Prayer in City Meetings?

[leherissierm]

I watched a city meeting for the first time on television the other day. I was really surprised that after the Pledge of Allegiance, one of the councilors said a prayer. I dont think he actually said "God", but he said "heavenly father" and "amen". I thought this was a litle inappropiate, especially because so many people believe in different things. Im not one of those people who think you shouldn't recite the Pledge because of the word "God" in it, but I don't think any kind of spiritual prayer should be allowed in a Government meeting. I am almost surprised that this isn't a big issue. Has this issue ever been brought up before?

[Jack357]

I think we need to learn a lesson from our friends in recovery groups they have it right. "We believe in a Higher Power", this covers all faiths. So when we say prayers in public meetings use "Higher Power" instead of God, Allah or what ever you believe in and the listener can interpret the way he or she wants too.

This is a nation of many different faiths and it always we be after all one of our rights is the freedom of religion. No one should ever feel like they are being forced to believe in something they don't. There is a time and place for everything and public meetings and recreational events are not the place to force your beliefs on anyone.

I don't recall any where in the Bible where Jesus actually forced his belief in God on anyone. (I could be wrong on this.)

As for the word Amen I found this on Wikipedia: Amen, meaning so be it, is of Hebrew origin.

But a lot of people will try and make this more complicated than what it is. AMEN

[jma]

I've wondered the same thing about prayer at a government meeting. It's inappropriate, and this is coming from a Christian.

[collie]

Well, they do the same thing in Hartford and in Washington with the Chaplains they appoint. I do agree it doesn't jive with supposed separation of church and state but you would be a martyr to the cause if you openly challenged this in Meriden. You're right but it will be another five hundred years before they're are ready to consider leaving the prayer out of the Meriden City Council meeting. Interesting that they don't start the BOE meeting with a prayer, though, isn't it?

[eds]

Let them say the damn prayer. Show me your injury from this and then I might reconsider. When the council starts a meeting with a blood sacrifice of a Vestal Virgin and starts praying to a goat, then worry.

[jma]

It's more an issue of inclusiveness. Did it ever occur to you that people who are not Christians might feel as though the local government may not have their best interest at heart? They may feel as though they don't count as part of our community. Our leaders should try to be thoughful of others, and considerate of their feelings. Just because it doesn't injure anyone, doesn't mean it's okay. By the way, there is a gentleman in our community who does sacrifice goats as a part of his religion. Why is your religion okay, and his is not?

[eds]

What about the Vestal Virgins?

[collie]

Mark my words, it will be five hundred years before they stop the prayers at the Meriden City Council meeting. I'll count my blessings they don't say them at committee meetings and at the BOE. And I really think it's a clear matter of church and state separation.

[leherissierm]

[QUOTE=eds]Let them say the damn prayer. Show me your injury from this and then I might reconsider. QUOTE]

It's not about injury. To have feelings about a certain issue, you don't have to be personally damaged by that issue. For example (going back to the subject of a previous thread),Eds, are you being injured by looking at roadside monuments? Probably not, but you still don't care for them...

Prayer in city council meetings (or anywhere, for that matter) is not injurous to me, but I still don't think it is appropriate in a goverment setting. It seems like something that should have been "outlawed" years ago. I think it borders on being a violation on the seperation between church and state.

[leherissierm]

As for the word Amen I found this on Wikipedia: Amen, meaning so be it, is of Hebrew origin.

But a lot of people will try and make this more complicated than what it is. AMEN

"Amen" is also defined as: "something said at the end of a prayer or statement to express agreement" (Funk & Wagnalls). For the sake of argument, I could say that "Amen" is offensive because I do not agree with their prayer. I do not agree that we should thank the "heavenly father" for anything (im not sure of the councilors exact words). Praying to a "higher power" doesn't work for me either - many people not not believe in any higher power than themselves!

FYI - Wikipedia is a highly unreliable source. Anyone can access the website and add their own information.

[eds]

Injury is a legal term. Injury can include wrongs that result in no visible injury. It refers to not only personal injury involving cuts and bruises, but injury involving emotions, and state of mind and also injury to property or character. Roadside monuments are injurious to property. They injure the property on which they stand, and provide for potential injury to those who look at them and are distracted by them placing those drivers in harms way. The city has a duty to ensure no harm is done by keeping up the roads and removing litter, of which, includes the various items left at roadside monuments. Failing that duty may result in an injury.

According to the legal dictionary at :

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/injury

"A comprehensive term for any wrong or harm done by one individual to another individual's body, rights, reputation, or property. Any interference with an individual's legally protected interest."

People have a legally protected interest in using safe roadways. Since the prayer is an alleged injury to one's civil rights, or the common right of society, that is where I ask to show said injury to one's civil rights. Of course prayer does not involve physical injury to one's person. The allegation involves injury to one's right of freedom from religious persecution of which a claim is made that a prayer in a public meeting amounts to state-sponsored religion, in effect, causing a form of persecution to those who do not participate in that form of religion. That is the allegation which I refute.

As to separation of church and state, separation of church and state never meant that prayers and God are to be kept out of civil meetings. On the contrary, the founding fathers meant that there would be no state-enforced religion as was done in England. The colonists were fleeing England because the Church of England was the only recognized official religion that could be practised. The founding fathers wanted to practise as Quakers, Jews, Catholics, Puritans, Lutherans, Baptists, Anglicans. But all worshiped God in some way.

Alternative religious practises were banned in England. In the past, the Church of England's courts were part of the English legal system. The Church of England was the officially recognized church and their laws were included into the laws of England. There was an overt official nature given to that church representing much more than just a simple prayer at a public meeting. In fact, prayers were often said in public meetings in New England during colonial times.

That freedom of expression of religion would not be hindered was what the founding fathers meant by separation of church and state. That the Church's laws and legal courts would have no official influence. It did not mean that prayer would be kept out of civil agendas. The founding fathers were very connected to their own ways of worshiping God and that included prayer in public settings.

In fact, heresy was a crime. Though not an official influence in law, the religious beliefs of the colonists greatly influenced their secular lives. As evidenced by the early days of colonial America in which work was not to be done on Sunday, laws were enacted to penalize those that did. There were many laws on the books back then, now called blue laws, that certainly show a connection, and not a separation, of church and state. Prohibition and dry laws were enacted with a basis in religion. America was founded on a non-secular belief in God which included Jews and Christians. Since early colony times, laws and practises have always been influenced by religion, specifically a belief in God. In God We Trust. There has always been a non-secular influence in law.

Separation also means that the church will not enact laws and the government would not provide religious sacraments or rites. That the church would not enact laws was the main focus on what the founding fathers were trying to establish contrary to that of English law. This concept of separation of church and state has become exaggerated to include the elimination of all forms of non-secular behavior in recent times with the advent of such things as goat-sacrificing neighbors; the tolerance of which has come to mean a complete and total secular nature to government flying in the face of the founding fathers' original intent. It was never the intent of the founding fathers to form a total and complete secular government.

[collie]

Well, we don't live in the 1600's. It's 2008 and the majority of people talking here about this topic seem to be equating leading off the city council meeting with a prayer as a separation issue. It's a city council meeting, not Bible study. Of course, many of us do pray on our knees to God that he guides the Meriden City Council but it would be inappropriate to do it at the podium during public comment. Can you imagine someone up there praying "Heavenly Father, help these foolish sinners see that taking money from the poor through the CDBG funds for a downtown building facade program is wrong ... open their eyes, we beseech you today ...." I bet THAT would go over like a lead balloon!

[eds]

You just might anger the Sergeant-At-Arms! :D

[collie]

What little sense of humor I have would find such a scenario absolutely hysterical but one picks one's battles and man, oh man, I wouldn't have the nerve!

[brunet]

I will start the next NRAB meeting with the forementioned prayer, Guilino and Milller will surely have a change of heart.

[BillCarson436]

Hello...

Vestial Virgins ?

And just where are you goiing to find Virgins these days... kindergarden ???

Count out High Schools.

Thank God we don't have to find one to toss into a Volcano...lol

[eds]

I don't know...ask Osama.