Quantcast

Comments about ‘Mesa school board reinstates prayer before meetings’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, June 2 2014 5:00 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
suhein
Farmington, UT

@J. Richardson

There are a lot more of us out here who agree with Wraiths interpretation of the 1st Amendment than you think. Wraith may not have stated his argument in the best way but Islamic states as an example of church and government being too intertwined isn't a straw man. In fact it's one of the best examples on earth today on the dangers of mixing government and religion out there. Thankfully I don't think America would ever become such a nation because of well, the 1st Amendment.

Still even something as small as prayer at a local meeting is considered a violation of the 1st Amendment by a great many people (and would have been by the man who wrote the amendment as Wraith pointed out).

I also get really tired of the argument that not allowing religion into government automatically replaces it with atheism. That is ridiculous. If I go to a gov. meeting and someone says a prayer it's easy for me to think - wait that's religion in gov. Should I go and there be no prayer who thinks oh no their making me atheist!?

suhein
Farmington, UT

@RedWings

There is no way that 95% of the population wants prayers in public meetings. Only 77% of the U.S. population even claims to be "religious" in surveys and I'd be willing to bet a third of those don't want to see prayer in meetings so it't a lot more like half, maybe less than half.

I really fail to see, again, how if you went to a meeting and there was no prayer you would automatically think that the government is forcing you to be atheist. More than likely the meeting would start, business would be completely and everyone would go home without a single person thinking anything about religion.

Government should be involved with laws and running the country and that's it. Do most of you realize that if you were able to travel back in time you would be shocked at how little religion played a role in the origins and running of the government at it's beginning? Religion poisons everything it touches - these myths and fairy tales have no business in the running of the country.

AerilusMaximus
Berryville, VA

@suhein

Saying a prayer in a government meeting is a far cry away from sharia law.

It interesting that the same people that are crying tolerance for others have no tolerance at all.

"Religion poisons everything it touches - these myths and fairy tales have no business in the running of the country."

It is a good thing we have multiple witnesses to back these "myths" up. I don't recall any fairies?

suhein
Farmington, UT

Did none of you read any of the posts? No one has said that saying a prayer is sharia law. The only thing anyone said was that Muslim nations provide a good example of what happens when religion and government get too mixed up? Are you disagreeing with that? Are you saying that isn't a good example? Are you saying that the religion and government ration in those countries is just fine?

I think most rational people will agree that religion and government is too mixed together in those countries. That was the only point ever trying to be made by anyone in using that example. The only one.

And you don't have a single witness to any of those myths. You might think you do but none of these witnesses stand up under even the most basic scrutiny. Every religion from the earliest tribal civilization to our current time all said the same thing. Our myths are the right ones, trust us. I know all those millions of others are wrong and all make the same claim we do, but trust us. Just trust us.

G L W8
SPRINGVILLE, UT

Most commentators, for and against public prayer, or more generally, public exercise of religion, interpret Jefferson's remarks in terms of their own preconceived positions, beliefs, or ideology. One statement he made, as engraved on his monument in Washington, D.C., is often overlooked in the debate. Quoting: "...I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Jefferson to Dr. Benjamin Rush, September 23, 1800.
Both sides of the issue can come to the point where individuals on one side are imposing their own forms of tyranny on the other side. I cannot read more into Jefferson's mind than may be there, but I wonder: would he not plead more for the old axiom that 'I may not agree with what you say (or believe, or practice,) but I will defend to the death your right to say it (or believe it, or practice it). That seems to call for much more civility than we are getting from the courts, from religious zealots, or their non-believing counterparts. What about "I'm okay, You're okay?" Wouldn't that serve us all better?

AerilusMaximus
Berryville, VA

@ suhein

What other specific religions are you talking about?

I don't know of any other religions that have multiple accounts of any type of God coming to earth dieing for the sins of the World and then being resurrected.

I know they have some sort of "myths" as you would call them but never heard of any of them like I said before having multiple witnesses.

"In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established" 2 Cor 13:1

Tekakaromatagi
Dammam, Saudi Arabia

"Next time I'm at a public meeting, I'm going to ask to pray. I'll pray to satan - just because."

If you don't believe in Satan and you pray to him to be offensive to Christians, the Satanists are going to be offended also. You have essentially said that their belief is a joke.

Liberal Ted
Salt Lake City, UT

What atheists need to understand, is that people have beliefs and opinions that differ from theirs. Atheists feel threaten by someone praying. Let's turn the situation around where atheists tell people they aren't allowed to pray. How is that fair or better than what it was?

In my opinion, people of faith need to be allowed to exercise their faith, even in public settings. Atheists do not have to participate, but, can be respectful. I am only a member of one church. Yet, I am willing to have leaders and people of other faiths begin meetings with prayer. I don't have to participate, but, can be respectful.

I have a hard time, why atheists are allowed to use terms of "tolerance" "progressive" when the very action of telling others what to do, is intolerance and digressive.

Frozen Fractals
Salt Lake City, UT

@Chris B
" Don't like it? Tough. Deal with it"

Just remember that sentiment of yours when same-sex marriage becomes legal.

@take2ndbreath
"force us to worship in only one certain way. "

Personally, I would consider praying a form of worship.

@RedWings
" 95% of the public has another opinion. "

Definitely not 95%.

A Scientist
Provo, UT

Instead of closing our eyes and bowing our heads and giving any credence to superstition, we should be raising our heads, opening our eyes, and working toward solutions!

I refuse to be silenced by "prayer" to any deity.

to comment

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