.jpg)
Yesterday (April 15), U.S. District Judge Barbara Crabb decided that the National Day of Prayer mandated by federal law since 1952, is unconstitutional because it amounts to a government call for religious action. In a historic 66 page ruling, Judge Crabb wrote that the government can no more enact laws supporting a day of prayer than it can encourage citizens to fast during Ramadan, attend a synagogue or practice magic."In fact," she wrote, "it is because the nature of prayer is so personal and can have such a powerful effect on a community that the government may not use its authority to try to influence an individual's decision whether and when to pray."
Judge Crabb noted that her ruling was not a judgement on the value of prayer. She wrote that government involvement in prayer may be constitutional if the conduct serves a "significant secular purpose" and doesn't amount to a call for religious action, but that the National Day of Prayer crosses that line. Crabb also wrote that her ruling shouldn't be considered a bar to any prayer days until all appeals are exhausted.
US Justice Department attorneys representing the government are reviewing the ruling but Obama administration spokesman Matt Lehrich has already indicated what the White House's position will be. In an email, Lehrich told the Associated Press that the president still plans to issue a proclamation for the next prayer day. "As he did last year," Lehrich wrote, "President Obama intends to recognize a National Day of Prayer."
The lawsuit against the federal government was filed by the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) in 2008. Besides the Foundation, plaintiffs were Anne Nicol Gaylor, Annie Laurie Gaylor, Dan Barker, Paul Gaylor, Phyllis Rose and Jill Dean, who are all Foundation officers or board members. Defendants are President Barack Obama and Robert Gibbs, his press secretary. Original defendants were President George Bush and Dana Perino, his press secretary at the time.
Dan Barker, Foundation co-president, said: "It's nice to see that the judge agrees with us the government should be neutral about religion and should not be taking sides — which is an issue of fairness."
Annie Laurie Gaylor said she was "euphoric" over the decision. "It is such a profound violation of conscience for Congress to direct our president to tell all citizens to pray, and that they in fact must set aside an entire day for prayer once a year. We are so gratified and delighted that Judge Crabb in her solid decision rejected revisionist history and decided this case on the merits."
.jpg)
In 1952, a national day of prayer was being strongly lobbied for by religious leaders like Rev. Billy Graham, who told Congress, "We have dropped our pilot, the Lord Jesus Christ, and are sailing blindly on without divine chart or compass, hoping somehow to find our desired haven. We have certain leaders who are rank materialists; they do not recognize God nor care for Him; they spend their time in one round of parties after another. The Capital City of our Nation can have a great spiritual awakening, thousands coming to Jesus Christ, but certain leaders have not lifted an eyebrow, nor raised a finger, nor showed the slightest bit of concern. Ladies and gentlemen, I warn you, if this state of affairs continues, the end of the course is national shipwreck and ruin."The bill establishing the National Day of Prayer was introduced in the Senate by Absalom Robertson of Virginia - Rev. Pat Robertson's father. Senator Robertson stated that it was a measure against "the corrosive forces of communism which seek simultaneously to destroy our democratic way of life and the faith in an Almighty God on which it is based."
The law, signed into effect by President Truman, read, "The President shall set aside and proclaim a suitable day each year, other than a Sunday, as a National Day of Prayer, on which the people of the United States may turn to God in prayer and meditation at churches, in groups, and as individuals."
(From the FFRF news release) In 1988, an amended statute was approved setting a specific day for national prayer. Vonette Bright, founder of the Campus Crusade for Christ and the National Day of Prayer Committee, lobbied Congress to amend the law because Bright "believed that we should have a day in this country where we cover this nation in prayer and the leaders." Singer Pat Boone, co-chair of the prayer committee, testified, and Sen. Strom Thurmond of South Carolina introduced the bill in the Senate, noting the floating date made it "difficult for religious groups." Sen. Jesse Helms sermonized on behalf of the bill that "God in heaven will hear and forgive our sins and heal our land."
***
While US Justice Department attorneys are still studying the ruling, conservative legal organizations like the American Center for Law and Justice (founded by evangelical leader Pat Robertson) and the Alliance Defense Fund, an Arizona-based group of Christian lawyers, are already condemning it. The American Center for Law and Justice, which filed briefs in the case on behalf of 31 members of Congress, called Judge Crabb's ruling "flawed" and vowed to file an appeal.
"It is unfortunate that this court failed to understand that a day set aside for prayer for the country represents a time-honored tradition that embraces the First Amendment, not violates it," said Jay Sekulow, ACLJ's Chief Counsel. "If the appeals court fails to reverse this decision, we are confident the Supreme Court will hear the case and ultimately determine that such proclamations and observances like the National Day of Prayer not only reflect our nation's rich history, but are indeed consistent with the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment."
Judge Crabb's ruling can be read in it's entirety here (in pdf format).
Photo Credit:
1) Praying hands
2) Rev. Billy Graham in 1951
If you like my articles, you can click on "subscribe" at the top of the page and receive notice when new ones are published.
You might also enjoy these:
- It's national 'Remedial Civics for the Religious Right Day' today!
- Is 'Separation of Church & State' in the US Constitution?
- Intelligent Design: Should schools teach the 'controversy'?
- Diverse groups reach first-ever consensus on religion in US law
- Evolution in two minutes: a song
- Los Angeles museum sued for not showing anti-evolution film
Comments
If someone wants to pray, then by all means pray. One does not require the government to affirm their belief in a deity, for them to worship the deity of their choosing. Let the marketplace of ideas debate the question of a god, let government be neutral on this issue.
This ruling will be appealed.
My problem isn't with people praying. It's telling me that because I'm a Christian I am offending someone. Well...what if I'm offended by other religions? Why are Christians being asked to keep quiet even though other religions are being given free reign to worship as they please. Don't mention God or Jesus--but it's okay to pray to some concrete idol that was dead before it was molded. Sounds like pure stupidity gone to seed.
Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
It is subst
It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?
Promote then, as an object of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.
George Washington Farewell Address 1796
@ Myra: The problem here isn't offending someone or not but the fact that a government sponsored christian event stands against the US constitution. (It'd be the same if it was muslim or jewish)All religions are given free reign it's the government that can't favor or impose a religion.
The appeals will lose too.
I commend U.S. District Judge Barbara Crabb for what will surely be an unpopular ruling among certain religious extremists.
I am delighted with the ruling. My faith is a deeply personal matter and I resent the government doing any meddling in something so personal.
Additionally, considering the government's poor performance in other areas (like preventing financial fraud), I do not feel them competent to be telling me about even more important issues, such as prayer.
a national day of prayer is nice, you don't have to pray if you don't want to, why does everyone want to change the face of america so drastically. It reminds me of the ancient egytians eradicating all mention of a pharaoh, or the dark ages, or book burning and censorship.
The national day of prayer does not envoke one religion over the other. Those you think it is on a Christian day need to tell me where in "THE NATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER" dictates a certain idealogy over another. There is no mention of a particular sect.
The law reads - "The President shall set aside and proclaim a suitable day each year, other than a Sunday, as a National Day of Prayer, on which the people of the United States may turn to God in prayer and meditation at churches, in groups, and as individuals."
The fact that only churches are mentioned, implies that this law is based on Christian ideals. The fact that it mentions God, disrespects those Americans who believe in multiple Gods, Goddesses, or no Gods at all. Personally, a law that would respect all Americans and their beliefs, would be much preferred.
The US Constitution reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion".
In 1963, the Supreme Court introduced the "secular purpose" and "primary effect" tests, which were to be used to determine compatibility with the establishment clause. Essentially, the law in question must have a valid secular purpose, and its primary effect must not be to promote or inhibit a particular religion.
Judge Crabb is totally correct in ruling that the law in question is unconstitutional. The fact that the law contains the phrase, "on which the people of the United States may turn to God in prayer..." fails the 1963 test. The issue is not one of Christianity, it is interpreting and ruling on whether the bedrock foundation that our country was built on over 200 years ago was fractured 50 years ago. Nothing more, nothing less.
Russ, The National Day of Prayer IS unconstitutional whether it favors a PARTICULAR religion/sect or not. Regardless of WHICH religion it promotes, it promotes religion OVERALL, since it actively encourages (promotes) the idea of praying to a supernatural deity. Thus, it indeed promotes/endorses the idea that there IS a god to pray to (and that we SHOULD be praying to him), rather than the idea that there are NO such gods.
The best policy would be for the government to remain NEUTRAL on matters of religious faith, prayer, etc. Thus, the government should stay OUT of the business of telling people whether to believe in gods or not (and whether to pray to any gods or not). People can make those decisions via studying the issue with their friends, family, community, church, etc., without the government getting involved.
Lastly, ND-of-P really DOES promote some religions over others, since it specifies "God" (monotheism, going against polytheistic religions) and churches (Christiani
"The national day of prayer does not envoke one religion over the other. Those you think it is on a Christian day need to tell me where in "THE NATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER" dictates a certain idealogy over another. There is no mention of a particular sect. "
But the simple governmental endorsement of PRAYER violates my personal beliefs and is a violation of my Constitutional rights.
During my military days, in some units we were ORDERED to attend the National Day of Prayer Breakfast - in which evangelical chaplains clearly promoted not just Christianity, but their fundamentalist theology.
Great, another Socialist judge who went to law school but apparently never got an "A" in a History or Civics class. “If she had, she would have known that at the Constitutional Convention, after five weeks of nothing being accomplished. Benjamin Franklin stood up and said, ‘Why is it that we have not once applied to the Father of Lights to eliminate understanding?’ “He said, ‘In the beginning of the contest with Great Britain, we had daily prayer in this room.’ He went on to say that he had lived a long time, and the longer he lived the more convincing proofs he saw of the truth of God governing the affairs of men. He went on to move that, ‘Henceforth, that prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings upon our deliberations in Congress be held every day.’What part of don't you understand Judge Crabb? This is a country founded on a Judeo-Christian philosophy. Holding a prayer day is a traditional event that does not compel anyone to attend. How lucky can we get.
If you are a Christian (or other religious believer), there is nothing preventing you from praying any day of the year. Your own Bible (Matthew 6:1-6) tells you that prayer should be a private matter. So how is this "National Day of Prayer" of any value? In fact this day goes against the above verses.
If this day is for all religions, why do only Christian groups lead the "festivities"(Shirley Dobson and the National Day of Prayer Task Force, primarily), and why are only Christian groups fighting to defend it?
Montreal Mental Health, this isn't about changing America, it's about changing it back to what it should be. Hence why all the religious people are upset, accusing people of being "socialists" and couldn't give a flying fig about the First Amendment and lie when they say it embraces it.
>"This is a country founded on a Judeo-Christian philosophy."
Sorry Roy, if that's the case then why don't they mention it in the Constitution? Why is there the threat of hellfire for those who don't worship God?
"Holding a prayer day is a traditional event that does not compel anyone to attend."
Thank you for ignoring my statement: During my military days, in some units we were ORDERED to attend the National Day of Prayer Breakfast - in which evangelical chaplains clearly promoted not just Christianity, but their fundamentalist theology.
Now pray for my forgiveness.
What is everyone so afraid of? One religion over another doesn't corner the market on prayer. There are more people who believe in the power of prayer than those who don't. I might have met a handful who don't... funny thing.. even my friends who are Wiccans will ask for prayer from anyone who who believes in prayer... Don't pray if you don't want to... but why not let people have what is important to them?
You're missing the point, Charlene. It doesn't matter if the prayer is to Jesus or to Zeus. The government has no business either promoting religion or repressing it. The only way it can be fair to the beliefs of all it's citizens is to keep it's nose completely out of the belief business.
Nobody is taking away their right to pray on that day or any other, Charlene. So there should be no reason for all those (mostly Christians) to complain.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!