I happen to agree with this.
The American Civil Liberties Union sent a letter Wednesday to Mayor John Peyton and City Council President Richard Clark asking that the city stop opening council sessions with sectarian prayer.
http://www.news4jax.com/news/24011254/detail.html
ditto. it's a city council meeting, not bible study.
Intolerance brought this about -- no great surprise.
Quote from: sheclown on June 23, 2010, 09:08:37 PM
Intolerance brought this about -- no great surprise.
Are you refering to the whole Dr. Ahmed fiasco or do you support prayer in a city council meeting?
What is the connection between prayer and running a City Council meeting? I don't understand why prayers are necessary in this forum.
Councilman and Council "Chaplain" Don Redman was interviewed on WJXT and he said when he offers a prayer, he says "I", not "We", thus his prayers should not offend anyone. He should be asked why, then, anyone should want or care to watch him pray in public. His personal prayers should be a private activity, not a public one. How does he come to the conclusion a public meeting in City Hall is the place for him to display this private activity?
Redman's comments brought the ACLU to COJ.
Prayer used as a weapon, especially to humiliate someone, should not be allowed anywhere, city council meetings or church for that matter.
It's about time these zionist fundamentalists were held to account.
Now we need to burn their bibles.
Orrrr... (perhaps a bit more subtle:)
Thank God for the ACLU!
Reading comments on all the media sites, this city is so full of stupid people that don't realize that prayer and government functions are not needed together.
Even though Clark says it'll continue and he supports it, they really won't have much of a choice, they're violating the law.
I'm certainly not against prayer...however, I do understand why it should not be a part of the city council meeting. Just as it's not allowed to be part of the school systems. Not everyone is of the same religious affiliations, and that in a sense leaves out the other religious (and even non-religious) persons in that those are not really included. It leaves them out, in that they're not recognized. This is the reasoning as to why it shouldn't be part of the official council meeting, as it 'imposes' a certain religious act, if you will, upon those who either aren't of the same faith or don't believe.
The council could handle this just as most schools do, say the pledge to the flag, then allow for a moment of silence. That's when people can either just be respectfully quiet, or have a personal prayer. It's such a simple solution, and will for all to have that personal freedom.
Point-counterpoint on sectarian prayer at city council meetings:
PRO: Jacksonville is a Christian city. It is the duty of every elected official to ensure that the minority of heathens who live within city limits to convert. The best venue to ensure maximum conversion is through sectarian prayer to safeguard our residents from the lava-floored cloisters of hell...
CON: Christianity is the dominant faith in Jacksonville, but there are ways in which city leaders can express their faith without doing so in a gaudy or ostentatious manner. Sure, public forums can include some prayer, but could it not be a moment of silence or a less sectarian prayer? Besides, if someone is looking to truly save his soul, shouldn't he go to...church?
I'm undecided on whether there is a place for prayer in city council meetings, however, I'm not sure if ACLU has an argument here. I believe that under Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U.S. 783 (http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1982/1982_82_23), prayer at the beginning of a government meeting or start of a legisaltive session is constitutional. Now, ACLU may have other arguments and may find this case in applicable, but under the current precedent, I believe that COJ is on proper constitutional footing.
I think they should begin every meeting by disemboweling a chicken and then reading the entrails.
^^^ LOL @ finehoe ---
Don't forget to pass out some snakes...
What happened to the separation of church and state? What they are they praying for; that they will grow a brain before each meeting?
I think Clark's comments are especially disturbing....just because everyone on Council is currently Christian does not mean praying to Jesus is acceptable...remember, you represent ALL citizens!
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 24, 2010, 09:48:17 PM
I think Clark's comments are especially disturbing....just because everyone on Council is currently Christian does not mean praying to Jesus is acceptable...remember, you represent ALL citizens!
That's the rub ... they are
supposed to represent all the citizens, but some choose to represent only those who go to the "right" (in multiple senses) church (not temple, or synagogue, etc.)
I don't see anything wrong with a prayer before a meeting. If people were respectful, kind, had honor, and treated each other the way they wanted to be treated - I wouldn't see any problem with prayer before a meeting. The problem is - they aren't.
Imagine if every new nominee, or developer, or petitioner were "forced" to say a prayer before the meeting. Of course, they aren't "forced" but they would be highly looked down upon if they didn't and if they didn't say the right words. Prayer in this city is now politics. A forced religious test to determine if "we" the city should nominate or support your idea.
If people were kind, curious, well behaved, listen, had manners, and basically understood their fellow human beings - prayer before the city council wouldn't be an issue. After watching what Redman did though, I'm not sure the council can handle the giant responsibility of a prayer without vilifying their own fellow citizens.
I don't see the point of the prayer in the first place?? It's not like they are going to war or saving the world. Are their decisions that divine? Just wasting peoples time when they should be debating. Save church for your off time!
I am not a proponent of prayer in these council meetings but I do find it odd that we seem to get more worked up about this ritual than we do about some of the decisions (or non-decisions) in these meetings that do more harm to our lives. If we could only be equally passionate about the results of these council meetings I think these people would get our attention and we would all be better off. But prayer I care little or nothing about.
@ Cricket --- That is an excellent point.
I agree w/ what you are saying Cricket, good point, and definitely true.
That being said, whether we want to agree/disagree/admit/don't admit-prayer is that important.
I'm an atheist, so it's obviously not important to me, BUT...when every council meeting starts out with a prayer, by one religious group, it not only endorses that creed, but alienates others. It's this kind of attitude and sanctimonious holier-than-thou talk that keeps many smart, nonreligious (and religious) people out of participating in these meetings.
I, and a few friends of mine, went to a council meeting awhile back. You have to realize how hard it is to voice an opinion/thought when you are talking to a zealot. While they are strong in their faith, they are equally strong in their opinions...it's hard breaking through that outer shell in all things, not just city council meetings and religion. Why? Because they don't answer to rationality as a be-all-end-all. They listen to themselves, and 'their book'. They have nobody else to answer to when they are literally saved.
Through the years I have encountered many circumstances where a group is asked to pray. A few were Jewish, a few were Muslim, many were christian denominations I was unfamiliar with. I was taught to simply respect the moment. You do not have to pray. When I have been asked to pray during a ceremony of some sort I simply bow my head respectfully and let whomever is praying do so. I, nor anyone else should really be offended. It is certainly not meant as an offense. A question for those who find the act of prayer offensive... what is your reaction when eating at someones house that offers a prayer before meals? I assume you just respectfully bow your head and let those who wish to... pray.
This really should be a non issue.
Prayer should never be tolerated.
This is not a ceremony, it is a city council meeting for goodness sake!
Quote from: BridgeTroll on June 25, 2010, 10:41:40 AM
A question for those who find the act of prayer offensive... what is your reaction when eating at someones house that offers a prayer before meals? I assume you just respectfully bow your head and let those who wish to... pray.
There's a differrence between the privacy of someone's home and a public venue.
Quote from: BridgeTroll on June 25, 2010, 10:41:40 AM
Through the years I have encountered many circumstances where a group is asked to pray. A few were Jewish, a few were Muslim, many were christian denominations I was unfamiliar with. I was taught to simply respect the moment. You do not have to pray. When I have been asked to pray during a ceremony of some sort I simply bow my head respectfully and let whomever is praying do so. I, nor anyone else should really be offended. It is certainly not meant as an offense. A question for those who find the act of prayer offensive... what is your reaction when eating at someones house that offers a prayer before meals? I assume you just respectfully bow your head and let those who wish to... pray.
This really should be a non issue.
exactly!Same here. Also, I have never been to fond of the ACLU. You can not dectate to someone when and where they can pray in certain situations. We are supposed to have freedom of religion, but if you are chrisitian you are not allowed to talk about it, pray, speak the name of jesus, etc in public. Yet if you are muslim, we are obligated to allow them to pray 3 times a day. Is it just me or does that seem a little funny? It has never bothered me. When I was growing up, if you didnt believe in something, you didnt participate in it. Simple as that.
Quote from: ben says on June 25, 2010, 10:27:30 AM
That being said, whether we want to agree/disagree/admit/don't admit-prayer is that important.
Well then I ask you to open your wallet this minute and tell me if you are offended by "In God We Trust" imprinted on every piece of paper money, which is essentially
an affirmation of faith. Personally it wouldn't matter to me one way or the other if it stays or if the Treasury Dept decided tomorrow to remove it. And I am sure you will continue to love those $100 bills with or without this declaration of religious faith.
Whatever happened to the "moment of silence" - certainly a moment in which our leaders could be thinking what wise decisions they might enact. Cricket, I'm with you.
(http://theframeproblem.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/prayer-purpose.png?w=450&h=600)
I don't believe it^, but found it funny, never the less.
QuoteWhatever happened to the "moment of silence"
This seems a perfectly fitting alternative... regardless... I have never understood the objections of the folks who want a short prayer banned from these types of functions. Seems a lot of uproar about nothing. Respect the moment and move on...
None of this would be happening if Councilman Redman would've stfu during the whole Dr. Ahmed fiasco. Instead, he had to open his mouth and then tried to clarify his statement, sorry, we knew exactly what you were getting at, and now look.
That'll teach those Christofascists.
Quote from: Cricket on June 25, 2010, 11:11:19 AM
Quote from: ben says on June 25, 2010, 10:27:30 AM
That being said, whether we want to agree/disagree/admit/don't admit-prayer is that important.
Well then I ask you to open your wallet this minute and tell me if you are offended by "In God We Trust" imprinted on every piece of paper money, which is essentially an affirmation of faith. Personally it wouldn't matter to me one way or the other if it stays or if the Treasury Dept decided tomorrow to remove it. And I am sure you will continue to love those $100 bills with or without this declaration of religious faith.
you could always just use your debit or credit card and not have to read this
QuoteNone of this would be happening if Councilman Redman would've stfu during the whole Dr. Ahmed fiasco. Instead, he had to open his mouth and then tried to clarify his statement, sorry, we knew exactly what you were getting at, and now look.
Exactly Reed. This seems to be nothing more than political payback...
What are these prayers before the meeting supposed to accomplish? To what end is the whole exercise aimed at?
QuoteWhat are these prayers before the meeting supposed to accomplish? To what end is the whole exercise aimed at?
I assume it is akin to praying before a meal or some other gathering. I myself do not participate... but I am not offended either. Taking 1 minute to respect the moment others might feel compelled to participate in shouldnt ruffle anyones feathers.
Quote from: finehoe on June 25, 2010, 01:08:50 PM
What are these prayers before the meeting supposed to accomplish? To what end is the whole exercise aimed at?
There are plenty of rituals that are performed every day in our lives that we never question, like in courthouses, legislative chambers, board meetings, boy scout meetings (LOL). Should we abandon every exercise because they don't serve the ultimate purpose of the meeting?
Quote from: BridgeTroll on June 25, 2010, 01:46:09 PM
QuoteWhat are these prayers before the meeting supposed to accomplish? To what end is the whole exercise aimed at?
I assume it is akin to praying before a meal or some other gathering. I myself do not participate... but I am not offended either. Taking 1 minute to respect the moment others might feel compelled to participate in shouldnt ruffle anyones feathers.
So it's to ask some supernatural being to "bless" the proceedings? Maybe they should drown a virgin in the St. Johns prior to each meeting. It would be just as effective.
Quote from: Cricket on June 25, 2010, 01:47:43 PM
Should we abandon every exercise because they don't serve the ultimate purpose of the meeting?
Should we mindlessly follow tradition just because that is what has always been done? If there is no rational purpose in it, why do it.
Maybe you all aren't bothered by our tax dollars being used to reinforce superstition, but plenty of people are, myself included.
You seem so... upset and offended by it. Why? It takes all of a minute. The people doing it see the purpose and seem to find confidence and comfort in it. Why should that bother you?
Quote from: finehoe on June 25, 2010, 02:21:14 PM
Should we mindlessly follow tradition just because that is what has always been done? If there is no rational purpose in it, why do it.
And if we as taxpayers ranted about hours of purposeless meetings with no results the way we rant about one minute of prayer we would all be better off.
Teapot + tempest. There are more important things the ACLU could be using its resources for even in Jacksonville.
No doubt... :D It is achieving its goal though. High visibility and emotional rhetoric... and political payback for Redmans stunt.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on June 24, 2010, 10:45:05 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 24, 2010, 09:48:17 PM
I think Clark's comments are especially disturbing....just because everyone on Council is currently Christian does not mean praying to Jesus is acceptable...remember, you represent ALL citizens!
That's the rub ... they are supposed to represent all the citizens, but some choose to represent only those who go to the "right" (in multiple senses) church (not temple, or synagogue, etc.)
That is where the issue becomes murky. We all know that Jacksonville is a city of many faiths. The problem arise when some city leaders view a simple invocation as a moment to make a 'statement' that places their faith above all others. Or when other city leaders believe that city council proceedings are the platform from which it is proper to indoctrinate the unconverted. There is nothing inherently wrong with a simple expression of faith, but it doesn't seem that simple in our fair city...
Quote from: BridgeTroll on June 25, 2010, 03:13:36 PM
You seem so... upset and offended by it. Why? It takes all of a minute. The people doing it see the purpose and seem to find confidence and comfort in it. Why should that bother you?
LOL. I'm not upset, although I do find it tiresome that religious people continually try to force their silly superstitions down everyone else's throat.
Quote"The practice that the city is doing right now basically says Christianity is the faith that people in Jacksonville should be practicing," said Benetta Standly, of the ACLU. "We want the city to really respect the diversity of all the people in the city."
It may only be "taking a minute" but if it is saying Christianity is the faith that people in Jacksonville should be practicing, then the council needs to stop, no matter how much confidence and comfort Richard Clark finds in it. If he is unable to perform without engaging in this ritual, he should either resign or do it by himself before the meeting begins.
^This is why I love finehoe! It looks like city leaders are unable to distinguish between a good faith (pardon the pun) expression of spiritual goodwill and using their public positions as a bully pulpit (pardon the pun) from which to manipulate people's personal beliefs. Yes, this city is predominantly Christian. Yes, government on various levels incorporates some kind of Christian prayer into their functions. But, it bothers me when our leaders, who happen to be Christian, assert that religious minorities should quit their griping because they really do not have a place in the public dialogue - unless they plan to convert sometime soon...
QuoteIt may only be "taking a minute" but if it is saying Christianity is the faith that people in Jacksonville should be practicing, then the council needs to stop, no matter how much confidence and comfort Richard Clark finds in it
If I am not mistaken, there is a prayer said before every Congressional Session in DC. Is that saying Christianity is the faith that all Americans should be practising?
I don't know, I'm just asking.
^^The U.S. House doesn't limit it to Christianity: http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/usa/Muslim-Chaplain-Delivers-Prayer-for-US-House-of-Representatives-86257862.html
Quote from: finehoe on June 25, 2010, 06:25:29 PM
^^The U.S. House doesn't limit it to Christianity: http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/usa/Muslim-Chaplain-Delivers-Prayer-for-US-House-of-Representatives-86257862.html
Thanks. Well that's why I asked. I would be okay with a rotating prayer then if it would satisfy the ACLU. I suspect it would satisfy you too. Although some would prefer no prayer at all.
This issue isn't about the action or the time, it's about what the intentions truly are.
Prayer is a personal activity (or it should be). The only reason to do it publicly (i.e. outside of a religious facility or beyond one's personal space) would appear to be to influence others or to serve notice to others that you plan to use your religion as the measure upon which you will conduct the business at hand. That is not appropriate for a representative government-related event, function, or process.
By the way, when does Mr. Redman think it's appropriate to invoke prayer? When he leaves the house? Starts the car? Crosses the street? Uses the restroom? Meets a constituent? What criteria does he and others use to invoke prayer at some times versus others? If, as I suspect, he fails to offer nearly continuous prayers, it makes me wonder if the public display has anything to do with prayer as a practice versus trying to impose his beliefs on others.
The city council is not being very helpful with their attitude, either. From their actions, I get the impression that they are telling us, "We don't really care that this city is culturally and religiously diverse. We don't care that these politically correct groups are offended. What we care about is showcasing our piousness for the community at large to prove the point that we have a superior religion. All others be damned. When it comes to 'outreach,' they can reach out to us."
If those folks are so Christian, they shouldn't pray at COJ meetings because it's in violation of a direct order from Jesus.
Matthew 6:5
"And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward."
Now, I realize that city council meetings are not normally held in synagogues or on street corners, but the next verse nonetheless explicitly states that you are to do your praying someplace where nobody but God is going to hear you.
Matthew 6:6
"But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly."
Such inconvenient bits of Scripture, eh?
Quote from: Cricket on June 25, 2010, 06:38:50 PM
Quote from: finehoe on June 25, 2010, 06:25:29 PM
^^The U.S. House doesn't limit it to Christianity: http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/usa/Muslim-Chaplain-Delivers-Prayer-for-US-House-of-Representatives-86257862.html
Thanks. Well that's why I asked. I would be okay with a rotating prayer then if it would satisfy the ACLU. I suspect it would satisfy you too. Although some would prefer no prayer at all.
This appears where this is headed, and that's okay by me. We have become a cripple society when a dozen people can get on and whine about someone praying and asking for divine guidance for our broken city (God knows we need all the help we can get!) because it offends them while I can wear a "FUCK YOU!" Tee and be the toast of the party!
This city is going to hell in more ways then one! OCKLAWAHA
Although I agree that this city has been going to hell for years, that's undeniable. However, I still feel that it would resolve all issues, if they merely did what the schools do, say the pledge and then have a moment of silence. This not only allows a few moments for anyone who wishes to pray, but does not impose upon those who feel otherwise. It's such a simple solution, which is why I suppose the council will not do it. Now if the council members who are so inclined, they could meet as a group before going into the chamber, and hold a private prayer...which is another solution.
It's not removing prayer, it merely takes it to a personal level (which it should be, unless you're in a place of worship) and yet does not insult, impose that prayer upon those who wish not to participate in it. There are people of all faiths, denominations, cultures, etc., and not everyone prays the same...that's the basis of this issue, since the prayers that have been spoken are Christian based.
As for the ACLU being involved and people saying that they have no business doing so, this is exactly what the ACLU is all about, this is what they do. However, if this ends up in the court, the ACLU will have to make and prove their case...which isn't all that strong, legally.
Quote from: DeadGirlsDontDance on June 28, 2010, 01:03:44 AM
If those folks are so Christian, they shouldn't pray at COJ meetings because it's in violation of a direct order from Jesus.
Matthew 6:5
"And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward."
Now, I realize that city council meetings are not normally held in synagogues or on street corners, but the next verse nonetheless explicitly states that you are to do your praying someplace where nobody but God is going to hear you.
Matthew 6:6
"But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly."
Such inconvenient bits of Scripture, eh?
Excellent contribution.
Quote from: DeadGirlsDontDance
Matthew 6:6
"But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly."
Such inconvenient bits of Scripture, eh?
You should send that to Redman
Quote from: Springfielder on June 28, 2010, 04:14:34 PM
Quote from: DeadGirlsDontDance
Matthew 6:6
"But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly."
Such inconvenient bits of Scripture, eh?
You should send that to Redman
Send it to the puppeteers that control him.
Is it possible to nail the ACLU to a cross? Geez, these people need more to do.
mtrain, you can pray on your time b/c it seems like you need all the help you can get. I've had enough of FBC running this town and its time that the city figured out that we are not all fundamentalist baptists awaiting the rapture. As a native of jax, I can say that it really gets tiresome having their ideology shoved down our throats at every turn.
Enough is enough and thank Earth that the ACLU will stand up for the majority of folks that don't agree with fbc's indoctrination.
Quote from: mtraininjaxIs it possible to nail the ACLU to a cross? Geez, these people need more to do.
This is what the ACLU does, they protect civil rights from violation...and this is what lead to prayer being removed from the school systems. People didn't seem to mind them being involved when it came to pushing for fair treatment of minorities and other issues. Whether you agree with it or not, this is why they're called American Civil Liberties Union.
There's a simple solution, but our city council is too arrogant to even take that into consideration...in other words, offer a moment of silence.
This was discussed on First Coast Connect last week. I was one of the Media Panelists, one of the conclusions that we discussed was that if Redman didn't ask Dr. Ahmed to "Pray to his God", we probably wouldn't be having this discussion now.