Conquer Club

I hear that there is a big hoopla in court now about the National Day of Prayer.

In truth, while I absolutely pray and like the day, those who say it borders on establishment have a point. What right does the government have to insist or even suggest that people should pray. It is not their business. The day dates back from a time when almost no one woud freely admit to not being a part of a church, in fact many would not admit to being anything but Christian, preferably Protestant. Things have changed.

Unlike the cross on public lawn to honor soldiers, though, this one is not just history, it continues. Still, there is a very easy and equitable solution for all.

We don't need, should not require a Congressional Proclamation to make a day of prayer. The right way to do it is for all the churches, all those who honor prayer, to themselves proclaim, together that this is a unified, joint day of celebration. Then they should have the right to hold those services, the vigils, etc on public land, just like any other group.

Problem solved... and , as a person of religious belief, it seems to me a better solution for all!

Right.

We shouldn't have a Martin Luther King Day, or a Black History Month, or Easter,or a Christmas, either. It is in no way the business of the government to even acknowledge that some people find a certain significance in those dates, if that significance is related to a non-politically correct topic like religion or race.

The right way for this to be handled is for all people who don't want to work on a Monday (or 20 or so Mondays throughout the year - banks and government employees, I'm looking at you) should just not show up.

To summarize 72o, Thomas Jefferson was annoying at times. This was one of them.

To understand the whole “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” and Jefferson’s subsequent “separation of church and state” it is important to remember, not particularly one person but one office; The King of England who was also the head of the Church of England.

The big joke is that this amendment isn’t what you might think it is. It is a restriction on “Congress” and therefore the federal government. At the signing of the constitution several states did in fact have state religions; eventually they got embarrassed by them and included similar language in their own state constitutions. The amendment was to prevent state religions from happening at the federal level.

Thomas Jefferson, for his part was almost obsessed with the King of England. The notion that he was a head of a state and a church was something he could simply not stand. (That and he just hated the German speaking monarch’s guts.) Thus when a Baptist church from Danbury wrote to him on the subject of presidentially declared “holidays,” Jefferson wrote a tirade about how we were more enlightened than that King of England. He later crossed out that tirade part but the notion that we have a wall of separation between the church and the state remained and it was this reason, Jefferson insisted that he could neither declare days of mourning or holidays because such was the act of the church, not the state.

In other words, if we had followed Jefferson’s advice we would have no Federal holidays whatsoever. No days in honor of famous people, or historical events, or mandated celebrations of any kind as they are the function of the church. (That’s why they are called “holy” days. Etymology: Middle English, from Old English hligdæg, from hlig holy + dæg day)

Thus I strongly disagree with the notion that this declaration of a national day of prayer violates the establishment clause. On the other hand, I think it would have given Jefferson a seizure.

It's only an establishment of religion if you force people to partake of it. A National Day of Prayer doesn't force one to pray, so it is NOT a violation of the First Amendment.

The other argument (the one I think is valid) is that the government is not telling people that they have to pray to any particular religion's god. Based on my limited law school education and history education, I would say the establishment clause has to do with establishing a religion rather than simply religion.

In any event, I don't let the government tell me when I can and cannot pray, or to whom to pray... whether or not there is a cross on the courthouse door. It does take a lot of self-control though. Damn government.

I never heard of this before. Is it supposed to be a holiday? Does it happen every year?

jonesthecurl wrote:I never heard of this before. Is it supposed to be a holiday? Does it happen every year?

You and me both. I've lived there for a long time too.

Maybe's it's a Northern thang.

It's something I've made fun of every year for a few years now. I'm not worried about it, really, because it probably won't ever get any farther than where it's at now, but it just seems like a silly thing to try to defend. For such a personal act, people are clinging to the national recognition of prayer like the country will implode without it. I do wish the government wouldn't pander to superstition, but we can't always get what we want.

Neoteny wrote:It's something I've made fun of every year for a few years now. I'm not worried about it, really, because it probably won't ever get any farther than where it's at now, but it just seems like a silly thing to try to defend. For such a personal act, people are clinging to the national recognition of prayer like the country will implode without it. I do wish the government wouldn't pander to superstition, but we can't always get what we want.

People are clinging to it? I haven't heard that.

It is funny what some people care about. Like on one side we have people who are so adamant about getting this "day of prayer" removed that they are willing to take it to court and pay tons of loot to do so. Then on the other side we have people who are so adamant about keeping this day of prayer that they are willing to do the same. Who cares?

thegreekdog wrote:

Neoteny wrote:It's something I've made fun of every year for a few years now. I'm not worried about it, really, because it probably won't ever get any farther than where it's at now, but it just seems like a silly thing to try to defend. For such a personal act, people are clinging to the national recognition of prayer like the country will implode without it. I do wish the government wouldn't pander to superstition, but we can't always get what we want.

People are clinging to it? I haven't heard that.

It is funny what some people care about. Like on one side we have people who are so adamant about getting this "day of prayer" removed that they are willing to take it to court and pay tons of loot to do so. Then on the other side we have people who are so adamant about keeping this day of prayer that they are willing to do the same. Who cares?

Basically, the "who cares" was my real point.

We have all kinds of "day of". I believe there is a "national pickle day", just to name an example. In that context, having one for prayer is no big deal.. at all!

The issue, though, as always is money and principal. In this I actually think the objectors have a point, even while I very much like the idea of a day of prayer. The problem is that, in some areas, government funds are apparently being used for various prayer venues that goes a good deal beyond just allowing a public gathering in a public place. I can see people's point. I would not want my tax dollars going toward a national day of atheism. I just wouldn't.

BUT, and this is the key point, why does this HAVE to be a government proclomation at all? Should it even be one? That is why I said why don't ALL the churches.. Scientology, B'hai, Hindu, Buddhist, Lutheran, Roman Catholic, Missionary Alliance, etc... ALL just get together and jointly agree to honor this one day as a completely non-sectarian day to honor prayer within each religion. We have too many religious points of division. The idea of a unified day to celebrate faith seems a nice idea to me. I just don't think it's one that belongs as a governmental idea.

THEN, politicians, etc can freely attend or not, as they wish, as people supporting their constituencies.

jonesthecurl wrote:I never heard of this before. Is it supposed to be a holiday? Does it happen every year?

You know, for all it's faults, Wikipedia is still a very good place to look before admitting you are a clueless idiot.

The National Day of Prayer (36 U.S.C. § 119) is an annual day of observance held on the first Thursday of May, designated by the United States Congress, when people are asked "to turn to God in prayer and meditation". The law formalizing its annual observance was enacted in 1952, and is being challenged in court.

It's not always 100% correct but it's generally a first place to check if you have no idea what is being talked about.

tzor wrote:

jonesthecurl wrote:I never heard of this before. Is it supposed to be a holiday? Does it happen every year?

You know, for all it's faults, Wikipedia is still a very good place to look before admitting you are a clueless idiot.

The National Day of Prayer (36 U.S.C. § 119) is an annual day of observance held on the first Thursday of May, designated by the United States Congress, when people are asked "to turn to God in prayer and meditation". The law formalizing its annual observance was enacted in 1952, and is being challenged in court.

It's not always 100% correct but it's generally a first place to check if you have no idea what is being talked about.

Thank you for that. My point is I've lived here for almost 4 years now and never ever heard of it. I googled and found various people ranting, on "Keep Our Day of Prayer" sites, but I had no idea how seriously anyone else took it. There's plenty of churches around here, plenty of schools, plenty of temples, I've seen nothing ever.

How many people had heard of it before this thread? (serious question).

jonesthecurl wrote:
Thank you for that. My point is I've lived here for almost 4 years now and never ever heard of it. I googled and found various people ranting, on "Keep Our Day of Prayer" sites, but I had no idea how seriously anyone else took it. There's plenty of churches around here, plenty of schools, plenty of temples, I've seen nothing ever.

How many people had heard of it before this thread? (serious question).

Some communities have had long-standing celebrations, but many began pretty recently. A group here started praying on our courthouse lawn a few years ago. First it was just a couple of churches, but it grows.
A lot of this began with the Family funding a breakfast for select (originally just male) congress people. This is one of those things that is wonderful in its intent, but can also be very much used for political purposes. I mean, who ISN'T in favor of just praying?

From my perspective, when such things are allowed to be secular, instead of joint communities of religious groups, it trivializes the sacred. This is a say of unity, not friction.

Not quite getting the point.
Non-goddists aren't gonna pray.
Do goddists not pray more than once a year, and then when they're told to?
Is it a gummint thing? How official is it?

PLAYER57832 wrote:I hear that there is a big hoopla in court now about the National Day of Prayer.

In truth, while I absolutely pray and like the day, those who say it borders on establishment have a point. What right does the government have to insist or even suggest that people should pray. It is not their business. The day dates back from a time when almost no one woud freely admit to not being a part of a church, in fact many would not admit to being anything but Christian, preferably Protestant. Things have changed.

Unlike the cross on public lawn to honor soldiers, though, this one is not just history, it continues. Still, there is a very easy and equitable solution for all.

We don't need, should not require a Congressional Proclamation to make a day of prayer. The right way to do it is for all the churches, all those who honor prayer, to themselves proclaim, together that this is a unified, joint day of celebration. Then they should have the right to hold those services, the vigils, etc on public land, just like any other group.

Problem solved... and , as a person of religious belief, it seems to me a better solution for all!

Except that acknowledgment of God through non-coercive prayer is hardly endorsement.

I think both sides of this issue are acting a bit silly.

For the anti-National Day of Prayer folks...why do they care? Is there any real consequence to having a National Day of Prayer? Does it actually do anything? Does it force anyone to "be religious" any more than they would be otherwise? It reminds me of the people who get pissed off when someone wants to say at an event of some sort...if you don't pray yourself, you don't HAVE to participate. Just remain quiet and respect those who would like to...you're not "approving" of prayer by doing so.

For the pro-National Day of Prayer folks...why? As I said in the previous paragraph...what's the point? Are you trying to convince someone who doesn't routinely pray that they should do so on this day for some reason? Are you expecting people to pray MORE on this day? I don't see the point to it...it seems like a useless, pointless proclamation.

I guess I give it a big "who cares, move on".

jonesthecurl wrote:Do goddists not pray more than once a year, and then when they're told to?

I think for most Christians, the National Day of Prayer is a reminder that they are called to pray specifically for their nation, so they make sure to devote part of their prayer time to doing that since it's not necessarily done on a frequent basis by most people.

Woodruff wrote:For the anti-National Day of Prayer folks...why do they care? Is there any real consequence to having a National Day of Prayer? Does it actually do anything? Does it force anyone to "be religious" any more than they would be otherwise? It reminds me of the people who get pissed off when someone wants to say at an event of some sort...if you don't pray yourself, you don't HAVE to participate. Just remain quiet and respect those who would like to...you're not "approving" of prayer by doing so.

That's not very impressive. Again, I don't really have a major complaint against the NDoP, except that it just makes us look silly to the rest of the world, but I think we're pretty used to that by now. We can talk about Jefferson's inner thoughts and how there is no mandate for prayer, but the simple fact is that this is a federally recognized endorsement of a religious activity. If we had a National Day of Hating on Black People (not to trivialize racial discrimination, of course), but I was not required to participate, I would be against that too. The government (not some random public event) should not get officially involved in religious activity (of which prayer is, by definition), or vice versa, even if this isn't a violation of the establishment clause as written. It seems to me it should be, because, ideally, our government would not comment on religion at all, but I agree that this is a relatively minor thing (though I refuse to "remain quiet;" go f*ck yourself; if it were about respect, those who want to protect the day of prayer would respect atheists and let it go). Is it against the law? I dunno, but I do think it's wrong, but only barely. I personally find the Christmas bank holiday to be more ridiculous, but whatever.

Night Strike wrote:

jonesthecurl wrote:Do goddists not pray more than once a year, and then when they're told to?

I think for most Christians, the National Day of Prayer is a reminder that they are called to pray specifically for their nation, so they make sure to devote part of their prayer time to doing that since it's not necessarily done on a frequent basis by most people.

Yes, but we don't need the government to designate a day for this.

PLAYER57832 wrote:Yes, but we don't need the government to designate a day for this.

We don't need the government to designate a day for a lot of things. Yet they do. Yet it doesn't cost us anything. Everyone needs a hobby, even congress. Unfortunately I can't easily find a list of all the special days set aside by congress. Apparently no one really cares.

tzor wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:Yes, but we don't need the government to designate a day for this.

We don't need the government to designate a day for a lot of things. Yet they do. Yet it doesn't cost us anything. Everyone needs a hobby, even congress. Unfortunately I can't easily find a list of all the special days set aside by congress. Apparently no one really cares.

There are probably about 2,000, as I noted above.

However, religion is not like any other topic. In many ways, that Congress issues all these proclomations at all is a waste of taxpayer money. I mean, there are absolutely things that need to be noted, but "national clown week?" ???

I could almost see a prayer day alongside some other causes like breast cancer awareness days or other positive events. It's kinda why I don't really care about it. Prayer and religion can be a positive thing, I think. If there are such things as slippery slopes, though, it's religion and race and things like that mixed with politics that are so prone to going horribly awry. Fortunately, cancer and clowns and pickles don't have that history. I don't see "talk to that thing that nobody can provide evidence for (even though he's interacting with by listening to us and we even expect him to respond) day" as going down that route, but I can really see why people are sensitive to this.

PLAYER57832 wrote:However, religion is not like any other topic. In many ways, that Congress issues all these proclomations at all is a waste of taxpayer money. I mean, there are absolutely things that need to be noted, but "national clown week?" ???

I am so tempted to say "There is nothing funny about national clown week."

You realize, that in the "good old days" when states didn't think of the seperation nonsense, you were often required to pay a tax to support the state church, follow the state church's customs (or be thrown out of the state and hanged if you dare sneaked back in), and not follow your own faith where it may have conflicted with the state religion. When they declared a day of fasting, you had to fast, or else!

Really, it if wasn't for the fact that some presidents started promoting this day at the White House, this day would be just as well known as "national clown week."

tzor wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:However, religion is not like any other topic. In many ways, that Congress issues all these proclomations at all is a waste of taxpayer money. I mean, there are absolutely things that need to be noted, but "national clown week?" ???

I am so tempted to say "There is nothing funny about national clown week."

You realize, that in the "good old days" when states didn't think of the seperation nonsense, you were often required to pay a tax to support the state church, follow the state church's customs (or be thrown out of the state and hanged if you dare sneaked back in), and not follow your own faith where it may have conflicted with the state religion. When they declared a day of fasting, you had to fast, or else!

Really, it if wasn't for the fact that some presidents started promoting this day at the White House, this day would be just as well known as "national clown week."

Yes. And that is part of my point.

Let's have the day, it just shouldn't be a government sponsored day.

If you want to pray then pray.

If you don't want to pray then enjoy whatever else you want to do with that time.

It seems that different administrations are going to participate or not participate according to the belief of whoever is president at the time. We all need to deal with it.