| To the Editor: Elected officials need to avoid any ‘National Day of Prayer’ activities |
| Written by Lloyd A. Jones |
| Wednesday, 20 June 2012 10:14 |
|
This writer sincerely hopes our elected officials will, in the future, refrain from participating in the National Day of Prayer. They are elected to represent us all, non-believers, quasi-believers and those who believe in sky-gods, first-cause gods or whatever. Quite simply such participation is a violation of the first Amendment of our Constitution, especially since the activities almost uniformly support our religious viewpoint. Across our country, when challenged in court, similar public participation has been ruled a Constitutional violation. Therefore, when our congressional or state representatives, commissioners, sheriff and other elected officials gather on our courthouse lawn to officially demonstrate their piety, they are in violation of our constitution regarding the separation of church and state. Most public gatherings, for example, school boards, graduations, town councils and others, seem informed and leave prayer to individual choice and privacy as it should be. The letter of May 30, 2012 demonstrates precisely the sort of bigotry which will result if religious practices occur at a public site with apparent sanction by elected personnel. The May 30 writer was very offended by what seemed a minimal attempt by our sheriff to be religiously inclusive. The writer took offense regarding whose or which god was referred to by the sheriff! The argument about our true god, false god or multiple gods will never be settled since absolutely no evidence exists to support or deny any of the claims of the devout. Most all god-claims date from bronze-age stories made up by people who did not know where the sun went when it became dark! Each religion claims to be the one, true path to achieve its goals as well as being the source of morality. Their differences are mind-boggling. Some branches of Christianity, propose a morality which would stone blasphemers! Do you suppose the writer of the May 30 letter ever considers what god he would follow had he been born in Cairo, Egypt? His letter demonstrates perfectly why public officials should remain religiously neutral, lest someone will feel omitted or offended, not to mention the violation of our constitution. Sectarian devotion should be displayed in private or in churches if one must be religious. Lloyd A. Jones Weston |
Front Page Stories
| BG schools to discuss redistricting 05/21/2013 | MARIE THOMAS BAIRD Sentinel Education Editor  Bowling Green School District plans to change the boundaries for its elementary school [ ... ] |
Perrysburg school forecast predicts budget surplus 05/21/2013 | PETER KUEBECK Sentinel Staff Writer  PERRYSBURG - The school district is expected to run a budget surplus for the next four [ ... ] | Other Front Page Articles | ||
Comments
Whoa, Down Boy! What has "happened" is you libs have condemned Christianity and embraced Islam AND atheism. I say again, “…What harm is there in ANYONE honouring our creator with prayer, especially on a day set aside for this reason? Prayer doesn’t have to be spoken in English, or In Yiddish, or Persian, or even from any one faith. The one true God knows who his worshipers are speaking to and am sure he is not offended by whatever name we use to address him.
"You libs"
...as if there are no liberal xtians.
If you don't know the harm of official religion, you don't know any history, Harry.
But the President of the United States can go public in support of Homosexual Marriage?
So you're demanding I accept your president going public in support of something I don't believe in, but condemning something YOU don't believe in? Supporting un-natural, immoral behavior such as Homosexuality is as much a religion as any mainstream belief.
Hating people is, as you just demonstrated.
This is where you are seriously confused, Harry.
I am "demanding" nothing, just stating facts. And I am not "condemning" anything; however, saying that National Days of Prayer need to be inclusive of all beliefs is not condemning your particular belief.
I guess you don't understand a thing about religious tolerance.
And this is as crass a statement of homophobic hatred as I have ever seen on the Sentinel blog, which takes some doing. Congratulations , Harry; you have outdone yourself!
Knowing the Islamophobes in this country, you'd think you were exposed to a virulent disease or something!
Hey girl...no one is forcing ANYONE into prayer. You speak of "Islamophobes", just as homosexuals speak of homophobes. Does this mean you speak in defense of Islam and condemn Christianity?
I think you have too much time on your hands in your taxpayer funded job.
Fact: there are many law-abiding, American citizen Islamic families in NW Ohio, including in Bowling Green. Do you get your jollies from attacking your neighbors, Harry? And attacking people for coming to their defense?
Gee Brian, you are certainly one miserable person! Why do you feel so threatened by those who have beliefs contrary to yours? You people on the left All share this characteristic; if someone disagrees with your point of view, you get hostile. You demonstrate if some people have more money than you. You riot if we all don’t agree with YOU on “Same Sex” marriage. You condone “Gay Pride Day”, but condemn the “National Day of Prayer”, and expect US to be “OK” with that. You want it ALL don’t you Brian?
You must enjoy being in the dominant group.
It won't last forever.
Lloyd, Your Mother would be Very Disappointed if your were able to read this LTE?
I am Certain she would come up with a Latin phrase to let you know she does NOT agree with your opinions expressed in this LTE.
PS: She was a Very Bright Lady and a Great Latin Teacher (from a 4 Year Student of hers)
Would it kill you to call Nature,(which is your creator), "GOD"?
Nope! As I said before, GOD knows who his/her worshippers are, and is not offended by whatever name we choose to call him/her.
Oh, now it's MOTHER nature. No, I could handle praying to a female GOD(dess). Maybe she's a real good looker with curves!..LOL!
I'm more Jeffersonian in my beliefs than in some fictional being which was a creation of illiterate herders thousands of years ago.
Besides, who said your god is superior to Krishna, Odin, Jupiter, etcetera? You can't!
I'm saying do what you want and let others as well.They pay the bills too,Very simple
Why is it only Judeo-Xtian prayers at these events? Can you answer that?
You make ME want to spit nails at your 'my religion, not yours' attitude. Stick it!
2) We far more than a mere mythology to live by. You are not paying attention.
3) I am your neighbor and I am more dependable than your silly bible.
4) Your right to pray does not override my right not to participate. I practice Paganism, can we have a prayer to the goddess Inanna at the next NDOP? I keep my religion to myself, you should too.
5) Your last statement provoked a response from me that the Sent-Trib did not put up.
6) No one cares where your blind heart is anyhow.
Why does next to nobody understand what it means?
It only means the government can't establish a state religion. Nothing more. In fact, if anything, it provides the protection for these folks TO attend such events!
Also, the Constitution nowhere specifically mentions any separation of church and state.
Until these elected officials start telling you to pray to their God or that you have to attend these events, you really have nothing to complain about!
You are 100% correct, and prayer is fine. And if you don't like your representative for any reason, you can always vote them out.
But what is lost, is the Federal government declaring any "Day." They should be concerned only with governing. I don't even want my money to go to the cost of printing out these declarations.
Too bad our Constitution is not appreciated for this fact, and some believe we are exceptional for other (arrogant) reasons.
The only legitimate American "exceptionalism" is rooted in its extraordinary freedom and equality of opportunity, in the "American Dream." Any nation that claims that it has God's special favor even over and against its allies is going to behave with very real and dangerous arrogance. Your statement is the real arrogance.
Did I mention being in God's favor?Did I mention a divine scripture?Should I have added "from God" to my 3rd sentence?Should you have put words in my mouth before I could clarify?Maybe rooted was not the right word.
The British went through various forms of forced Christianity.People sacrificed their lives for religious freedom to get here.The Constitution was written precisely for liberty from Tyranny and forced control from any god.At the time for the West this was hands down the exception.Even mimicked by the French.
I bet you believe slaves were also not counted as a whole citizen back then,because they were black.Study Frederick Douglas (an American icon) for the real answer.
I'm sorry for thinking that your statement that the constitution was "rooted in God" meant that it was divinely inspired. That is, however, a point made by many in the Tea Party and by Wallbuilders, so I think the mistake is an honest one.
Also the various colonies were not equally open to religious freedom. Massachusetts Bay was a Puritan absolutist alternative to the "forced Christianity" of Jacobean England, and was actually more repressive and absolutist than England. The establishment clause derived partly from a recognition that suspending religious dispute was necessary for the colonies coming together as a nation.
You don’t even give somebody a chance to explain without calling them a name. You should listen to others, the world does not revolve solely around your ideals. For example here’s another harsh lesson for you – nothing personal, but you need intervention.You can thank me later.
http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/ShowRatings.jsp?tid=1061798
Something you should know about "Rate-my-professors." It is completely irrelevant and not an accurate review of about anybody. There are countless excellent teachers at any school who have taught hundreds of students for years without ever getting rated. The main vehicle for students rating professors are the evaluations that are officially administered and kept on record. Most of the comments on RMP--for anybody--are negative. The strongest positives tend to go to professors who are "easy." As to my personal record here--you will notice that there are a couple records double-posted and one of those was a carbon copy of an evaluation handed in by a student who attended fewer than half the classes and was retaliating for a low grade.
I figured those ratings were meaningless, so it was purposeful, and hatefull from me. After all who goes to the complaint department with something good to say?
From this point forward, however no more pranks from me. A soiled reputation is a hard thing to beat.
It is hard not to let emotions get in the way at times, so I also have to thank you for setting me straight! What saves me from shame is knowing that I can still improve.
On a lighter side I'm surprised you didn't argue that I knew the data was flawed. I bet you just ran out of room.
And you know, that's the problem. You obviously are a kind gentleman. Thank you. Both sides have people that are well intentioned. It's a shame then when people with different viewpoints can't get beyond their differences.
Look up the term "ad hominem", and you will find a description of just what you wrote.
Thanks for the laugh!
You have added nothing to the debate. Which is the reason why whatever you say is negated.
All you did here is parrot the same thing you did earlier.
And I contend I meant no ill will. But how I went about it was flat out childish and wrong.
Have you not ever done anything you were sorry for?
I'm not asking to have what I did forgotten, in fact I would rather have it hit me head on, and be reminded of it. So in that sense, thank you.
You are a hypocrite about freedom of religion. Keep your enforced Xtianity to your blind self! Some of us are not participating in your 2000 year old swindle!
Keep your prayers a private matter.
Making a show of religious behavior demonstrates how shallow it really is after all.
How deep.
Save it for Rush. It's lame.
No, it is not.
Your premise is wrong. There is no religious state. Only religious people. Just like you said, the 1st Amendment prevents this. Once again you missed the exceptional part of America.
As for violence it must not be tolerated - and it is not. But you sound just like those Muslim haters, but switched the word Muslim with Christian. Have you never heard of Christian curches being threatened with bombs?
In 2008 a Unitarian Universalist Church in Knoxville, Tennessee was shot up, with two dead and 7 wounded by a guy who wanted to kill "liberals and Democrats."
Also, I was responding to Ms. Caron's comments, and I don't think I misunderstood them. And I have heard the "there is no separation" argument all too often from people who believe exactly as I describe. If your own views are subtly different, then you need to explain that.
Separation of Church and State is what keeps religious practice free. Otherwise we would have another dark age of Xtian ignorance enforced upon us. No, thank you!
Prof Williams at least uses logic and critical thought to analyze events. It is a far cry better than the medieval religious ignorance that obviously crawls around out in the country around here.
You're in downtown Detroit. Alone. It's dark, it's late. You have no weapon to defend yourself. A group of teens appear from behind an alley. Are you concerned about anything?
Same thing, but this time a group of teens appear from a church. What are your concerns now?
I understand what you're saying, but my argument was against Brian's "bigot, ignorant, and cave" statements to Wood county townies.
His denigration is wrong, and I was trying to explain why.
Why is there so much hatred from him and others who are not "rightwingers?" You are the exception. Brian is the norm.
For example when you flip somebody off you're in hate mode. Reagan's picture was flipped off several times today in the White House. Do "adults" do this? How are we supposed to react?
Criticizing Reagan vigorously for his policies is, of course, necessary and to be desired--welcomed even by people who think he was a great president. It is what gives our democracy vitality and relevance. Personally, I was stunned at how much of a pass the media--who liked him a lot as one of their own--gave him, but at the time I was focusing on some of the damage being done internationally , in central America and even in Germany (it is amazing how little the fall of the wall had to do with RWR's speech).
Also: flipping someone off may be comic ridicule instead of mere hate. Especially with that criminal joke, Reagan.
Besides, some of my body parts are weapons. When the bigots mug me they will need a gun or at least 3 fools before I worry.
My concern is that you have no relevant posts here.
"slightly-veiled racist scenario"
Why is race always brought up? If I would have said a group of blacks versus a group of whites, then yeah. But I was being neutral here. You're the one implying what type of race each group is all on your own.
And the point was that religion does have a purpose, beyond what is written. You just think these people are idiots for it. And I'm just saying not all are idiots, you can be a totally logical person and still be a part of a church.
Why do you alwasy sound so angry all the time?
Why do you interpret passion for anger?
Am I supposed to sing songs about religious oppression and public officials endorsing it?
So OK, both groups of teens were black.
Your scenario is about as valid as a three dollar bill.
How can you remind me of something I don't know?
Apparently, though, none of that matters, you and "Chris" wish I would just shut up. And i have somehow struck a deep vein of resentment, anger, even hatred.
Why do you resent "higher education institutions" so much?
The arrogant attitude arises when the worldview of the ignorant is challenged. Professors have the JOB of challenging worldviews. If you can't handle critical thinking, stop commenting in the public arena.
Brian's characterizatio n of the job of professors is 100% accurate.
Musicology and cultural studies contain enough elements to make your social knowledge vastly superior to the rednecks out in rural Ohio by a long shot.
John, however, probably barely got his GED and still feels qualified to present poorly-informed social 'analysis.'
It is obvious which person is able to contribute more value to society.
What IS your problem? Were you insulted by a music teacher as a kid? Did you get caught cheating in a humanities course?
Professors have the job of professing. Challanging world views is open for anybody.
OMG's point was that just because you are a member of an educated group, does not mean you are educated, or can necessarily teach. In fact it goes the other way around as well. Just because you're a redneck, does not mean you are uneducated. It took me to the age of 22 to realize this.
Please note, I am not making any judgement on professor Williams, just clarifying OMG's statement.
You are right that challenging world views is open to everybody. But it is a specific aspect of using the Socratic method in the classroom. It is also the opposite of what I think you mean by "professing."
Agreed. I believe book smart or test taking smart does not necessarily mean success. Thomas Edison certainly didn't learn by rote. But he obvioulsy knew how to study practically, as he read day and night when he was working on a project.
Dare I say though, that Edison had no use for the electives?
What you are really talking about are basic definitions of what the university--as opposed to trade school--is for. It is based on the theory that a comprehensive education--not just in your major--will prepare you for developing a flexible adult view of the world that will give you valuable tools you can't even imagine using at the time.
The problem is that "electives" are often treated as "throw-away" courses by their departments, and students who take them expect them to be easy and non-involving (and get really mad when they find otherwise). I think this is wrong, and I teach accordingly, emphasizing the skills and ideas that are applicable beyond the subject at hand.
They don't emphasize spelling in the engineering department anymore, huh?
OMGs statement was a classist attack that needed no clarification.
John, your tactics are the written equivalent of brown-shirt behavior. Which is fully consistent with your political orientations and attitudes toward labor, diversity of opinion, critical thinking, and a multi-party political system.
You bring up a point I never understood. Why is government even involved with marriage? Why do homosexuals even want the government invovled? What happened to the true liberal philosophy? If government would simply but out, there would not be a problem.
A notary and perhaps one witness should suffice.
If your church doesn't offer that type of contract, well then get out of there, and form your own church, or change it from within.
There may not be any common sense in the literal writings of the religious. But you should not discount the benefits. Some people only stay in line and are moral due to religion. So for somebody who turns to religion, rather than let's say a gang, it makes all the sense in the world.
Just because it doesn't work for you doesn't mean it doesn't work for somebody else.
Note there are moral people regardless of having religion or not. There are arguments for joining religious groups beyond the belief in a God.
And, since when is the Sentinel a public, government institution? Are you having trouble understanding what public and private are?
This writer has far more integrity then the hypocrites who accuse him of their own crime.
You belong to a dominant group. Your 'rights' are already preserved. You have NEVER suffered religious discrimination. *I HAVE*. This conversation may change when people pray to my goddesses in public, which we have not been able to do for about 1700 years.
Obama is really just another Xtian.
If this NDOP is held on private lands or a public park with all permits and fees paid, that is fine. Government officials, however, can only attend as private citizens, not in their official capacity.
No one is suggesting that people don't have the right to pray. Praying cannot be done in a way that is government endorsed. This is the equivalent of establishing a government religion.
Publicly endorsing religion at a public event is not the same as going to a private event.
Why do you view the world as a mere cartoon of right and left, good and evil? It is braindead and childish.
I will give you a pass on private sector job loss for a moment, just honestly answer the following. Do you believe Obama has put policies in place to move this country forward and what policies are helping the private sector?
Evidently you want to return to the days of racism, and sexism, where you were forced to wear a skirt, even in below zero weather, you were denied certain jobs due to your gender, etcetera.
Evidently, you don't care about the rights of African-Americans being denied, facing Jim Crow segregation, poll taxed literacy tests, etc.
RSS feed for comments to this post.