Uncle Sam, Don't Preach!
US District Judge Barbara Crabb of Madison ruled April 15 that a 1988 law requiring the President to declare the first Thursday in May as National Prayer Day is unconstitutional. (1) The case was brought by the Freedom From Religion Foundation, based in Madison.
Those who are most vehemently opposed to the intrusion of the federal government into the lives of individual Americans can be expected to applaud this ruling, though so far they have not been heard from. Certainly, if any area of a person's life should be off-limits to government, it would be that of religious belief and practice. Rev. Billy Graham suggested a national day of prayer in 1952, and the Campus Crusade for Christ urged the passage of the bill that made it official. But the US Supreme Court has ruled that every law must have a secular purpose, and Judge Crabb found that this one does not. Rather, its sole purpose contravenes the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
Now, I am not against prayer; in fact I pray every day. I have been praying since about 1952, and have never needed the slightest reminder from any government official to do so. The issue is not prayer itself, but rather whether a government official should officially advocate it.
While the Justice Department is considering whether to appeal the decision, the White House indicated that President Obama will issue the proclamation on May 6, as previously planned. Judge Crabb has stayed enforcement of her decision pending filing of an appeal. Given the rock-solid legal basis for the decision, it is hard to believe that either Obama or Attorney General Eric Holder have any enthusiasm for appealing it. ( 2) Even a pro-forma appeal will give private groups that favor public prayer an opportunity to file an amicus brief supporting the law. Although President Obama could simply accept the decision and cancel the proclamation, only a decision by the Supreme Court would be clearly binding upon future presidents. Accordingly, I would favor cancelling the proclamation but appealing only for the purpose of securing a binding decision at the highest level.
The National Prayer Day law is not coercive, but merely symbolic. The symbolic meaning is that it is right and proper for the federal government to recommend that Americans pray. To do this I say, "Thanks, but no thanks, I will decide that for myself on the first Thursday in May and every other day of every other year." I trust that the US Circuit Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court will say the same.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, April 16, 2010, page 1.
(2) Unlike his predecessor, Obama's religious beliefs do not appear to have any noticeable influence on his official actions.
Those who are most vehemently opposed to the intrusion of the federal government into the lives of individual Americans can be expected to applaud this ruling, though so far they have not been heard from. Certainly, if any area of a person's life should be off-limits to government, it would be that of religious belief and practice. Rev. Billy Graham suggested a national day of prayer in 1952, and the Campus Crusade for Christ urged the passage of the bill that made it official. But the US Supreme Court has ruled that every law must have a secular purpose, and Judge Crabb found that this one does not. Rather, its sole purpose contravenes the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
Now, I am not against prayer; in fact I pray every day. I have been praying since about 1952, and have never needed the slightest reminder from any government official to do so. The issue is not prayer itself, but rather whether a government official should officially advocate it.
While the Justice Department is considering whether to appeal the decision, the White House indicated that President Obama will issue the proclamation on May 6, as previously planned. Judge Crabb has stayed enforcement of her decision pending filing of an appeal. Given the rock-solid legal basis for the decision, it is hard to believe that either Obama or Attorney General Eric Holder have any enthusiasm for appealing it. ( 2) Even a pro-forma appeal will give private groups that favor public prayer an opportunity to file an amicus brief supporting the law. Although President Obama could simply accept the decision and cancel the proclamation, only a decision by the Supreme Court would be clearly binding upon future presidents. Accordingly, I would favor cancelling the proclamation but appealing only for the purpose of securing a binding decision at the highest level.
The National Prayer Day law is not coercive, but merely symbolic. The symbolic meaning is that it is right and proper for the federal government to recommend that Americans pray. To do this I say, "Thanks, but no thanks, I will decide that for myself on the first Thursday in May and every other day of every other year." I trust that the US Circuit Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court will say the same.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, April 16, 2010, page 1.
(2) Unlike his predecessor, Obama's religious beliefs do not appear to have any noticeable influence on his official actions.
Labels: Obama, prayer, Supreme Court
posted by Gerald S Glazer at 1:24 PM
3 Comments:
Jerry, well-said. As usual, your reasoning is concise and properly reasoned.
So then do you favor removing "In G-d we trust" from our money and all of the many religious symbols from the federal buildings in Washington, DC?
And what about the opening prayers in Congress and swearing in?
I just noticed this reference in this article
(2) Unlike his predecessor, Obama's religious beliefs do not appear to have any noticeable influence on his official actions.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. Obama is a Muslim. His father was Muslim and in Islam religion is transmitted paternally. Just as Mr Glazer is Jewish BECAUSE his mother was Jewish so too Barrack Hussein Obama is Muslim BECAUSE his father was Muslim.
One of the first things Obama did was to go to Egypt to apologize to Muslims around the world. He bowed down to Muslim leaders and he has prayed in numerous mosques around the world saying his prayers in Arabic like a good Muslim.
Obama's policies are anti-Israel and pro-Arabs and pro-Muslim. He makes apologies for Muslims and their terrorism and has declared Islamic jihad and other associations of Islam with terrorism to be removed from his administration.
Clearly Obama's relgion is affecting his policies and opinions and attitudes.
Post a Comment
<< Home