The Evansville Courier Press had an editorial on legislative prayer. Let’s take a look:
The serial drama of prayer — sectarian or not — at the Indiana Legislature continues its run through the courts.
It was sectarian. Non-sectarian prayer isn’t and hasn’t been a problem.
To review: All heck broke loose in April 2005 when a minister invited to the Indiana House to give the daily opening prayer crossed the line that some believe separates church and state.
Some, like the Founders and the Supreme Court.
Before it was over, the minister, from the House speaker’s podium, was leading legislators and others in standing, clapping and singing “Just a Little Talk With Jesus.” It prompted some legislators to leave the session.
Good. This kind of revival-style Christian prayer is not appropriate as official business of the Indiana House of Representatives. Instead of announcing to the chamber that the minister would be leading a nice little song, Speaker Bosma should have asked the minister for something a little more ecumenical.
As a result of the controversy started from this event, a group of taxpayers sued to prohibit sectarian prayers from the speaker’s podium.
It was successful.
Federal Judge David Hamilton agreed with them, telling the House it could not open its sessions from the speaker’s podium with prayers that endorse any particular religion.
Again, non-sectarian prayer was fine. Always has been, always will be.
The story continues.
Last month, a federal appeals court dismissed the suit, saying the taxpayers who originally challenged sectarian prayers did not have legal standing to bring the suit.
And now, reports The Associated Press, the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana has asked the federal appeals court to reconsider this latest decision.
And the beat goes on.
We have a suggestion. We understand that the Legislature is going to be busy with the big property tax issue, beginning in November when it gets organized for the coming session in January.
But why don’t Republican and Democratic leaders or their representatives take just a little time and try to talk this out.
See if there isn’t common ground where they could agree on what does and what does not constitute an acceptable prayer to open legislative session.
This wasn’t such a big issue until that day in April 2005 when lawmakers were brought to their feet with that rousing hymn.
Go back to before that day and find out what worked.
Few Hoosiers would object to a thoughtful prayer that is inclusive to all, and does not cross any lines, constitutional or otherwise.
Work it out, and end the court case.
Right, non-sectarian prayer is fine. Always has been, always will be. Sectarian prayer that isn’t part of the House’s official business is also A-OK. But, when a particular religious sect attempts to mark the House of Representatives as its territory, we have a problem. But this isn’t a matter of House Republicans and House Democrats working it out. Both Republican leadership and Democratic leadership feign ignorance of what was wrong with the sectarian prayer. This is a dispute between citizens of differing faiths and their Representatives, not between Republicans and Democrats.
What is this ‘non-sectarian prayer’ you speak of?
How do you tell?
And would it be ok to get a speaker in to start the day by telling everyone that their superstitious little stories are a bunch of bunk? All these arguments about whether a particular flavor of judeo-christian belief can be promoted–only judeo-christian belief in general– is more than a bit galling to the few of us rooted in logic, reality, etc. Can’t we just have them use their brains to evaluate the validity of the bills before them, without all this begging for supernatural help with their fairly routine and mundane jobs? Or can I get a tax refund for the time my “legislators” spend engaging in religious activities on my dime?
Well, it’s not a bright line, I don’t suppose, but if you can tell whose God is being prayed to, you’ve probably crossed the line.
I feel that my life is rooted in logic and reality. However, I must agree that a line was crossed when the hymn was sung. I, along with other pastors in my town, open the town board and school board meetings with prayer. I am very careful to choose my words wisely. So far the only complaints I have received have been the times that a pastor forgot to show up for a meeting.
Doug-then I take it that the line is crossed even before the minister opens his/her mouth? It is crossed when he/she is introduced as Pastor x from y church.
Grace at the table, taking an oath in court on the Bible are deeply part of our culture. In Colonial days just about everyone read the Bible simply because it was the only book everyone had in common,and therefore was used as a reading primer.If a beginning prayer is to be sectarian, it should follow a similar non-denominational model. It needs to be short,maybe 30 seconds total time, and then we get to the business at hand.No one should be made to feel that someone is ‘taking over’ for God.Perhaps we could consult the ACLU and they could help us make a short list!
I don’t think knowing a person’s personal preferences automatically turns an otherwise generic prayer into a sectarian prayer.
The sad part of this is that the folks who wanted to pray as official government business had, in the past, generally been respectful enough that non-religious people and people of different faiths could shrug it off as not that big a deal. Then Speaker Bosma and a hand full of zealots had to cross the line. Upon crossing the line, the courts had to take a look.
Unfortunately, the courts do not have very good tools for imposing informal resolutions to disputes. A formal, judicial resolution required the court to cut with an axe instead of a scalpel. So prayers that wouldn’t otherwise make people care too much fell outside of the law.
As we gather together today to conduct the People’s business, may we keep uppermost in our thoughts that we are charged with protecting their life, liberty and property. May we work in a spirit of cooperation to strengthen our common bonds and improve the conditions in which all Hoosiers must work and live. And by our common striving, may we be able to achieve the priorities for which we were sent to this great body.
AMEN (Which I believe means, I agree, in Latin.)
How’s that as an example…?
Few Hoosiers would object to a thoughtful prayer that is inclusive to all, and does not cross any lines, constitutional or otherwise.
And those few may be safely trampled, I guess.
Once again, why is so much of our public discourse conducted by liars or idiots or both? The piece is not one man’s opinion. It’s the purported view of the Courier-Press, and the “sectarian or not” business simply displays either complete ignorance of the issue or ulterior motive. People ought to be ashamed to publish tripe, whatever it supports.
Constitutional or no! Leave us remember that when someone jails a Courier-Press reporter for failing to reveal a source.
In colonial days, a lot of people died of dysentery, too.
The fact that people in the past learned to read by reading the bible has not one bit of bearing on whether a superstitious ritual is needed prior to conducting the state’s business. Some people learned by watching Sesame Street, too. But I don’t need a mini-celebration, complete with personal appearances by Big Bird and Elmo, before each day of official business just to commemorate that fact.
I don’t want to come off as “hostile toward religion”. I just don’t see that it is necessary for what essentially is a business meeting. I can only imagine a bearded old man in the sky saying, “Every time I sit down and start to ponder this Darfur situation, these Hoosiers start pestering me for guidance with their clocks and license plates again.”
But you know what–I am actually very hostile toward public/official “shows” of religion. I’m reminded that those who respond to such things elected our president (or, acted as tools in the hands of God who “chose” him). And they thought it was way cool that God personally discussed the Iraq situation with our president and told him to invade. Several hundred thousand people who are dead today would have preferred a little attention to things like facts, data, and the application of a bit of brainpower and attention to the details coming from inspectors on the ground–and a bit less gut-feeling and God-talking.
Tradition is a fine thing to carry on, if it can be justified. But they ride to the Statehouse in cars, not carriages. Show reasonable reasons for not ditching the tradition, or be done with it.
I am a realist, as are most of these politicians. Doing away with the tradition will not change the way the General Assembly works of not.. but it has and will be used to stir up a lot of trouble and raise money for the right-wingnuts and their party of fools (which include both Reps and southern IN Dems.) It’s just too easy to demagogue.
So, in the interest of purported public piety and moving this along.. a ecumenical prayer or wish spoken from the public pulpit — uhm.. dias– is preferred to a gospel sing every damn time they sit. I doubt that any of these so-called Christians would have sat for a moment while a mullah called for prayer in Arabic. It has the same fingernails on the chalkboard of the soul kinda effect.
But since they are the majority, the fundamentalistas require their prayerful diligence be acknowledged in the public square. Let the Pharisees get their praise on earth, while the rest of us earn the respect of others in the quiet of our own hearts and through private actions.