Quantcast

Comments about ‘Supreme Court to weigh in on legislative prayers’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, May 20 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Chris B
Salt Lake City, UT

Anything that upsets the liberals must be a good thing!

Bubble
SLC, UT

@ Chris B: So you think violating the Constitution is a good thing?

FatherOfFour
WEST VALLEY CITY, UT

"Public" and "Prayer" should be separate for a reason. If they were Islamic prayers, the Christians would complain. If they are Christian prayers, the Buddhists may feel excluded. I am neither Christian, Muslim, nor Buddhist, so then my side is not heard. If you want to pray, do so in private. I've heard it works best that way anyway.

Tyler D
Meridian, ID

Chris B – “Anything that upsets the liberals must be a good thing!”

You’re half right Chris… any decision that upsets (extreme) liberals and conservatives is a good thing.

WRK
Riverton, UT

OK Bubble, I will take the bait. How is this a violation of the Constitution. Maybe you are talking about Amendment I of "The Bill of Rights" which states:
"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 don't see anywhere in there that says "freedom from religion", which is what the liberals would like us to think it says.
Now, your turn Bubble, go.....

George
New York, NY

@WRK
how exactly can we have freedom of religion if we are not free from the government giving preferential treatment to one form of religion above all others as it appears maybe the case in this situation. The only way to truly have freedom of religion is for all of us to be free from the government involvement which means religion and state must be kept separate.

Chris B
Salt Lake City, UT

@George,

If a majority of the population in this area is Christian then pure statistics say that a majority of the prayers would be Christian prayers.

No bias from the government appears present

Though I don't ever pray, I say keep up the good work with your prayers!

Yay!

zoar63
Mesa, AZ

@Chris B

"Anything that upsets the liberals must be a good thing!"

There is a display of the ten commandments in the Supreme Court. I guess that must really ruffle the feather’s of progressive lawyers arguing cases there but then what can they do about it. Sue the Chief Justices that should do it.

the truth
Holladay, UT

@George

The founding father had public prayers.

They even had an official chaplain (a christian) in congress,

congress publish the koran and they published the bible including Jefferson's abridgment for the Indians among other religious publishings, and they financed missionaries to the Indians,

there is religious writings and sculptures in and on the federal buildings,

the founding fathers certainly had no problem with it, and they wrote the constitution.

So explain that.

Kass
SLC, UT

@ zoar63: The same display that contains Moses and the 10 Commandments also contains Mohammad and the Koran.

The artist who carved the panel that many mistake for the 10 Commandments was very clear that his work depicted the Bill of Rights.

Sorry Charlie!
SLC, UT

@chris b
from the article "From 1999 through 2007, and again from January 2009 through June 2010, every meeting was opened with a Christian-oriented invocation."

Sorry Charlie!
SLC, UT

@the truth
so you mean to tell me you still cling to the notion that "the founding fathers" still spoke with one voice? HOw many times have we all gone back and forth on this. we can go back and forth all day and half the nigh each quoting and misquoting our favorite "founding father" but we always end at the simple truth they were no more in agreement then we are today.

JWB
Kaysville, UT

Our city in Illinois had a fountain circle drive downtown and 6 miles off the freeway. The fountain is covered in the winter and for decades had a Christmas Nativity scene in November and December. However, a man from either Ohio or Pennsylvania that happened to drive by that Nativity Scene and found it offensive and the town through the courts lost the Nativity scene. Why would a man pin point it? These people find religion offensive in any shape or form. For a country that was populated with people who wanted religious freedom, this country was a prime area due to it's massive land mass. People had the opportunity to move on if persecuted for their religious beliefs. Some people in this country were even given an extermination order for their deaths which existed until the late 1970s. Our church in a Christian cooperative in Washington state was set on fire because they didn't consider us Christian. People are still motivated by religious persecution, whether Muslim, Christian or other denomination. However, some use religion as a method to justify their hatred for others, even though that hatred is not just for religious behavior.

JWB
Kaysville, UT

This topic always brings up the philosophies of the world, men and women as the scriptures are not used in a way that would support non-prayer. It seems like the agnostics or atheists would want people to pray for them and anyone that lives in this world, especially, when those men and women in Congress or the Legislature are making decisions, long-lasting decisions in most cases, relating to our life and the lives of our children and grandchildren. In God we trust doesn't mean the same now as when the people came to this continent seeking a better way of life. Our ancestors fought against tyrants from Europe for this country's cause. These colonists were separated by a large area without fast and furious communications. However, they were united in prayer but not necessarily religion. They believed in God and since the Bible had only been out for the commoner a few hundred years, people even in their home countries didn't all read it the same due to their language, cultural and religious differences. There is a God and prayers can be heard and answered. Listen to the tornado victims on prayers. They should testify.

Bob A. Bohey
Marlborough, MA

If in the courts eyes prayer should be allowed then is stands to reason that equal time must be given in all public forums for prayers from all religions. My perception of this issue is that the people so vocal for prayer in schools, town meetings or any tax payer funded endeavor, would not be thrilled to give equal time to prayers not of their faith. The should be very careful for what they wish for. Personally I think it would be interesting to see them get what they want. The ensuing fireworks would be very entertaining.

9MM
Murray, UT

I don't understand the idea that people would get offended by prayers offered by those not of their religion. City council meetings are full of people with differing views, and we consider that a good thing. So why would someone offering a prayer of a different view be offensive in a public meeting. If you can't deal with differing view points, then you probably shouldn't be attending government meetings in the first place. And if enlisting the help of a supreme being, at the beginning of a public meeting, to help build a consensus between competing these views is illegal in this nation. Then we obviously believe our constitution not worth the parchment it was written on!

UtahVET1
Sandy, Utah

The people who complain about prying are just doing it to get their names in the news. And to Bubble
SLC, UT, prying is not against the constitution.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments