National Prayer Day unconstituitonal

[Frelga]

is doing it in the spirit of "God give me strength" and not "God please fix it."

How is supernatural strength morally better than direct assistance?

I wouldn't say it's morally better. I just like to be assured that the president is putting every effort in solving the problem rather than waiting for God to fix it. If he finds strength in prayer, that's not my business.

[JewelSong]

Lots of people find strength in prayer. Others prefer to use "private reflection" or "meditation" or something similar.

I know what Frelga is trying to say - you don't want a world leader who is constantly calling on the Almighty to smite one's enemies or save the country from the earthquake or deliver us from our excesses.

But I DO want a leader who spends at least SOME time in quiet contemplation and thought...whether he/she calls it prayer or not. To me, prayer is a centering down...a way to stop, look and listen (if you will) to that inner voice. A way to breathe in and out and the be still and know.

That is what I do when I pray.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

There was a very recent Ninth Circuit Court decision ruling the Pledge of Allegiance and 'In God we Trust' Constitutional.

The case is Newdow v. Rio Linda Union School District. Many will recall that Newdow - an atheist who is both a doctor and a lawyer - previously challenged the constitutionality of the Pledge. In that case, the Ninth Circuit ruled that the pledge was unconstitutional, but the decision was vacated by the SCOTUS without reaching the constitutional question on the grounds that Newdow did not have standing to bring the suit because he did not have custody of his child (in an opinion written by Justice Stevens, with Justice Scalia having recused himself because he had commented on the case previously). Newdow then rebrought the suit on behalf of himself and three anonymous other parents. The District Court ruled that he did not have standing but that the other parents did, and that the pledge was unconstitutional. But on March 11, 2010, a three judge panel of the Ninth Circuit reversed that holding, ruling that the pledge was constitutional, in a 2-1 vote. The dissenting judge was Judge Stephen Reinhardt, widely considered the most liberal judge in the country. I am fairly sure that the full Ninth Circuit will review this decision, and almost certainly the SCOTUS after that.

Interestingly, Newdow also challenged the "In God We Trust" motto, and the same Ninth Circuit panel rejected that challenge. All of the judges, including Judge Reinhardt, agreed that they had to follow existing precedent that held that the national motto is of a “patriotic or ceremonial character,” has no “theological or ritualistic impact,” and does not constitute “governmental sponsorship of a religious exercise."

Lidless, yes you have the right to express your opinion, but you will do so respectfully, or you will do it some place else.

[axordil]

The thing with the Pledge is that it's only quasi-governmental. It's not an enforceable loyalty oath or anything, it's a ceremonial thing one participates in or not, like singing The Star Spangled Banner at a ball game. So for me the Pledge is almost irrelevant.

The National Day of Prayer is one branch of government directing another to engage in a regularly scheduled religious rite, and to exhort the country to do so as well. I find that troublesome in light of the Establishment clause, or at least the understanding I enjoy of it.

[Rodia]

First thought: well, no one is being forced to participate.

Second thought: isn't making this day official an imposition on the country's leaders to endorse prayer, and thus, religion? Hm, technically, being spiritual myself, I should believe that a religious government (hopefully matching my religion) is the best thing that could happen, but since I'm not a complete idiot I know that in reality it spells very very bad things. So at the cost of looking anti-religious, I'd say please keep the government secular.

Third thought: What if the president is not spiritual and does not pray? A National Prayer Day established by the government puts him in an awkward position.

The result is useless controversy, I think. It's just provocative.

(as is the name of the organisation filing the lawsuit. They sure sound like they want people to get along... )

[Lidless]

Third thought: What if the president is not spiritual and does not pray?

Then he doesn't get to be president. It's too much of a vote factor - at least right now. All campaigners make sure they are seen shaking hands with God before the election.

It was always the case that a black person and a woman would/will become president before an openly atheist person will.

Throughout history all presidents have been Christians (or made sure they were seen as such), though a few were not affiliated to a particular branch of Christianity. There is much debate over Lincoln's beliefs, depending on which biographer you read, and Jefferson was quite abhored by organised religion as well.

Article II of the Constitution specifies that the President must be:
- at least 35 years old
- born a US citizen
- must have lived here for the past 14 years

The unwritten part includes being religious and having a golf handicap of less than 18, which is why Hillary Clinton never stood a chance.

[Rodia]

Well, don't blame the religious people for that. The majority and minority both will always vote for someone who appears to be upholding the same values they do. I'd blame the candidates for lying about their faith.

I asked the question sincerely, I didn't know it was such a huge factor in the US for the presidential candidates to show faith. Even in Poland where we're not only mostly Christian but mostly Catholic, thus theoretically even more united in faith, we had an openly atheist president for two terms just a few years ago. Though our most recent president did get elected largely on his devout behaviour, I think.

[yovargas]

Yeah...if an atheist stood a shot of being elected any time soon here, this prayer day thing might not make me as uncomfortable.........