Atheist group based in Wisconsin sues Bush, governor over National Day of Prayer

[Nambe]

Source: Associated Press

MADISON, Wis. (AP) _ The nation's largest group of atheists and agnostics is suing President Bush, the governor of Wisconsin and other officials over the federal law designating a National Day of Prayer.

The Freedom From Religion Foundation sued Friday in U.S. district court, arguing that the president's mandated proclamations calling on Americans to pray violates a constitutional ban on government officials endorsing religion.

The day of prayer, held each year on the first Thursday of May, creates a "hostile environment for nonbelievers, who are made to feel as if they are political outsiders," the lawsuit said.

The national proclamation issued this year asked God's blessings on our country and called for Americans to observe the day with appropriate programs, ceremonies and activities. ...

Read more: http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-prayer-day-lawsuit,0,1473371.story

[ixion]

1. national day of prayer?

:wtf:

I missed that somehow, or perchance I just ignored it the first time. :evilgrin:

[RoccoR5955]

2. I make it a point of missing that National Day of Prayer EVERY year! n/t

[Beregond2]

3. This is the kind of thing that makes atheists look ridiculous

in many people's eyes. The constitution has no such ban. It merely bans the government setting up an official state religion.

Exactly how an event that most people have ever heard of creates a "hostile environment" escapes me.

I suppose next we will have loggers protesting Arbor Day because it creates an environment hostile to logging.

These people need to get lives.

[Gamey]

7. Agree with beregond

[wuushew]

8. Read Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists again

n/t

[tccturtle]

11. Talk about being biased. I really thought DU was better than this!

Nambe makes a perfectly valid point. As a new theist myself, there always has been, and always should a septation of church and state. Your statement basically just tells me that you could really give a rats ass about how I would feel about this topic. I used to really respect and admire your great posts, and I am disappointed that you think so less of me. With my also being also gay, it would be the same as me saying to you that as possible heterosexual that you need to get over your self it would be the same as you to "get over om scoring a heterosexual trick". I would only ask that ask that you afford me the same respect.

[DavidDvorkin]

12. I was sure a post like Beregond2's would show up.

And it did.

[Zhade]

113. His is wrong, but Festivo's are DANGEROUS.

Exactly the type of pro-believer lies designed to further trash our rights.

[Lordquinton]

13. Let's look

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"

Seems fairly cut and dry to me.

[tbyg52]

33. Hey, Lordquinton!

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[Lordquinton]

98. Thank you

As they say, long time listener, first time caller here.

[Proletariatprincess]

16. spoken like a believer.

That is kind of like white people telling minorities that
there is no race discrimination.  That from their white
majority point of view, there is no hostile enviroment for
people of color...its not real.
 Many people's eyes are blinded by their own prejudices,
Beregond.

[amdezurik]

30. the sad part is you can't hear yourself

you sound exactly like the anti-gay bigots who claim 'next they will want to marry animals' or the anti-civil rights bigots 'next the darkies will want to go to school with out kids and marry our wimmin!'. It might behoove you to think a bit before making these snap judgments

[tccturtle]

32. Ummm first - I am not anti-gay

If I could marry my husband/lover/partner I would do so in a heartbeat, so don't even go there. As to making snap judgments....I was not the one who was attacking the separation of church and state.

[tbyg52]

34. a) Logging is not religion and b) how would you feel about a "National Day of Anti-Prayer"? nt

[Taverner]

45. "National Day of Anti-Prayer" - I like that

Anyone caught praying is put in stocks in the town square

[Taverner]

44. Not at all

It is a Govermnent "blessing" of a religion. The Judeo-Christian family of religions.

[immoderate]

57. Let's have a national day of superstition. Oh, wait a minute...

Fact is, you insult the intelligence of the founders when you condone this nonsense. They really wanted to leave this stuff alone. It 's nice that candidates don't run on a platform of defeating evil. Uh, on second thought...

Well how about National Pickle Week? I mean forget that it's actually ten days. :)

--IMM

[and-justice-for-all]

74. The amendment actually keeps the "State" from....

recognizing any religion. That means, that the federal government is to not endorse ANY religious activity nor discourage people from worshiping as they see fit.

A federal endorsement of this activity is in fact unconstitutional. The same goes for the Faith-based Initiative crap.

[Maestro]

125. The problem lies in the fact that this National Day of Prayer

is geared to one religion, Christianity and more specifically, Protestants. If it were a day to pray to whomever your Creator is, it would not be so bad, but it seems to be directed at just one religion. That is the way I see it anyhow.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

137. I had no idea how bad Jews, blacks and gays felt when they were referred to as "those people."

Now, thanks to you, I have.

[kirby]

4. May 1, 2003 - Why does that day sound familiar?

What happened on this National Day of Prayer in 2003?

[Rancid Crabtree]

6. trying to be helpful

what happened?...my guess is a bunch of sailors had to clean up, a lot, and then do it again, with feeling...if they all turned around they'd look like those photos of Civil War soldiers...but before the photo loaded, I was thinking of another 1st...a month earlier, and that holiday for atheists recognized by all.

[LeftyMom]

9. Oh look, he tried to make a joke. How cute.

I could just pinch your little cheeks.

[Rancid Crabtree]

21. I do my best

and thank you for titillating me with the thought of my cheeks getting pinched...my heart's all a-flutter.

[awoke_in_2003]

10. Atheists are fools

because we don't believe in something that has absolutely NO physical evidence? Wow. Are we fools because we don't believe in Zeus, Odin, the Tooth Fairy, Santa Clause, and Leprechauns, too? I know, that is foolish to think, we know none of these things exist, they aren't in the bible:sarcasm: There is as much evidence in the existence of Thor as there is the existence of god (and the stories of Thor are a hell of a lot more interesting).

[Rage for Order]

15. I don't think that's the case

The only atheists who are fools are those who claim to know for certain that there is no God, just as those who claim to know for certain that God does exist are fools. It is not something that can be known one way or the other, and those who claim otherwise should rightly be considered fools.

[starroute]

20. Putting it that way assumes you've defined a "God" to argue about

Try defining what the "God" is that atheists don't believe in and I might be more willing to accept your equation of atheists=fools.

By "God," do you mean "there is something that exists outside of the material universe which is in every conceivable way different and separate from the material universe, which cannot be acted upon or perceived in any way involving the familiar laws of matter and energy, and yet which both created and remains capable of influencing the material universe in ways which do not involve any physical force or leave any physical traces of outside intervention"?

That's a concept that a lot of religious people seem to accept without question -- and yet it's one so self-contradictory and ultimately meaningless that I can't even follow its logic well enough to agree that it would be foolish to deny the possibility of it being true.

Or do you mean something more like "even though the universe as we perceive it through our senses seems to consist only of matter and energy, humans also share in a world of inner experience which suggests that the totality of reality includes more than our material perceptions"?

That concept of a larger metaphysical cosmos seems a lot more meaningful -- and is one that intelligent people could have a reasonable discussion about. But it doesn't exactly include an entity called "God" -- or even provide any need for one.

The real argument isn't about whether there's more to the universe than what we perceive. It's about whether the narrow, self-aggrandizing, and emotionally primitive concept of something vaguely like an idealized human being pulling strings from behind the scenes should be considered as anything more than the over-inflated equivalent of a four-year-old's answer to "why is the sky blue."

It's about time that we accepted that agnosticism really means "we don't know shit" -- instead of insisting that it should mean something more like "we don't know whether the simplistic speculations of a bunch of Paleolithic hunter-gatherers about what's really out there beyond the limits of their campfire is true or not, but you're a fool if you don't agree that it might be correct."

[Realityhack]

51. That depends upon which god you are cirtain about.

Sure you can't disprove A god.
But you can disprove a specific god or specific acts of god etc.

BTW I think most atheists here would be classified as agnostics in your book.

[awoke_in_2003]

71. The way I see the word atheist

is what is literally means, no belief in a god. Can I prove or disprove this, no. Some call that being agnostic, but I take that more as being in doubt of existence. I know, it is a fine line, but the world is not made of black and white.

[pokercat999]

117. But Atheists are under no obligation to prove the absence

of any deity while on the other hand any religion MUST prove it's self that is if they want my $$. Rest assured that is exactly what they want money and power.

[Rancid Crabtree]

22. Sorry, I didn't mean to throw you off your feed

cool reply, though...that sarcasm with the...blood? dripping from it is neat...maybe we can agree there's good and evil in the world and leave it at that?

[Taverner]

48. There is no Good. No Evil. No Morals. Only Ethics.

At least that's what I understand.

[awoke_in_2003]

49. what bothers me

is being assumed a fool because I don't believe, because I don't do the same to those who do believe

[awoke_in_2003]

75. "maybe we can agree there's good and evil in the world"

I have to make a distinction here, I do not believe in FORCES of good and evil. I do believe, however, that man is capable of committing good or evil acts in respect to what most of society perceives as good and evil. Not trying to bust your chops, just presenting another view for consideration.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

156. How cute.

You: "Atheists are fools, haw haw haw."
Atheists: "WTF? Asshole."
You: "Gee, can't we all just get along?"

Go suck a plutonium rod.

[Taverner]

47. At least Thor has a Superhero

Where is Jesusman?

Oh yeah, there's this fool:

[awoke_in_2003]

69. I always liked Thor...

appeals to the caveman with a club that still exists in the primitive part of our brain. When I am ready to make the commitment, I will be getting a German Shepard, and plan to name him Thor.

[Taverner]

70. If I ever get a chihuahua I will name him Thor

Seriously - as much as I hate small yappy dogs, every Chihuahua I've fostered ended up being real cool. And goofy. And with an ego for a dog 200x its size.

[varkam]

146. Fresh meat!

Welcome to DU.

[Taverner]

46. Isn't May 1 also International May Day?

AKA The International Day of Laborers?

[Wendio]

5. National Day of Prayer=

Another way for the religious to identify the nonbelievers among them. If you don't participate then you are a godless heathen that needs "saving". If they truly believe, why must they set aside a national day??? Shouldn't every day be a day of prayer for them?

[tbyg52]

35. Hi, Wendio!

Welcome to DU! :hi:

Ain't that the truth? Tell me there isn't pressure to participate, or at least funny looks if you don't.

[Wendio]

95. Thanks tbyg52.....

I am used to the funny looks since I didn't bow my head during opening prayer at the booster/PTA meetings. Odd how it was ALWAYS a christian religion that was asked to come and give the opening prayer. (down south, not where we live now)

[rpannier]

14. Wish em luck

They'll lose.

[blossomstar]

17. Politics + Religion = War

[Pastiche423]

18. They should win

It's in Our Constitution, after all.

[vinylsolution]

19. He is watching....

... he is voting:

[Vidar]

23. I am not an atheist; however, I applaud anyone who sues Bush for any reason.

As my hero Churchill said, in answer to a question about his alliance with Stalin," If the devil himself fought against Hitler, I'd put in a good word for him in the House of Commons".

[cosmik debris]

24. I have a special diet for the National Day Of Prayer.

Cabbage, broccoli, a lot of fresh fruit, boiled eggs, and beans.

I say a lot of prayers that day.

[fNord]

25. this isn't just about the rights of atheists.........

I am very active in my doctrine of faith, and in it we are almost forbidden to pray. it can be a very dangerous thing to do. There are many documented cases of people, for example, in desert towns suffering from a drought, praying for rain and getting there town wiped out in a flood. so to make a day of prayer is not only discriminating to the atheist, it is down right offensive to people of my ilk. i there for present this to the bush-ites, and suggest the go and preform an anatomical impossibility



Edited by fNord for spelling

[anarch]

26. I endorse this sentiment from the depths of my pineal gland

:thumbsup:

[Festivito]

27. So many new people and strange doses of half-statements.

Welcome to the new people. Note: please, do use the check spelling button. Sometimes it is so bad we cannot discern what you did try to mean.

Some posters recall the no-establishment part, but, curiously forget the ...

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I can understand that having to endure the time spent while someone else prays can be an onerous occurrence, however, consider, for you who even despise religion of any type, is it really that hard to stand there and endure it? After all, isn't most of the day spent without religion, and the religionists do endure that. Why can't you?

I think that forcing people to stand while others pray is a sadly bad reflection on the control freak's religion. I would not do it. But, I cannot in good conscience nor from selfish self-preservation of following orders stop them until they step on my right to my religion, even if that is no religion at all.

[Fumesucker]

28. It could be argued that a national day of prayer..

Interferes with the rights of Americans to pray or not pray as they see fit..

It is neither the responsibility nor the place of the government as laid out in the Constitution to either encourage or discourage prayer.

If such an official day of prayer influences one single American to pray or not pray in a manner that they would not have otherwise done so then it should be found unconstitutional, IMO.

[Festivito]

29. And, it could be argued that free speech interferes with...

the rights of Americans to speak as they see fit.. to make a play on your own statement.

Yet we allow people to speak, and somehow, we get our chance.

And, I don't think that in either of these cases that the freedom will be found unconstitutional, IMO.

[Fumesucker]

36. Free speech = = free speech...

National day of prayer != Freedom of religion.

So your "play" on my statement does not make any sense.

What do you think the purpose is behind a national day of prayer?

[Festivito]

40. Praying is a free exercise of religion.

Whether done by many on a public square or alone inside an unexplored cave.

[Realityhack]

50. Ignoring the point.

Nobody is talking about banning praying on any day.
Nobody is saying you can't pray openly in public.

Thus there is absolutely no free exercise issue.

What we are talking about is the government declaring something to be an official day of prayer. It IS arguable that this is a government endorsement of religion over non-religion.
Would it be equally OK for the government to declare a national day of not talking to imaginary sky daddy gods?

Of course not. Neither is appropriate, and if you look at history I think you will find the framers of the constitution would not (in general) support such a day.

[Festivito]

61. No , you really should not be ignoring the point.

Because there is a free exercise issue.

And, how about:
A national day of not praying to nothing.

Sorry, I could not resist. But, it oddly works for both sides. And, there should be no need to disparage each other's side. That is shameless of you.

So, none of your "of course not" either.

If you look at history as you have asked me to do I think you might find framers acknowledging a creator in action, a Bible taking up some space inside the law making place, and other paraphernalia, usually in artworks scatter about.

So, no to your reasoning that the framers "would not."

[Realityhack]

81. What specifically do you think the free exercise issue is? n/t

[Festivito]

88. Americans want to gather and exercise freely, i.e. prayer. /nt

[Realityhack]

94. How is that an issue i this case?

Is anyone saying they can't? Nope.
Is anyone saying a church group can't have a national day of prayer? nope.

No free exercise issue never mind a violation.

Honestly I think you are the only person here who sees that as an issue. I am 100% certain the court does not.

[Zhade]

108. IT IS ILLEGAL FOR THAT PRAYER TO BE ENDORSED BY THE GOVERNMENT.

I mean, fucking DUH - read the First Amendment sometime.

[Festivito]

123. Well, who needs a SCOTUS when we have you!

And, I quoted the 1st in this branch. Talk about a DUH.

Get a clue.

Learn how to play nicely with others.

[fascisthunter]

126. NO SHIT!!!!! Thank you....FIRST AMMENDMENT read it people!!!!!

They are literally crossing the line between church and state.

[Festivito]

131. OH MY!!11!!! CAPS11!! &fecal matter. Is it HUGH?1!!!!11!!

Oh, I was hoping for more of a separation than a stupid line.

[fascisthunter]

149. awwwwww....

:nopity:

[Festivito]

152. LOL.

:popcorn:

[tbyg52]

38. Uh, nobody is proposing to prohibit the free exercise thereof.

They are proposing that the government stop endorsing/mandating it, which is the other side of that coin.

[Festivito]

42. Nobody is mandating that you pray.

Nobody is saying that since government sets a day of prayer for the whole nation, that the whole nation therein endorses a day of prayer given that there still remains a freedom of religion.

But, saying that there cannot be a day of prayer says that only the belief system of atheism is allowed establishment by the US to the exclusion of other belief systems.

[Realityhack]

53. Oh bullshit.

"But, saying that there cannot be a day of prayer says that only the belief system of atheism is allowed establishment by the US to the exclusion of other belief systems."

That is complete BS. Saying their can only be a national day of not praying would be an endorsement of atheism.
Not establishing either is clearly the neutral, not involved in the issue option. Apparently you think that a national day of prayer represents the government staying out of the issue. You are wrong.

[Festivito]

76. Not establishing either is indeed endorsing atheism.

Atheism wins. No prayer. No mention of God. Only a lack of religion. A lack of belief in God seen anywhere all school day.

But, I gather the notion has not just transferred to bovine dung, but has completely transferred. My oh my.

Your last two sentences make no sense to me. The government doing something is somehow not doing something. There's something wrong there. I don't think it's me.

[Realityhack]

82. Not true.

Nothing prevents the individual exercise of religion during the school day.
What we are talking about is the government taking a stance on the issue. The government remaining silent is NOT an endorsement of atheism. I do not understand how you arrive at that position.

Look at three options:
National day of prayer - Gov. endorsement of religion
No statement from Gov. - Gov. staying out of religion/atheism
National day of not praying - Gov. endorsement of atheism

[Festivito]

89. Yes it is true.

We are talking about the government taking a position on allowing or disallowing a name for a day that has a religious theme. Could be Christmas for that matter.

If the government banned all religious representations from public space, I'm saying it would show its denial of religion as much as if it decided to only allow non-religious displays. It would be endorsing non-religion as the state religion.

[Zhade]

114. A day remaining NEUTRAL is not a day BANNING belief!

NT!

[Festivito]

121. Unless the word neutral falls into question. /nt

[Fumesucker]

62. Atheism is not a "belief system".

Atheism isn't even necessarily a belief.

Atheism is a lack of belief in a god or gods, any god or gods.

Lack of belief != belief

There is a subtle yet important distinction between believing there is no god and not believing in god. Both positions are atheistic but one is a positive affirmation "there is no god" while the other is strictly negatory "I don't believe there is a god".

If Americans were only allowed to pray on the National Day of Prayer you would have a point, you have already admitted Americans can pray when and where they wish.

What makes these arguments with theists so wearing is that most atheists in the US started out as (mostly Christian) theists. We understand you far better than you understand us because we once *were* you.

What is your interpretation of these "red words" from the Bible? Can you even tell me who spoke them?

Matthew 6:5 And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

6 But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.

[Festivito]

79. Well, I think it is. At least what I'd pose as opposing.

Yes, the atheists here constantly play with the definition, sometimes giving two, sometimes giving websites with long long long explanations, sometimes shorter websites where on one page it says one thing and on another it implies something different. But, that is not you.

If you wish to include agnostics, Spinozaists, and others into the atheist umbrella, have at it. I will speak to the the belief that there is no God. If forced to coin a new word, fine, we'll coin a new word. For now I'll use atheism.

To say God does not exist, for my viewing, is a belief. To argue from that point suggests a belief system.

If you feel you know me better than I know you, please use that to express things clearly and completely. If I need me to dare you; I dare you.

As to Mt6.5 I've already said that having gatherings for a National Day of Prayer speaks badly of the individual's religion and the individual calling for it.

But, now I'll add that stopping those people from praying also speaks badly of the individual calling for that.

[PassingFair]

84. Not believing in "god" is not the same thing as the belief that there is no god.

There is no evidence of "god".

There may be a "god".

There may be space aliens.

There may be dragons.

There many be a giant teapot circling the earth.

There is no proof for any of them.

[Festivito]

97. Well, that gets a big: "SO WHAT!" Macht nicht.

And who cares.

[astral]

106. You know what? I think there's proof of God

I do not care if there is proof of God in your universe or not, but there is in mine. It was life experience that brought me to God, not family or preachers or church.

[Zhade]

110. Think it all you want - it doesn't mean such evidence exists.

Your personal experience cannot be tested and validated, thus it is NOT evidence.

[Fumesucker]

115. You were raised an atheist?

Unusual in the USA.

[PassingFair]

133. You believe what you want to believe.

Some of us require evidence.

[tbyg52]

100. Nobody is stopping anybody from praying!

They are just objecting to government endorsement of it!

This whole argument floors me. When is the last time the feds busted into a church and stopped the service? End of story.

[Gwendolyn]

102. Nein Liebschen, atheism is not a belief system...

A--- theism, is simply a lack of theistic belief. It's the opposite of theism if you like. You're attempting to turn nothingness into something.

By the same token you wouldn't say that "not" collecting stamps is "a hobby." Or "not" playing football is "a sport."

Not sure how you guys digressed, but anyway.

[Festivito]

103. Meine Liebschen, I am using it as such.

I wrote, somewhere in this morass of posts, that I'm using atheist to mean someone believing there is no God. Not a spinozaist, not an agnostic, not and un-theist, an A-(opposed)theist. If you wish a new word coined, coin it and I'll use it instead.

An a-philatelist for example would not just lack being interested in stamp collecting, he'd be actively opposed to the practice. That would e his hobby unless he employed himself gainfully at it.

Actively denying a God is belief put into action imbuing it as a system.

Aufwiederscrieben baby!

[askeptic]

104. Non-belief is not the same as belief - sheesh!

You are conveniently trying to define the atheist as a "believer", in order to attempt to justify your argument. It fails. Also, your attempts to claim that silence (on the subject of religion) somehow endorses atheism. In other words, you are claiming that the government cannot be neutral. Your arguments are circular. If I say nothing on the subject of vegetarianism, am I somehow "anti-vegetarianism"? No = atheism is not silence. Atheists have good reasons for not believing and will give you the arguments as to why belief in a supernatural being is irrational. They can make many good arguments, as in Smith's "Atheism, the Case Against God". It is ridiculous to try to make the case that silence somehow endorses a particular viewpoint.

Even if your argument held the slightest bit of water (which it doesn't), why do you think the government should endorse YOUR viewpoint rather than someone elses?

[Festivito]

119. For 3rd time, coin the word, and I'll use it.

You use the word it and could refer to more than one argument. Write properly.

The government has a hard time remaining neutral since the day it passed the Bill of Rights on the subject of religion. Not that it cannot achieve neutrality.

I see no circular logic. I find you using false analogy, and extrapolating from it. And, the government should endorse my viewpoint for the good of the nation.

[Zhade]

135. "And, the government should endorse my viewpoint for the good of the nation."

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you DU's resident theocrat, who wouldn't understand the First Amendment if it were patiently explained by Constitutional scholars.

[Festivito]

140. and most certainly not if done by trite goons.

On the other hand, such a person might already understand it well, and might actually post comments that pertain to the post followed.

[Lance_Boyle]

148. the word has been coined - atheist

you seem to be pushing the definition of "anti-theist" onto that word. "A" is "not," "anti" is "opposed." Get your Latin roots straight before you go re-defining things to suit your agenda.

[Festivito]

153. Of the roots un, in, a, a is most opposing.

un-theistic would be to not follow theism.

in-theistic would be to follow anything but theism.

a-theism would be opposite of theism. Since theism is a belief, being against belief or a belief opposite of a belief in a god.

anti-theism would be against theism. Actively pursuing its downfall.

I am trying to describe people who are opposed to belief in god, there seems no easily refined word to use. Atheist in one of its several meanings seems to fit the best, so I used it.

Then I get this rolling group of responders who cannot be bothered to read or think before responding, going ballistic over what is perfectly reasonable, only by the time they realize they were over the top, they cannot back up and start over.

One person actually thought they understood me at one point. I suppose I should feel lucky and leave the rest to wallow in their own dribble.

[tbyg52]

99. OK, how do you feel about a day of anti-prayer? nt

[Zhade]

109. Atheism is not a belief system.

NT!

[Festivito]

120. Some of it is. /nt

[Zhade]

136. Those who assert that it's been proven there are no gods espouse belief - it's still not a system.

And those who do that are as wrong as those who claim gods exist.

Then there's those of us, likely the majority of atheists, who simply lack belief. Thus, no religion and no belief (and no system).

[PassingFair]

43. This is NOT free exercise, Festivito, this is government SPONSORED prayer.

A No-No.

[Festivito]

52. Exercising a right to pray is not a free exercise, it is sponsorship?

No to your statement. It is an exercise of prayer protected under the free exercise clause, as free exercise. And, Congress may not make a law denying the free exercise of a religion. It's not denying anyone their free choice to pray or not to pray. Nor is any other right in play, that I see.

[Realityhack]

56. Are you intentionally missing the issue?

NOBODY is prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

The ONLY question is:
Is it ok for the federal government to declare a day as a "national day of prayer".
That is it.

Nobody is saying you can't pray that day if it is not so declared.

Now, answer the simple question. Would it be OK for the federal government to declare a "national day of not praying to imaginary gods"?

[Festivito]

64. Yes, you are.

And my answer is at the other post you made saying close to the same thing.

[Realityhack]

83. and you dodged the question there as well. n/t

[redqueen]

58. No... they are not excercising a right to pray... they declared a National Day of Prayer.

That's sponsorship.

That's showing a bias toward religion... because there is no National Day which endorses / sponsors atheists.

[Festivito]

67. Yes, they are, they did declare....

One can run around yelping OMG it's sponsorship, but even sponsorship is not illegal, and it's not even sponsorship until we repeal the first amendment.

Endorsement is not illegal, yet it's not endorsement either. It can be construed as such, but not in a courtroom.

If the attempt here is to acknowledge that there are people who admire prayer and that they can have their day, then I say fine, give them their day. If we have people who admire themselves for a lack of religious belief, maybe another day can be for them. We have several days each year.

[Realityhack]

85. Ok I think I am starting to see what you are trying to get at.

Honestly I think some of this is a language barrier (I assume your first language is not English).

You are essentially saying 'We can have a day of prayer, and a different day of no prayer (or whatever). Therefore this is not an establishment issue'. The problem is, no such day exists for the second group. And unless it does or their is a clearly established way to get one, you very well may have an establishment issue.

[Festivito]

96. You would need to create one.

Government is not going to ASSUME you want one and then ASSUME you want it started for you, or that the Orthodox want a day of chanting, or...

Now, if they allow a national day of prayer but will not allow an national day of chanting, or they attempt to hold back passage of allowing it, yes, there is a constitutional infringement.

No issues left.

Studied Engineering to avoid writing. But, I don't spell there their as you do:-o~

[PassingFair]

59. If my kid's school announces that everyone is meeting at the flagpole to pray,

they would be sponsoring that prayer.

If the kids decide on their own to meet
at a specific time and pray, that's OK.

See the difference there?

The Government of the United States should
NOT be creating NATIONAL prayer days.

[Festivito]

65. You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it think.

If the school forces a student to attend a gathering that will have a prayer spoken, it looks like a free speech issue. If that child's religion won't allow him/her to HEAR anyone else speak a prayer, a concession would have to be made, or that would be a good lawsuit as that child was forced into not having his choice of religion. But, I know of no such religion.

Around here, Detroit, with many Islamics, when around the flagpole and the phrase "under God" comes along during the pledge, those islamic students simply don't speak those words and they pick up again as the pledge continues. Even if they speak the words, no one can make another person mean it.

If the principal mandated that they speak the words it would be an interesting battle. For one principal it would be that he requires that you memorize the pledge and saying it is not endorsing it, as reading Mein Kampf out loud is not endorsing Hitler. Another principal might insist it be spoken every day, and, I'd bet the courts would rule against that principal.

See the difference there?

No one should be stopped from using democracy to gather people to pray by creating a national day of prayer.

[PassingFair]

66. You do not pass the Lemon Test.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endorsement_test



I live "around here" in Detroit. Those "Islamics" are not
asked to meet at the flagpole for Christian prayers.

Unfortunately, EVERY child is asked to recite the
Pledge of Allegiance, which was ALTERED in 1954
to include the words "under God", after YEARS of
activism by the Knights of Columbus.

[Festivito]

72. I could argue that it does pass.

And where arguments against mine would be applied, I could argue that it passes the better Constitutional review.

And, if those Islamics were told Christian prayers were available to them, they could ignore it or go.

And I'm well aware of the pledge's history.

[PassingFair]

78. You can arguably argue anything.

But you would lose.

Jeffersonian principles will
be upheld. The churches
do NOT want to be taxed.

[Festivito]

80. But, I would win.

Churches are readying for taxation. It has been increasing year by year.

And I am upholding Jeffersonian principles. You are not. So there.

[Realityhack]

87. No churches have been readying to fight to stay tax free...

despite violating the rules.
That is the opposite of readying for taxation.

[Festivito]

90. Huh? /nt

[Realityhack]

92. Evangelical groups...

have been readying for a court fight over remaining tax exempt despite violating the 501c3 rules.
They plan to openly challenge for the ability to say anything they want including endorsing candidates etc. without being taxed.

[Festivito]

122. Yes, some of them are.

I am still upholding the Jeffersonian principles, not you.

[wuushew]

132. It is quite a stretch to say you are arguing the Jeffersonian viewpoint

"We have solved, by fair experiment, the great and interesting question whether freedom of religion is compatible with order in government and obedience to the laws. And we have experienced the quiet as well as the comfort which results from leaving every one to profess freely and openly those principles of religion which are the inductions of his own reason and the serious convictions of his own inquiries." --Thomas Jefferson: Reply to Virginia Baptists, 1808. ME 16:320
"The constitutional freedom of religion the most inalienable and sacred of all human rights." --Thomas Jefferson: Virginia Board of Visitors Minutes, 1819. ME 19:416


"Among the most inestimable of our blessings, also, is that... of liberty to worship our Creator in the way we think most agreeable to His will; a liberty deemed in other countries incompatible with good government and yet proved by our experience to be its best support." --Thomas Jefferson: Reply to John Thomas et al., 1807. ME 16:291


"In our early struggles for liberty, religious freedom could not fail to become a primary object." --Thomas Jefferson to Baltimore Baptists, 1808. ME 16:317


"Religion, as well as reason, confirms the soundness of those principles on which our government has been founded and its rights asserted." --Thomas Jefferson to P. H. Wendover, 1815. ME 14:283


"One of the amendments to the Constitution... expressly declares that 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press,' thereby guarding in the same sentence and under the same words, the freedom of religion, of speech, and of the press; insomuch that whatever violates either throws down the sanctuary which covers the others." --Thomas Jefferson: Draft Kentucky Resolutions, 1798. ME 17:382


"The rights are of the natural rights of mankind, and... if any act shall be... passed to repeal or to narrow its operation, such act will be an infringement of natural right." --Thomas Jefferson: Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779. (*) ME 2:303, Papers 2:546

The Private Nature of Religion

"I have ever thought religion a concern purely between our God and our consciences, for which we were accountable to Him, and not to the priests." --Thomas Jefferson to Mrs. M. Harrison Smith, 1816. ME 15:60

"From the dissensions among Sects themselves arise necessarily a right of choosing and necessity of deliberating to which we will conform. But if we choose for ourselves, we must allow others to choose also, and so reciprocally, this establishes religious liberty." --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Religion, 1776. Papers 1:545

"Religion is a subject on which I have ever been most scrupulously reserved. I have considered it as a matter between every man and his Maker in which no other, and far less the public, had a right to intermeddle." --Thomas Jefferson to Richard Rush, 1813.

"I never will, by any word or act, bow to the shrine of intolerance or admit a right of inquiry into the religious opinions of others." --Thomas Jefferson to Edward Dowse, 1803. ME 10:378

"Our particular principles of religion are a subject of accountability to God alone. I inquire after no man's, and trouble none with mine." --Thomas Jefferson to Miles King, 1814. ME 14:198

Government Intermeddling in Religion

"I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the Constitution from intermeddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises. This results not only from the provision that no law shall be made respecting the establishment or free exercise of religion, but from that also which reserves to the states the powers not delegated to the United States. Certainly, no power to prescribe any religious exercise or to assume authority in religious discipline has been delegated to the General Government. It must then rest with the states, as far as it can be in any human authority." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Miller, 1808. ME 11:428


"In matters of religion, I have considered that its free exercise is placed by the Constitution independent of the powers of the general government. I have therefore undertaken on no occasion to prescribe the religious exercises suited to it; but have left them as the Constitution found them, under the direction and discipline of State or Church authorities acknowledged by the several religious societies." --Thomas Jefferson: 2nd Inaugural Address, 1805. ME 3:378


"Our Constitution... has not left the religion of its citizens under the power of its public functionaries, were it possible that any of these should consider a conquest over the consciences of men either attainable or applicable to any desirable purpose." --Thomas Jefferson: Reply to New London Methodists, 1809. ME 16:332


"I do not believe it is for the interest of religion to invite the civil magistrate to direct its exercises, its discipline, or its doctrines; nor of the religious societies, that the General Government should be invested with the power of effecting any uniformity of time or matter among them. Fasting and prayer are religious exercises. The enjoining them, an act of discipline. Every religious society has a right to determine for itself the times for these exercises and the objects proper for them according to their own particular tenets; and this right can never be safer than in their own hands where the Constitution has deposited it... Everyone must act according to the dictates of his own reason, and mine tells me that civil powers alone have been given to the President of the United States, and no authority to direct the religious exercises of his constituents." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Miller, 1808. ME 11:429


"To suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency is a dangerous fallacy which at once destroys all religious liberty, because he being of course judge of that tendency will make his opinions the rule of judgment and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own." --Thomas Jefferson: Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779. ME 2:302, Papers 2: 546


"It is... proposed that I should recommend, not prescribe, a day of fasting and prayer. That is, that I should indirectly assume to the United States an authority over religious exercises which the Constitution has directly precluded them from. It must be meant, too, that this recommendation is to carry some authority and to be sanctioned by some penalty on those who disregard it; not indeed of fine and imprisonment, but of some degree of proscription, perhaps in public opinion. And does the change in the nature of the penalty make the recommendation less a law of conduct for those to whom it is directed?... Civil powers alone have been given to the President of the United States, and no authority to direct the religious exercises of his constituents." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Miller, 1808. ME 11:428

Religion Intermeddling in Government

"Whenever... preachers, instead of a lesson in religion, put off with a discourse on the Copernican system, on chemical affinities, on the construction of government, or the characters or conduct of those administering it, it is a breach of contract, depriving their audience of the kind of service for which they are salaried, and giving them, instead of it, what they did not want, or, if wanted, would rather seek from better sources in that particular art of science." --Thomas Jefferson to P. H. Wendover, 1815. ME 14:281


"Ministers of the Gospel are excluded to avoid jealousy from the other sects, were the public education committed to the ministers of a particular one; and with more reason than in the case of their exclusion from the legislative and executive functions." --Thomas Jefferson: Note to Elementary School Act, 1817. ME 17:419

"No religious reading, instruction or exercise, shall be prescribed or practiced inconsistent with the tenets of any religious sect or denomination." --Thomas Jefferson: Elementary School Act, 1817. ME 17:425


"I do not know that it is a duty to disturb by missionaries the religion and peace of other countries, who may think themselves bound to extinguish by fire and fagot the heresies to which we give the name of conversions, and quote our own example for it. Were the Pope, or his holy allies, to send in mission to us some thousands of Jesuit priests to convert us to their orthodoxy, I suspect that we should deem and treat it as a national aggression on our peace and faith." --Thomas Jefferson to Michael Megear, 1823. ME 15:434

Establishments of Religion Undermine Rights

"The clergy, by getting themselves established by law and ingrafted into the machine of government, have been a very formidable engine against the civil and religious rights of man." --Thomas Jefferson to Jeremiah Moor, 1800.


"The Christian religion, when divested of the rags in which they have enveloped it, and brought to the original purity and simplicity of it's benevolent institutor, is a religion of all others most friendly to liberty, science, and the freest expansion of the human mind." --Thomas Jefferson to Moses Robinson, 1801. ME 10:237


"But a short time elapsed after the death of the great reformer of the Jewish religion, before his principles were departed from by those who professed to be his special servants, and perverted into an engine for enslaving mankind, and aggrandizing their oppressors in Church and State." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, 1810. ME 12:345


" the nature of... government a subordination of the civil to the ecclesiastical power, I consider it as desperate for long years to come. Their steady habits exclude the advances of information, and they seem exactly where they . And there clergy will always keep them if they can. will follow the bark of liberty only by the help of a tow-rope." --Thomas Jefferson to Pierrepont Edwards, July 1801. (*)


"This doctrine <'that the condition of man cannot be ameliorated, that what has been must ever be, and that to secure ourselves where we are we must tread with awful reverence in the footsteps of our fathers'> is the genuine fruit of the alliance between Church and State, the tenants of which finding themselves but too well in their present condition, oppose all advances which might unmask their usurpations and monopolies of honors, wealth and power, and fear every change as endangering the comforts they now hold." --Thomas Jefferson: Report for University of Virginia, 1818.


"I am for freedom of religion, and against all maneuvers to bring about a legal ascendency of one sect over another." --Thomas Jefferson to Elbridge Gerry, 1799. ME 10: 78


"The advocate of religious freedom is to expect neither peace nor forgiveness from ." --Thomas Jefferson to Levi Lincoln, 1802. ME 10:305


"The clergy...believe that any portion of power confided to me will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly: for I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all they have to fear from me: and enough, too, in their opinion." --Thomas Jefferson to Benjamin Rush, 1800. ME 10:173


"Believing... that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their Legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State." --Thomas Jefferson to Danbury Baptists, 1802. ME 16:281


"I am really mortified to be told that, in the United States of America, a fact like this can become a subject of inquiry, and of criminal inquiry too, as an offense against religion; that a question about the sale of a book can be carried before the civil magistrate. Is this then our freedom of religion? and are we to have a censor whose imprimatur shall say what books may be sold, and what we may buy? And who is thus to dogmatize religious opinions for our citizens? Whose foot is to be the measure to which ours are all to be cut or stretched? Is a priest to be our inquisitor, or shall a layman, simple as ourselves, set up his reason as the rule for what we are to read, and what we must believe? It is an insult to our citizens to question whether they are rational beings or not, and blasphemy against religion to suppose it cannot stand the test of truth and reason. If book be false in its facts, disprove them; if false in its reasoning, refute it. But, for God's sake, let us freely hear both sides, if we choose." --Thomas Jefferson to N. G. Dufief, 1814. ME 14:127


"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes." --Thomas Jefferson to Alexander von Humboldt, 1813. ME 14:21


"In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own." --Thomas Jefferson to Horatio G. Spafford, 1814. ME 14:119


"I have been just reading the new constitution of Spain. One of its fundamental bases is expressed in these words: 'The Roman Catholic religion, the only true one, is, and always shall be, that of the Spanish nation. The government protects it by wise and just laws, and prohibits the exercise of any other whatever.' Now I wish this presented to those who question what may sell or we may buy, with a request to strike out the words, 'Roman Catholic,' and to insert the denomination of their own religion. This would ascertain the code of dogmas which each wishes should domineer over the opinions of all others, and be taken, like the Spanish religion, under the 'protection of wise and just laws.' It would show to what they wish to reduce the liberty for which one generation has sacrificed life and happiness. It would present our boasted freedom of religion as a thing of theory only, and not of practice, as what would be a poor exchange for the theoretic thraldom, but practical freedom of Europe." --Thomas Jefferson to N. G. Dufief, 1814. ME 14:128


"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." --Thomas Jefferson: Bill for Religious Freedom, 1779. Papers 2:545

The Benefits of Religious Freedom

"The law for religious freedom... put down the aristocracy of the clergy and restored to the citizen the freedom of the mind." --Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 1813. ME 13:400


" the bill for establishing religious freedom... was finally passed,... a singular proposition proved that its protection of opinion was meant to be universal. Where the preamble declares that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word "Jesus Christ," so that it should read "a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion." The insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend within the mantle of its protection the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo and infidel of every denomination." --Thomas Jefferson: Autobiography, 1821. ME 1:67


"No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor... otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief... All men shall be free to profess and by argument to maintain their opinions in matters of religion, and... the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities." --Thomas Jefferson: Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779. ME 2:302, Papers 2:546


"Our civil rights have no dependence upon our religious opinions more than our opinions in physics or geometry." --Thomas Jefferson: Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779. ME 2:301, Papers 2:545


"We have no right to prejudice another in his civil enjoyments because he is of another church." --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Religion, 1776. Papers 1:546


"The proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to offices of trust and emolument unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages to which, in common with his fellow citizens, he has a natural right." --Thomas Jefferson: Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779. ME 2:301, Papers 2:546


"A recollection of our former vassalage in religion and civil government will unite the zeal of every heart, and the energy of every hand, to preserve that independence in both which, under the favor of Heaven, a disinterested devotion to the public cause first achieved, and a disinterested sacrifice of private interests will now maintain." --Thomas Jefferson to Baltimore Baptists, 1808. ME 16:318

Religious Illegality

"The declaration that religious faith shall be unpunished does not give immunity to criminal acts dictated by religious error." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1788. ME 7: 98


"If a sect arises whose tenets would subvert morals, good sense has fair play and reasons and laughs it out of doors without suffering the State to be troubled with it." --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia Q.XVII, 1782. ME 2:224


"If anything pass in a religious meeting seditiously and contrary to the public peace, let it be punished in the same manner and no otherwise than as if it had happened in a fair or market." --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Religion, 1776. Papers 1:548


"It is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government, for its officers to interfere when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order." --Thomas Jefferson: Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779. ME 2:302, Papers 2:546


"Whatsoever is lawful in the Commonwealth or permitted to the subject in the ordinary way cannot be forbidden to him for religious uses; and whatsoever is prejudicial to the Commonwealth in their ordinary uses and, therefore, prohibited by the laws, ought not to be permitted to churches in their sacred rites. For instance, it is unlawful in the ordinary course of things or in a private house to murder a child; it should not be permitted any sect then to sacrifice children. It is ordinarily lawful (or temporarily lawful) to kill calves or lambs; they may, therefore, be religiously sacrificed. But if the good of the State required a temporary suspension of killing lambs, as during a siege, sacrifices of them may then be rightfully suspended also. This is the true extent of toleration." --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Religion, 1776. Papers 1:547

[Festivito]

134. Not at all, it is now an quoted stretch for you!

...we have experienced the quiet as well as the comfort which results from leaving every one to profess freely and openly those principles of religion...

That is, letting people have a day of prayer, a day allowing every one to profess freely and openly those principles of religion..., gives this great nation and experience of quiet and comfort.

Eat that late-comer. And, welcome.

[Realityhack]

86. Cases very similar to that HAVE been tried.

And the courts did not take your side.

[Festivito]

91. They'll come around. /nt

[Realityhack]

93. Interesting opinion. n/t

[Zhade]

111. Thank goodness you are so very, very wrong.

We already have enough fascists trying to burn the Constitution!

[Festivito]

118. Well, with two very's, that says it all! /nt

[fascisthunter]

127. nevermind

:eyes:

[Honeycombe8]

31. This is what gives atheists a bad name. It's just petty. Nat'l day of prayer? Big deal. nt

[Fumesucker]

37. A big enough deal for someone to go to the trouble of passing a bill..

If it's not a big deal why bother with a national day of prayer at all?

[tbyg52]

39. What Funesucker said.

If it's so "petty," why the big noise from the people who *do* want the government to mandate this? Why not just pray individually and in churches with no input from the government one way or the other? Sounds like a plan to me.

[Realityhack]

55. Wrong.

They went through the effort to establish it for a reason. If it was no big deal than everyone would say screw it, it isn't important let's just cancel it.

They won't because it IS a big deal to them. This is a token to a group that wants theocracy.

[redqueen]

60. It is a big deal. It's also a big deal that we include "under God" in the pledge.

At least it should be a big deal to anyone who recognizes the importance of keeping religion separate from government.

[Zhade]

112. So says the majoritarian whose rights aren't being violated.

I'm glad you weren't around the call the civil rights struggle "no big deal".

We'd still have segregation thanks to people like you and that idiot above.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

138. Don't assume too much. There's always the possibility that person is old enough.

One could be saying "Civil rights are no big deal; MLK and Malcolm X give blacks a bad name" in their twenties, circa 1960, and be 70 now saying the same things about gays and atheists. Only because McCain can't use a computer doesn't mean other old geezers can't.

[HEyHEY]

143. FUCK THAT Government has NO business doing such things

[askeptic]

41. What day is the National Day of Reason and Rationalism?

The proclamation is a tacit endorsement - by the government - of religion over non-religion, and has always seemed to me to be a clear violation of the 1st Amendment. It attempts to disenfranchise those who employ a rational approach to life. I think this is a valid suit and hope they win, although I have low expectation that they will, given the bias towards religion in our society.

[marshall]

54. Do they realize the National Day of Prayer is designated by CONGRESS?

The president just signs it (or vetoes it) like every other bill Congress sends his way.

Now if their gripe is against the Task Force and their approach to enacting an act of Congress, I can see their point. It has become more evangelical under the leadership of Shirley Dobson.

[redqueen]

63. Isn't the fact that they signed it into law the issue?

:shrug:

[marshall]

73. But if anything is to change it has to be through Congress

Congress couldn't give a shit if Bush is sued or not, they will continue to do whatever they want to do. If this groups really wants to change the National Day of Prayer they need to go after the people who wrote the law.

[Deep13]

68. This is one of those pick-your-battle issues.

Yeah, I think its unconstitutional, but I am a lot more concerned about creationists in our science classrooms.

[askeptic]

105. The FFRF HAS picked their battle - this is one of em

One of the primary purposes of the group is to work to stop government endorsement of religion.

[hedgehog]

77. The Freedom from Religion Foundation would have been better off if it had spent

its money taking out ads exposing the group behind the National Day of Prayer:

On Thursday, several million Americans will gather in special observances across the country to mark the National Day of Prayer, first inaugurated by Congress in 1952.

Under the energetic sponsorship of a national task force, the events have mushroomed into the thousands in recent years. They are held at houses of worship but also schools, courthouses, city halls, state houses, and at the White House and on Capitol Hill.

This year, however, voices are being raised to challenge the religiously exclusive nature of the task-force effort, which is coordinated by conservative Christians who have encouraged government leaders' involvement in their events but rejected direct participation by other faith leaders.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0430/p01s02-usgn.html


I had the National Day of Prayer confused with the Prayer Breakfast, but both groups are pretty creepy, IMO.

http://www.toobeautiful.org/lat_020927.html

[Dystopian]

101. Thank you very much for the links. eom.

peace~

[Zhade]

107. They're right to do so.

NT!

[pokercat999]

116. Thank GOD.....lol..how about

National Poker Day
National Day of Superstition....Friday 13th
National Lick a Frogs Ass Day

You get the idea.

[Democat]

124. Horrible timing - wait until after the election!

Dumb asses!

[fascisthunter]

128. Read the First Ammendment of the Constitution...

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."


The National Day of Prayer is an attack on secularism... You can pray anywhere at any time. There is no need for this Bill other than to fuck with the First Ammendment. Pretty bold attempt, but after the last several years, it's become the norm....

[pegleg]

154. Nowhere in there does it deny that there can be a national day of prayer.

It refers to making a law. The national day of prayer is not law. I'm seriously not taking sides on this deal, but legalists split hairs, and that's why it will stand up. Perhaps all those concerned should consider a national day recognizing the contributions of secular humanists. Just a suggestion. There is a national take your dog work day, national decorate your wheel chair day, and countless others. If such a day was to be challenged - then you would have plenty of legal precedent on which to draw.

[wuushew]

155. Bills of Congress, signed by the President are generally are referred to as laws

Do you have another definition? This national day of prayer dates to 1952 and was amended during the Raygun era. There have been national days of prayer declared by executive order but this IS an act of Congress.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEJL2Uuv-oQ

[pegleg]

157. Prayer doesn't necessarily imply religion.

These are just the kinds of things that will be brought to bear in court.

[onager]

129. We atheists just worry too much, I guess...

[Imagevision]

130. The Atheist group is upset because others are praying? - they should visit Iraq

[HEyHEY]

144. It's not cause others are praying, it's because the government is ENDORSING IT

[fascisthunter]

150. yeah... that's why...

whatever you say :eyes:

[customerserviceguy]

139. It's fine to protest a Day of Prayer

but suing the fundies just makes them feel 'persecuted'. They deliberately try to goad people into doing things that they can scream 'persecution' over, and rally their troops. It ususally just works to say, "No, thanks, not participating" and ignore them.

[Puzzler]

141. As much as I completely agree with this group...

... I really think that the less "ammo" given to the likes of Limbaugh and Hannity one month before the national election, the better.

[HEyHEY]

145. Dude, what's right is right. Fuck the election

[HEyHEY]

142. Good for them!

[pegleg]

147. It's the national day of prayer, not the national day of religion.

There's a distinction there. Kinda like a white person suing the government to abolish Black History month because of discrimination. Between this and the airing of Religulous, atheism is going to really get the sympathy of the nation.

[fascisthunter]

151. I Guess Then it Would Be Only Fair to have a National Day of No Prayer