PDA

View Full Version : Religion National Day of Prayer, Unconstitutional ????


Chiefshrink
07-11-2010, 05:10 PM
The Progressive Marxists will never rest until God is eliminated from our American heritage and culture. Rewriting American history is essential in their attempt to destroy our country as we know it, not to mention that even more essential is "always viewing" the Constitution as a "living breathing document" so that "relativity" can influence and make our laws. The only thing that Progressive Marxists see 'absolute' is 'constant relativity'.

FAITH UNDER FIRE

Challenged! Court using 'feelings' as case decider
Supremes never adopted 'offense' as sufficient standing for claim

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: July 10, 2010
10:25 pm Eastern


By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily


A district judge's decision that the National Day of Prayer is unconstitutional is being challenged on the argument, submitted in friend-of-the-court briefs to the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, that never before has any court decided that "hurt feelings" are grounds for making a claim.

"The district court in this case embraced an entirely novel – and improper – basis for standing: hurt feelings," said the brief submitted by the American Center for Law and Justice. "Never has the Supreme Court endorsed anything like such a wide-open concept of access to federal adjudication.

"Indeed, to the extent the Supreme Court has addressed the issue at all, it has firmly repudiated such limitless theories of Article III standing," the brief continued.


U.S. District Judge Barbara B. Crabb


The arguments from the ACLJ came in an appeal pending before the 7th Circuit of a decision by U.S. District Judge Barbara B. Crabb of Wisconsin, who decided the National Day of Prayer is unconstitutional.

Crabb's decision came in a case filed by the Freedom From Religion Foundation, a Wisconsin-based atheist and agnostic group that challenged the constitutionality of a 1988 federal law.

The law gives the president the authority to designate the first Thursday in May as a National Day of Prayer.

Crabb, appointed to the court in 1979 by President Carter, determined the statute violates the First Amendment's establishment clause, which says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."

Get the new edition of a 100-year-old treasure that documents the nation's true religious heritage

In her opinion, Crabb wrote that in her view of case law, "government involvement in prayer may be consistent with the establishment clause when the government's conduct serves a significant secular purpose and is not a 'call for religious action on the part of citizens.'"

But she wrote that the National Day of Prayer law "cannot meet that test."

"It goes beyond mere 'acknowledgment' of religion," Crabb wrote, "because its sole purpose is to encourage all citizens to engage in prayer, an inherently religious exercise that serves no secular function in this context. In this instance, the government has taken sides on a matter that must be left to individual conscience."

The case was appealed by the government, since the U.S. was a defendant in the case, and a multitude of civil rights organizations now are submitted friend-of-the-court briefs in the case.


According to a brief filed by the Alliance Defense Fund, "presidential prayer proclamations enjoy the same rich history in this country as legislative prayers. Both practices were common occurrences at the time the Constitution was drafted and ratified. Both practices have continued till today. Neither practice actually forces Americans to participate in a religious practice or believe in a certain way.

"They are simply tolerable acknowledgements of beliefs and practices widely held by Americans," the documents explain.

The dispute was over the declaration of a National Day of Prayer that has been exercised for decades. It was codified first by Congress in 1952.

"Public officials should be able to participate in public prayer activities just as America's founders did, and a recent federal judge's ruling should not prevent America's cities from lawfully observing the National Day of Prayer," said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Joel Oster. "We are confident that the 7th Circuit will uphold the federal statute setting a day for the National Day of Prayer."

Crabb's decision came April 15. She stayed her ruling until appeals could be resolved, however.

The ADF said the tradition of designating an official day of prayer began with the Continental Congress in 1775, after which George Washington issued a National Day of Thanksgiving Proclamation. Ever since, American presidents have made similar proclamations and "appeals to the Almighty."

ADF attorneys note that proclamations and appeals of state and local officials are no different. Historically, including 2010, all 50 governors, along with U.S. presidents, have issued proclamations in honor of the National Day of Prayer.

The ACLJ's brief was filed on behalf of dozens of members of Congress.

"This is a case where the law and history are very clear in recognizing the fact that a day set aside to pray for our country is not only a time-honored tradition, but one that is consistent with the First Amendment," said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the ACLJ. "Many members of Congress understand that the National Day of Prayer is a constitutional reflection of our history – our heritage. This tradition is supported by Supreme Court precedent and numerous acts of Congress. The 7th Circuit has an important opportunity to correct this badly flawed lower court decision. We're hopeful the appeals court will reverse the federal district court and protect a tradition that's been part of our nation for centuries."

The Freedom from Religion organization contends the statute violates the First Amendment because it endorses prayer and encourages citizens to engage in the practice. The White House has argued the statute is simply an "acknowledgment of the role of religion in American life" and is indistinguishable from government practices courts have upheld."

The ACLJ warned the use of "feelings" to determine a court case outcome would produce results that would be alarming.

"Allowing 'hurt feelings' to suffice would render irrelevant the entire body of taxpayer standing. In that area of case law, the Supreme Court has recognized a narrow exception to the usual rule .. that federal and state taxpayers cannot sue to challenge the use of tax money," the brief said. "That exception … allows taxpayers to sue only to challenge specific, legislatively authorized expenditures of funds, in alleged violations of the Establishment Clause.

"'Hurt feelings' standing would cast that limit to the wind," the brief said, arguing that the case should have been dismissed without even a hearing.

"Here, plaintiffs have sued over something they merely heard about."

"'Hurt feelings' standing, while a boon for 'cause mongers,' … is a bad idea whose time has not come. This court should vacate the district court's judgment and remand for dismissal for lack of standing," the brief argues.

Further, the history of the recognition day suggests it is "identified with our history and government."

And the literal reading of the district court's opinion could have ramifications across the country.

"Under the 'endorsement' guillotine, according to the district court's logic, might come the numerous religious inscriptions and works of art in the Capitol building. In the Rotunda of the Capitol Building, for example, are paintings with religious themes such as 'The Apotheosis of Washington,' depicting the ascent of George Washington into heaven…," the ALCJ said.

"The First Amendment Religion Clauses, which themselves single out religion for favorable treatment, simply do not require such a "relentless extirpation' of all religious expression and reference from public life," the brief said.

Mojo Jojo
07-11-2010, 05:39 PM
Here is were wacko's don't get the First Amendment....the President, or Congress or state & local government ask you to say a prayer for whatever. It is not required that you say a prayer. You don't have to show up someplace and sign in and be observed praying, and if you don't you will be jailed or otherwise penalized.
It is your choice to observe the "Day Of Prayer", and that is the First Amendment.

healthpellets
07-11-2010, 05:43 PM
well, the good news is eliminating a "national day of prayer" won't ruin our great nation. and if it does, we weren't that great in the first place.

furthermore, as a conservative, i find arguments arguments for maintaining or increasing the government's involvement in religion repulsive and misguided. instead of the government using its power to institute silly things like "national day of prayer", how bout just stay out of the whole thing.

the issue that i continually point out to religious conservatives that wish to have more government involvement in Christianity is simply that is all well and good when your religion is in power. but what happens when a Muslim or a Jew wins the presidency. then you won't be so happy anymore.

so instead of pushing more government involvement in religion, how bout we just step away from it all, so that when some Islamofacist ascends to power, he doesn't have a precedent for increasing the government's role in Muslim affairs.

healthpellets
07-11-2010, 05:44 PM
Here is were wacko's don't get the First Amendment....the President, or Congress or state & local government ask you to say a prayer for whatever. It is not required that you say a prayer. You don't have to show up someplace and sign in and be observed praying, and if you don't you will be jailed or otherwise penalized.
It is your choice to observe the "Day Of Prayer", and that is the First Amendment.

what purpose does something as silly as a "national day of prayer" accomplish?

why is the government involved at all in the first place?

Mojo Jojo
07-11-2010, 06:00 PM
what purpose does something as silly as a "national day of prayer" accomplish?

why is the government involved at all in the first place?

What purpose do Mother's Day, Father's Day and Earth Day accomplish? Yet all three are recognized by the federal government in a ceremonial way. Just because my dad was a deadbeat dad and I have no one to celebrate should I be able to sue the government to stop the event?

Part of politics is to make people feel good, so you get votes....right or wrong who knows. Do you realize how easy it is to get a city council, mayor, governor, congress or the president to proclaim a day the day of something?

healthpellets
07-11-2010, 06:06 PM
What purpose do Mother's Day, Father's Day and Earth Day accomplish? Yet all three are recognized by the federal government in a ceremonial way. Just because my dad was a deadbeat dad and I have no one to celebrate should I be able to sue the government to stop the event?

Part of politics is to make people feel good, so you get votes....right or wrong who knows. Do you realize how easy it is to get a city council, mayor, governor, congress or the president to proclaim a day the day of something?

come on. Mother's and Father's day is not even in the same realm as the National Day of Prayer. you can do better than that.

ROYC75
07-11-2010, 06:27 PM
come on. Mother's and Father's day is not even in the same realm as the National Day of Prayer. you can do better than that.

What about Christmas, or Easter, No wait, you guys want that taken away too.

Why have any holiday ? Why honor anything ?

You Liberals want it all your way ......... Makes me wonder how you even have the ability to follow Federal, State & Local laws. No wait, that's right, you don't want none.

healthpellets
07-11-2010, 06:31 PM
What about Christmas, or Easter, No wait, you guys want that taken away too.

Why have any holiday ? Why honor anything ?

You Liberals want it all your way ......... Makes me wonder how you even have the ability to follow Federal, State & Local laws. No wait, that's right, you don't want none.

watch where you're throwing that Liberal label.

so then tell me, what purpose does a National Day of Prayer serve?

Mojo Jojo
07-11-2010, 06:35 PM
come on. Mother's and Father's day is not even in the same realm as the National Day of Prayer. you can do better than that.

Dude...learn your history. Mother's Day was put into place by Woodrow Wilson, and the second Sunday in May was selected so it would not overlap Easter (a Christian Holiday). Father's Day was brought forward by a Presbyterian Minister (once again a Christian), and signed into law by Nixon.

It seems that religion had a lot to play in both those "holidays".

Direckshun
07-11-2010, 06:41 PM
The Progressive Marxists will never rest until God is eliminated from our American heritage and culture. Rewriting American history is essential in their attempt to destroy our country as we know it, not to mention that even more essential is "always viewing" the Constitution as a "living breathing document" so that "relativity" can influence and make our laws. The only thing that Progressive Marxists see 'absolute' is 'constant relativity'.

You're on to me.

ROYC75
07-11-2010, 06:44 PM
watch where you're throwing that Liberal label.

so then tell me, what purpose does a National Day of Prayer serve?

Only for those who wish to participate,those who wish not to do not have to. Same as any other day of honor.

Mojo Jojo
07-11-2010, 06:47 PM
watch where you're throwing that Liberal label.

so then tell me, what purpose does a National Day of Prayer serve?

When State offices fly a flag at half-mast because a trooper died what real purpose does it serve? It is a show of respect, faith and thanks?
Sometimes people need more.

healthpellets
07-11-2010, 06:49 PM
Dude...learn your history. Mother's Day was put into place by Woodrow Wilson, and the second Sunday in May was selected so it would not overlap Easter (a Christian Holiday). Father's Day was brought forward by a Presbyterian Minister (once again a Christian), and signed into law by Nixon.

It seems that religion had a lot to play in both those "holidays".

ok, so Mother's Day is a religious holiday because it was established so as not to conflict with a religious holiday. right?

and Father's Day is a religious holiday because it was proposed by a man of the cloth. right?

you're really stretching here.

it's like saying that every law proposed by Sen. Robert Byrd was in support of the KKK because he was a member.

healthpellets
07-11-2010, 06:50 PM
Only for those who wish to participate,those who wish not to do not have to. Same as any other day of honor.

And why should the government be involved in anything remotely religious in nature?

healthpellets
07-11-2010, 06:51 PM
When State offices fly a flag at half-mast because a trooper died what real purpose does it serve? It is a show of respect, faith and thanks?
Sometimes people need more.

i hope that people aren't relying on the government to remind them to pray once a year.

ROYC75
07-11-2010, 09:06 PM
And why should the government be involved in anything remotely religious in nature?

And why should the government be involved in anything remotely to honor anybody or even nature ?

Same principal ....... Many people can disagree with this on any given days.

healthpellets
07-11-2010, 09:33 PM
And why should the government be involved in anything remotely to honor anybody or even nature ?

Same principal ....... Many people can disagree with this on any given days.

hell, if the government wanted to name every day of the year after every solider that's died in Iraq and Afghanistan, i'm fine with that (though, i guess we'll be having a special day for over a few decades). honoring people or whatever is fine...whatever. dumb, but whatever.

but why put the government's toe in the religious pool? there's no need for it. none. i could care less if it's not "faith specific". it's simply unnecessary.

and there is no relationship between something like the National Day of Prayer, and MLK Day / Prez Day / Mother's Day / Columbus Day / etc. It's completely different.

HolyHandgernade
07-11-2010, 10:48 PM
Strictly speaking, I think it is a blatant disregard of the 1st Amendment, just as the phrase "In God We Trust" and the "under God" part of the Pledge of Alliegance.

But personally, I really couldn't care that much. I think atheists and agnostics do more harm to their cause by fighting these symbolic gestures than it is worth. Propping up the 10 Commandments in a courthouse, that's a worthwile argument, but I could really give a crap about the National Day of Prayer. I don't think that any measure that attempts to increased good will towards one's fellow human being is a bad thing. Now, if they try to exploit it as an example of government endorsing Christianity or any other religion, go on an all out assault against it. But, just on its own merits, it doesn't really bother me, even if I believe it to be unConstituional.

lostcause
07-12-2010, 12:08 AM
What about Christmas, or Easter, No wait, you guys want that taken away too.

Why have any holiday ? Why honor anything ?

You Liberals want it all your way ......... Makes me wonder how you even have the ability to follow Federal, State & Local laws. No wait, that's right, you don't want none.

The fucking first amendment says that congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion. What don't you get?

lostcause
07-12-2010, 12:11 AM
edit... reread and no comment.

|Zach|
07-12-2010, 01:09 AM
Anyone who cares about this going one way or the other is a clown.