This is a tough one for me. According to an Indianapolis Star article, entitled ICLU sues over prayers read at Statehouse, the Indiana Civil Liberties Union is suing Speaker Brian Bosma asking for an injunction on references to Jesus Christ in the daily prayers delivered before the House of Representatives.
My first thought is, it doesn’t break my leg or pick my pocket; I don’t care.
My second thought as a lawyer and a person knowledgeable about European history is that a wall between Church & State is a very valuable thing. Mixing religion with politics is toxic.
My third thought is that this is relatively innocuous, and you know it’s not going to get accurate coverage. Take the Star’s Headline “ICLU sues over prayers read at Statehouse” — at first blush it looks like the ICLU is against any praying at the Statehouse. Well, no, and if you read into the article, they tell you the truth. But the headline sets the tone. What the ICLU is, in fact, suing over are prayers specifically invoking Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior as official business of the House of Representatives.
Next, look at the quotes that get to go relatively unscathed:
Micah Clark, director of the American Family Association of Indiana, said it was ironic that a group that so strongly supports freedom would seek to stifle speech from Christians.
“Once again, people who preach about tolerance so much are appearing intolerant of people of devout faith,” Clark said. “This is a tradition that has gone on for many years, and I think it has the broad support of most Hoosiers.”
There is no indication that Clark revised his response when advised that the law suit did not involve expressions of faith by individuals in the private sector. And, indeed, it did not involve expressions of faith generally, but only prayers to Jesus Christ as part of the official business of the House of Representatives. But, then the Star reports that Mr. Clark is linked up with James Dobson’s Focus on the Family. (You might recall Dobson as the fellow who compared the Supreme Court to the Ku Klux Klan and has Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist in his pocket, egging him on to end the filibuster to enable placement of judges on the bench who are religiously acceptable to Mr. Dobson.)
So, on the one hand, the prayer in the House is no big deal to me, and I don’t really like agitating sincere Christians who don’t do much to bother me. On the other hand, mixing church and state is a bad idea, and I really hate letting rabble-rousers like Dobson who use religion for self-aggrandizement bully the rest of us into accepting something other than secular government.
The article cites one instance the ICLU found inappropriate for reading as part of the the official business of the Indiana House of Representatives:
One striking example took place April 5, the ICLU says, when the Rev. Clarence Brown of Second Baptist Church, of Bedford, encouraged lawmakers to stand and clap as he sang “Just a Little Walk with Jesus.”
However, what I would find most illuminating is the relative number of Christians invited to say the prayer of the day versus Muslims, Buddhists, Wiccans, Jews, and people of other faiths. If you have a wide and balanced variety of faiths, giving preference to none, I would have no problem with strong statements of faith by any one of them. But, if you couple an overwhelming majority of Christians with exhortations to regard Jesus Christ as your Lord & Savior, I think you have an Establishment of Religion problem.
The ICLU’s statement is here.:
“The lawsuit does not seek to prevent opening the House session with prayers, but asks that the prayers be offered in a non-sectarian manner consistent with respect for the beliefs of all Indiana residents and the Constitutional guarantee of religious freedom for all,” said ICLU Legal Director Kenneth J. Falk. “Our lawmakers represent every Indiana citizen, so it is myopic to not see that this type of prayer will exclude and alienate some Hoosiers.”
On dozens of occasions during the 2005 session of the Indiana General Assembly, visiting ministers or legislators themselves offered prayers with a heavy Christian emphasis that invoked Jesus Christ. Although in the 1983 case of Marsh v. Chambers the United States Supreme Court allowed non-sectarian prayers to begin legislative sessions, the ICLU charged that the Indiana practice far exceeds what was allowed by the Court.
On April 5, after an invocation that included the statement, “I thank you Jesus for dying for me,” the Speaker of the House announced that the minister “is going to bless us with a song.” The minister proceeded to sing, “Just A Little Talk With Jesus” and legislators and onlookers were prompted to stand, clap and sing along. During the hymn, several House members walked out of the chamber in protest, and at least one lobbyist attempted to leave the gallery area but was barred from doing so by a House employee. The Indianapolis Star published a photo of this incident the next day.
The case is entitled Hinrichs v. The Speaker of the House of Representatives of the Indiana General Assembly and is Cause Number 1:05-CV-813 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana.
Update 6/1/06 9:30 a.m. The ICLU Complaint is available here. (pdf) There is also an exhibit to the Complaint which seems to just be a copy of the Rules of the House of Representatives. It is available here.
Update #2 According to the ICLU’s Complaint (pdf), a clergy person who performs the prayer receives, at taxpayer expense, a photo of the clergy member with the Speaker as well as letter(s) of thanks from various House members. During the 2005 legislative session there were prayers offered from the Speaker’s stand with the approval of the Speaker that were clearly sectarian in nature and which advanced Christianity. The Complaint lists a number of such occasions, including:
Keep in mind, these aren’t from a church service or a Bible study or even from a citizen proclaiming his faith from the steps of the State House. These are speeches made by clergy members invited by the Speaker of Indiana’s House of Representatives and given from the podium of the Speaker of the House.
The plaintiffs are: 1) a Quaker lobbyist who has stopped lobbying while the practice continues and who believes that the prayers favor one form of religious belief over another and who believes that it is wrong for taxpayers to fund and to thank the clergy members for committing a Constitutional violation; 2) a Methodist minister who believes that allowing sectarian prayers is an affront to Indiana’s citizens and raises questions about the State’s respect for the religious beliefs of all Hoosiers’ religious beliefs; and 3) two Christian taxpayers and Indiana citizens who believe that sectarian prayer discourages diversity and imposes Christianity on non-Christians.
Update #3: Some other blogs with commentary on this issue:
Leave a Reply