of the library, or if Fundies want to sing hymns, the library can't tell them "no?"

Why can't this group just meet as a study group or religious club? This case smells of self-promotion.

How is a prohibition of religious services in a public library a violation of religious freedom?

[Nevernose]

22. One group is as good as another, religious or otherwise

If Muslims want to have prayer-chants on Fridays at the expense of other's enjoyment of the library, or if Fundies want to sing hymns, the library can't tell them "no?"

The operative phrase here is "at other's enjoyment of the library." This phrase should, and would, be applied no matter what religion the group holding the meeting belonged to. As long as the people meeting aren't disrupting anybody else, what difference does it make?

Why can't this group just meet as a study group or religious club?

I suspect that the fact that the term "prayer meeting" is more in vogue today than the terms "study group" or "religious group" has something to do with it. But again: as long as the library is open to other groups, and as long as the group using their facilities isn't disrupting other services, what difference does it make?

This case smells of self-promotion.
I agree. That doesn't make them wrong, even if I do (probably) disagree with them both religiously and politically.

How is a prohibition of religious services in a public library a violation of religious freedom? As I posted in #16 below, the ACLU disagrees with you. First I will quote from their site, and, if you're still interested, tomeorrow I will dig up the relevant cases on WestLaw. Just because a group is religious in nature does not bar their activities from anything remotely related to government, only to government SPONSORING a religion, any religion. If you will accept the premise that a public library is, in many respects, extrememly similar to a public school:

"the school must make its facilities available to all student groups on an equal basis. So your Bible club couldn't be the only group allowed access to the school grounds. Neither could your school let other student groups use the building for meetings and events and deny your Bible club the same opportunity."
http://www.aclu.org//studentsrights/religion/12805pub19990331.html

[Voltaire99]

28. As long as they agree not to burn any books...

Nice post, Nevernose.

That said, I oppose organized religious worship in non-religious public institutions on principle.

Creeping religiosity is bad for secularism, encourages more tribalism in a badly fractured society, and offends the purpose of the public institution.

Freedom of religion is a given in America; but the public sphere increasingly lacks any freedom from religion.

And that will end badly, as it has everwhere else.

[prolesunited]

7. Good!

I can't wait until the local library opens its doors for my group to conduct its satanic rituals. I know the Muslims in the area also are looking for a place to gather until their mosque is complete. I'm sure we would be as welcome as the Christians once this policy is overturned.

[amber dog democrat]

9. Satan loves me, this i know

'cus the Necronomicon tells me so..

[MountainLaurel]

10. ROFL!

:spray:

[Xithras]

11. In this case, the Christian group is actually in the right.

If a government facility is made available to private groups for private use, the government cannot discriminate as to which groups or messages are permitted in those facilities. Unless they can show that the services would be disruptive to the library, which would be difficult since they rent it to other groups regularly, they can't discriminate based on religion. This has been upheld by the federal and Supreme courts numerous times.

We actually had a similar situation here locally recently. A psychic spiritualist wanted to give a presentation in the Ripon California public library recently, but was turned away because the fundie Christians running the place freaked out over her religion. Since the library is made available to other groups, the ACLU and others chimed in to remind the library that they couldn't discriminate against her religion either.

[Charlie Brown]

14. A few thoughts

Religious clubs and organizations should be treated the same as other private clubs. "Religious services," however, are more complicated than clubs, and often place a large responsibility on the gov't as far as accomodations and practice.

Since permitting religious services places a big responsibility on the library to accomodate every single group, I can see why they would want to opt out of offering space for religious services.

If Muslims come in on Friday (keep in mind many towns do not have Mosques) they might want to say prayers in a loud tone. If another group wants to bring incense to burn, there's another responsibility for the library. It is often impossible to have a religious service without bothering others, and I can see why libraries would want to prohibit them on the premises.

I think I agree with the library on the grounds that the service would likely disturb or bother other patrons (with hymn-singing or "A-Mens"). If the library tries to ask them to keep it down , or avoid singing, then the group will probably claim it violates their freedom of religion, and, voila, another lawsuit.

Also, I keep getting the impression that the X-tians wanted this lawsuit to happen so that they could "infiltrate" the library. They could easily meet in their church or at home. It kind of irritates me.

If it was a Bible study group or a religious club, I would side with the plaintiffs.

[Kagemusha]

18. But if you ban all religious services equally...

Depends on if it's discrimination or, well, treating them all the same, just like dirt. (to use an expression)

[VegasWolf]

12. On a positive note, this would be the first time Bush and a bunch of

FReepers had ever been inside of a library.

:sarcasm:

[RazzleDazzle]

13. I would not be opposed to the Faith Center were it not for the fact

that if this goes through, churches without their own buildings could start using public buildings everywhere instead.

However, if the Faith Center wanted a room only once, or even once a month, I don't see a problem.

[Nevernose]

16. Didn't the ACLU already settle this in favor of the prayer group?

When they stood up for the rights of the children in Kentucky who wanted to start a bible club in their high school? The argument being that if one group wanted to have meetings, then so could any other, so long as the government wasn't sponsoring the religious activity?

WHAT ABOUT RELIGIOUS CLUBS OR BIBLE DISTRIBUTION?

Student-organized Bible clubs are OK as long as three conditions are met:

(1) the activity must take place during non-school hours; (2) school officials can't be involved in organizing or running the club, and (3) the school must make its facilities available to all student groups on an equal basis. So your Bible club couldn't be the only group allowed access to the school grounds. Neither could your school let other student groups use the building for meetings and events and deny your Bible club the same opportunity.

From the ACLU at http://www.aclu.org//studentsrights/religion/12805pub19990331.html

[NYC]

17. In all the time I've spent at the New York Public Library,

I have witnessed only one indident. I was in the back writing letters to politicians regarding the library budget. There was shouting in the front. Guards went past. More shouting. Guards returned.

The "son of God" had been evicted from the library.

Over years and years, this was the first incident I ever witnessed.

[Pastiche423]

19. What the hell are churches for?

If you've got something religious to do, why not do it in a church?

I don't want my tax dollars going for some religious prayer meeting.

[genieroze]

21. I wonder if * would back a Satanist prayer meeting.????

Edited to add: I personally don't care if they want to have their meeting there because it is a public library where one is supposed to have access. Just wondering if a non traditional religious sect would be given the same privilege. What I want to know is why don't they have their meetings at their church?

[daleo]

23. All part of an ongoing effort to re-norm society in a religious direction.

Don't churches have churches to practice their rituals in? I suspect this is just one of those efforts to have religious activity become utterly mixed together with political and civic functions that have formerly been kept separate. This is all part of a coordinated effort to re-norm society, so that the idea of separation of church and state becomes thought of as a quaint anachronism.

[BjohnsonMN]

24. It's too bad they don't back reading in libraries...

unless of course people are reading the Bible, a book by some right-wing hack, or My Pet Goat the GOP would prefer we stayed out of libraries. In fact I think this might be their method of helping to keep us ignorant, put a bunch of fundies in one place and no sane person would want to go there and they know fundies won't read the subversive books anyways.

On edit: When I say they want people reading the Bible I am only referring to the Old Testament, and the parts that they can use to push their agenda. They certainly do not want us reading about how we are supposed to treat the poor, because they want to pretend they are taking a literal view of the Bible while they ignore a large chunk of the text.

[Charlie Brown]

25. Yup, they'll start "changing" the library once their services are let in

I'm sure this group will start bitching about the books they want removed 'cause they claim it interferes w/their religious beliefs (gay-themed books or anything occult related). They'll demand to start witnessing to staff and other patrons, and make it very bothersome to others with damned hymn-singing and "Hallejujahs!"

They can meet in a church and I'm getting really tired of this $hit.

[BenDavid]

26. bush knew!

Bush knew that 11 soldiers were killed in Iraq before he went into the rose garden to give some good news on the economy Friday morning. As you will recall he did not mention it. 26 minutes later after his speech the news broke to the press. McCellan said bush knew before he gave the speech....

[Charlie Brown]

27. Is there some reason you are posting this in multiple threads? n/t