Metro Jacksonville

Councilman Yarborough is at it again.  Unfortunately, he probably speaks for many in Jax.  Still, his open intolerance of others is truly amazing for an elected official in a major city in the 21st century.  Read it below to believe it:

QuoteDifferent faiths cast eager or wary eyes on Jacksonville council prayers

Source URL: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2010-07-22/story/different-faiths-cast-eager-or-wary-eyes-jacksonville-council-prayers

By Jeff Brumley

Some non-Christian clergy in Jacksonville say they are willing and eager to give invocations at City Council meetings now that the ritual has been opened up to members of different faiths.

But when that first Hindu, Buddhist, Jew, Muslim or other minister will take to the podium is yet to be seen as the city works out the details of whom to invite and when.

And some Christians, including at least one council member, express concern the new policy could either be taken too far, validate non-Christian religions and even contribute to the city’s moral and spiritual decline.

Before, Councilman Don Redman, the council’s former chaplain and a Baptist, delivered Christian prayers to open the meetings. Council President Jack Webb squashed that practice when the city received written protests from the American Civil Liberties Union and the Anti-Defamation League.

Webb, who’s Catholic, said inviting ministers from other religions makes the process more fair to the many non-Christians represented by council and could help relieve some of the social tensions afflicting the city.

“I think there’s a need for healing in the community,” he said, “and I think this will go along way toward that.”

But that doesn’t mean council members and citizens attending their meetings can expect to see rabbis and imams delivering their prayers right away.

In fact, the first to say a prayer under the new system will be Councilman Clay Yarborough’s own pastor, the Rev. Mac Brunson of Jacksonville’s First Baptist Church.

Brunson declined to be interviewed about the prayer he will give on Tuesday, but a blog that follows the church said Brunson recently invited the entire church, which has thousands of members, to be there when he gives Tuesday’s invocation. Yarborough, the council’s current chaplain, said he expects a higher turnout at the meeting as a result.

Yarborough said Webb’s new system includes asking council members to invite clergy, so he asked to be the first to do so.

Webb said he’s working with the city General Counsel’s Office to develop a rotation of available and willing clergy to participate.

At least two ministers contacted by The Times-Union said they ready to go.

“We are a city that has many faiths and it’s appropriate that our elected officials would welcome people of all faiths” to give the invocations, said Rabbi Joshua Lief, spiritual leader of Congregation Ahavath Chesed in Mandarin.

“In reality, we [in Jacksonville] have always been open and welcoming,” Lief said. “Unfortunately, council in the past [were] closed to possibility.”

Panditji Srinathan Kadambi, the priest  at Hindu Society of Northeast Florida, said if asked he will pray for the citizens of Jacksonville and the world from council chambers.

“If we begin any kind of action with a prayer, that means whatever efforts we are making will be blessed by God,” Kadambi said.

Permitting a Hindu to pray before a council meeting “is right because I live in Jacksonville,” he said.

But it could also spell trouble, others say.

“If they’re going to pray to somebody else, I don’t have a problem with that â€" it’s everybody’s City Council,” said Jerry Skirvin, co-founder of PrayOnJax.org, a website and petition drive developed to protest the what Skirvin described as the anti-Christian campaign behind the ACLU’s warnings about council prayers.

“We’re going to watch and see what happens,” Skirvin said. “Just don’t go overboard with non-Christian religions.”

Yarborough, council’s chaplain, told The Times-Union in an e-mail that opening the prayers to non-Christians could spell trouble for the city on a number of levels.

“If city leadership embraces pluralism and tries to validate all religious viewpoints, it indicates that the spiritual, financial, educational, emotional … health of Jacksonville is at greater risk,” Yarborough wrote. “With no moral absolutes and no defined value system, decay is the result.”

The Rev. Stephen Goyer said it’s arrogant to assume Christians possess some special, unique power to ward off tragedy and disturbances with their prayers.

It also borders on viewing prayer as a form of magic or “miracle incantation that guards us against any sort of tragedy or disruption,” said Goyer, pastor of Riverside Presbyterian Church and member of the board of OneJax, an interfaith organization.

What a f*cking dumbass.

However, why should we be surprised, he attends FBC!

I too chuckled when I read that the very first pastor invited was the non-controversial Mac B. of the holier than thou FBC.  Things never change.  :-X

If this is the kind of thing that will happen in this city over prayers at council meetings than for me it's solved, no more mixing religion with any sort of politics on any level. By the way I'm sure the people involved with city council who follow a particular faith will pray on their own and with other believers who follow the same faith before this meeting takes place. Also what Rev. Goyer said I appreciate.

How about just a moment of silence before meetings to cease this drama?  I'm just waiting for Clay to bring out the snakes!

Quote from: TheProfessor on July 23, 2010, 01:29:47 AM
How about just a moment of silence before meetings to cease this drama?  I'm just waiting for Clay to bring out the snakes!

I like that idea a lot.

I wish Jacksonville had more open-minded, inclusive ministers like Rev. Goyer. 

Quote from: stjr on July 22, 2010, 11:08:09 PM
Councilman Yarborough is at it again.  Unfortunately, he probably speaks for many in Jax.  Still, his open intolerance of others is truly amazing for an elected official in a major city in the 21st century.  Read it below to believe it:

Quote


Yarborough, council’s chaplain, told The Times-Union in an e-mail that opening the prayers to non-Christians could spell trouble for the city on a number of levels.

“If city leadership embraces pluralism and tries to validate all religious viewpoints, it indicates that the spiritual, financial, educational, emotional … health of Jacksonville is at greater risk,” Yarborough wrote. “With no moral absolutes and no defined value system, decay is the result.”

Mr. Yarborough makes no sense.  It is not the duty of our city government to 'validate' a religion or sect.  It is not the duty of our city council to use public ceremonies to establish what religion or sect is legitimate for us to follow.  I am disappointed by Mr. Yarborough's stance for two reasons:
1. He presumes that, as a good Christian, it is his respnsibility to determine what religion or sect deserves a public forum in our city.
2. He presumes that the mere exposure to other faiths would taint the spirits of Jacksonville residents.  This is akin to the jealous boyfriend who keeps his girlfriend at home because he fears losing her to someone else.

Based on his quote, Mr. Yarborough is condemning the military.  The military has chaplains from different religions and sects.  As a matter of fact, larger military bases have a variety of 'chapels' which address the spiritual needs of servicemen and women who practice almost anything from Christianity to Wicca.  Are we to suppose that the military is somehow subject to decay?

While we're at it, are we to presume that Mr. Yarborough is telling us that the mere presence of other houses of worship is a sign of social decay?  Are we now equating non-Christian houses of worship with locl strip clubs and beer joints?  This is unfortunate...

Is his faith so weak that mere exposure to another faith will somehow harm him?

Let's see here... Voters elect the enlightened Mr Yarborough.

Mr Yarborough represents the voters who elected him.

Those who oppose the platform don't like it.

It's Democracy!  :)

QuoteYarborough, council’s chaplain, told The Times-Union in an e-mail that opening the prayers to non-Christians could spell trouble for the city on a number of levels.

“If city leadership embraces pluralism and tries to validate all religious viewpoints, it indicates that the spiritual, financial, educational, emotional … health of Jacksonville is at greater risk,” Yarborough wrote. “With no moral absolutes and no defined value system, decay is the result.”

That's one of the most ignorant quotes yet. IMO, he's such an embarrassment and is indicative of what's wrong with much of our city council.

Posted by: buckethead

QuoteMr Yarborough represents the voters who elected him.

That's true, and the sad part is, he has a voice in what impacts all of us, including those who did not, or would not have voted for him.

Quote from: buckethead on July 23, 2010, 07:11:09 AM
Let's see here... Voters elect the enlightened Mr Yarborough.

Mr Yarborough represents the voters who elected him.

Those who oppose the platform don't like it.

It's Democracy!  :)

It's also a glaring lack of separation of Church and State.  We live in (nominally) a representative republic. Not a theocracy.

And it's more evidence to StephenDare's posit of the hijacking and corruption of the Republican/Conservative movement in the US by right-wing fundamentalist whacko nut-jobs who wear their religion on their sleeves and flags.  IMO, there's no place for shenanigans like this in government.  On any level.

Quote from: TheProfessor on July 23, 2010, 01:29:47 AM
How about just a moment of silence before meetings to cease this drama?

+6

I can assure you there are quite a few who agree with his assertion. They put him there. It is a true equivalency.

Quote from: Doctor_K on July 23, 2010, 08:43:28 AM

Quote from: buckethead on July 23, 2010, 07:11:09 AM
Let's see here... Voters elect the enlightened Mr Yarborough.

Mr Yarborough represents the voters who elected him.

Those who oppose the platform don't like it.

It's Democracy!  :)

It's also a glaring lack of separation of Church and State.  We live in (nominally) a representative republic. Not a theocracy.

And it's more evidence to StephenDare's posit of the hijacking and corruption of the Republican/Conservative movement in the US by right-wing fundamentalist whacko nut-jobs who wear their religion on their sleeves and flags.  IMO, there's no place for shenanigans like this in government.  On any level.

Quote from: TheProfessor on July 23, 2010, 01:29:47 AM
How about just a moment of silence before meetings to cease this drama?

+6

So in our "Democracy", if a majority of voters wish to enact a local theocracy, they are not permitted to do so?

Are theocrats to be denied representation in government?

Quote from: riverside planner on July 23, 2010, 06:33:26 AM
I wish Jacksonville had more open-minded, inclusive ministers like Rev. Goyer.  

My thoughts exactly.

Quote from: stephendare on July 23, 2010, 08:56:31 AM
It doesnt make disagreeing with him non democratic.  What a load of dingo kidneys.

I don't think that was the point I was making. FWIW, I disagree with him.

Just a little rant illustrating the dangers of majority rule.

Quote.... validate non-Christian religions....

Like they weren't valid to begin with?? Ah, such ignorance... must be awful to have one's bliss interrupted by reality.

Quote from: Cliffs_Daughter on July 23, 2010, 09:31:15 AM

Quote.... validate non-Christian religions....

Like they weren't valid to begin with?? Ah, such ignorance... must be awful to have one's bliss interrupted by reality.

I have almost come to expect this by so many people in our town that I missed that aspect of the quote.

Quote from: copperfiend on July 23, 2010, 09:35:03 AM

Quote from: Cliffs_Daughter on July 23, 2010, 09:31:15 AM

Quote.... validate non-Christian religions....

Like they weren't valid to begin with?? Ah, such ignorance... must be awful to have one's bliss interrupted by reality.

I have almost come to expect this by so many people in our town that I missed that aspect of the quote.

Preaching to the choir here...excuse the pun.

Ever pay attention to how many of these in-your-face right wingers insist on that "Have a BLESSED day" thing, instead of just saying "Thank you" or "Goodbye" around here? I know it's a minor annoyance, but it's one that wouldn't be tolerated on such a widespread basis in an open environment.

Yes, the foundation of our country stands on Judeo-Christian beliefs and values, etc.  This foundation, however, must not be very strong if it all can come crashing down based on a moment of interfaith prayer... 

so let's just take this in the simplest form

assume our country was founded on Judeo-Christian beliefs/values....what would be thr problem of having a Rabbi give the invocation at Council?

Mr. Yarborough is sadly misguided....I even suspect that Mac Brunson of FBC wouldn't go this far.

Quote from: tufsu1 on July 23, 2010, 10:19:42 AM
so let's just take this in the simplest form

assume our country was founded on Judeo-Christian beliefs/values....what would be thr problem of having a Rabbi give the invocation at Council?

Mr. Yarborough is sadly misguided....I even suspect that Mac Brunson of FBC wouldn't go this far.

That is a good question.  We don't hear much from the Jewish community about this issue.  I guess that, as long as fundamentalists focus on excluding the Muslims, they will be able to slant the issue in their favor.

I disagree...the article includes quotes from the Rabbi of the Temple...who is also a member of OneJax, a community-wide organization comprised of variosu religions.

Quote from: tufsu1 on July 23, 2010, 10:19:42 AM
assume our country was founded on Judeo-Christian beliefs/values....what would be thr problem of having a Rabbi give the invocation at Council?

You have to remember that placing the "Judeo" before the "Christian" is of relatively recent vintage.  Up until around the middle of the last century, Jews tended to be as despised by so-called Christians as Muslims or Gays are now.

Quote from: tufsu1 on July 23, 2010, 10:27:02 AM
I disagree...the article includes quotes from the Rabbi of the Temple...who is also a member of OneJax, a community-wide organization comprised of variosu religions.

O.K., he is quoted in one article.  But I want to know more.

Quote from: ChriswUfGator on July 23, 2010, 09:47:25 AM
Preaching to the choir here...excuse the pun.

Ever pay attention to how many of these in-your-face right wingers insist on that "Have a BLESSED day" thing, instead of just saying "Thank you" or "Goodbye" around here? I know it's a minor annoyance, but it's one that wouldn't be tolerated on such a widespread basis in an open environment.

I've more than once wanted to respond to "Have a blessed day" with something random like "and may the gods also smile upon you" (emphasis on plural gods) just to see what kind of a reaction I'd get.

Come to think of it, the next time I do hear that I will do just that.  Makes me wish I had a good video-taking ability on my phone to instantly post here. :D

I don't see why we need a prayer before the meetings anyway. Or, why does our city council need a chaplain??  To me, this seems like a massive violation of the seperation of church and state.  I am a Christian myself, but I am embarrassed that people like Clay Yarborough claim to be one too.  Christianity is about loving non-believers and accepting them, not accusing them of ruining our city. 

I do take issue with this comment.

Quote
And it's more evidence to StephenDare's posit of the hijacking and corruption of the Republican/Conservative movement in the US by right-wing fundamentalist whacko nut-jobs who wear their religion on their sleeves and flags.

I can see where you are coming from, and I think that may be true in Jax, but I don't think that is accurate to say that about our country as a whole.  The 'nut-jobs' get a lot of press because they are indeed whacko and ignorant and it's hilarious, but i don't think they are representative of the conservative party. 

Quote from: Captain Zissou on July 23, 2010, 10:43:59 AM
The 'nut-jobs' get a lot of press because they are indeed whacko and ignorant and it's hilarious, but i don't think they are representative of the conservative party. 

The "conservative" party sure likes to pander to those nut-jobs, though.

Quote from: finehoe on July 23, 2010, 11:22:22 AM

Quote from: Captain Zissou on July 23, 2010, 10:43:59 AM
The 'nut-jobs' get a lot of press because they are indeed whacko and ignorant and it's hilarious, but i don't think they are representative of the conservative party. 

The "conservative" party sure likes to pander to those nut-jobs, though.

Indeed.  But I think that's a function more about getting votes under a two-umbrella-party system more than anything else.  There are whack-jobs on the Right and there are whack-jobs on the Left.  None of which think that they're the whack-jobs.

Quote
I can see where you are coming from, and I think that may be true in Jax, but I don't think that is accurate to say that about our country as a whole.  The 'nut-jobs' get a lot of press because they are indeed whacko and ignorant and it's hilarious, but i don't think they are representative of the conservative party.

I am of the opinion that it's more prevalent than you realize; or at least more widespread than just Jax. 

Take Bill McCollum's latest campaign ad against Rick Scott: "he worked with the Mexican Playboy company to produce material you wouldn't want your kids to see" and "his hospital performed all these abortions". 

Certainly two strong points from the Christian Conservative camp: smut and abortion.  Which, IMO, is more a Christian issue than a Conservative issue.  Or put another way - it's a religious ideology point versus a political ideology point issue.  Again with the Church & State.

(Disclaimer - I really don't have any interest one way or the other with the McCollum/Scott race - just using it as an example)

^^And don't forget Sarah Palin's and Newt Gingrich's tirades against opening a mosque in lower Manhattan.

Meh.  I'm not a fan of that either, but less for religious reasons than for the sake of tact.

Fundamentalist nut-jobs who warped the religion to suit their tastes killed a lot of people.  Now lets build that religion's place-of-worship on the same site. 

Tacky.

It'd have been better to not put anything else there at all, IMO.

Quote from: Doctor_K on July 23, 2010, 12:12:40 PM
Fundamentalist nut-jobs who warped the religion to suit their tastes killed a lot of people.  Now lets build that religion's place-of-worship on the same site. 

Get your facts straight, honey.  It is three blocks away and has no line of sight.

Quote from: finehoe on July 23, 2010, 12:27:19 PM

Quote from: Doctor_K on July 23, 2010, 12:12:40 PM
Fundamentalist nut-jobs who warped the religion to suit their tastes killed a lot of people.  Now lets build that religion's place-of-worship on the same site.  

Get your facts straight, honey.  It is three blocks away and has no line of sight.

Thanks, sweetheart.  I should've been more clear in bringing the source of my point to the table.  I'll work on that.

If the mosque isn't on site, is blocks away, and has no line-of-sight, then why all the commotion from the other nut-jobs over the mosque?  Because they're nut-jobs, and their imaginary man in the sky is cooler than someone else's imaginary man in the sky?

Quote from: Doctor_K on July 23, 2010, 12:37:56 PM
If the mosque isn't on site, is blocks away, and has no line-of-sight, then why all the commotion from the other nut-jobs over the mosque?

Quote from: finehoe on July 23, 2010, 11:22:22 AM
The "conservative" party sure likes to pander to those nut-jobs, though.

Touche.

So then in your opinion, is it a party of, by, and for the nut-jobs?  Or does it have the potential to be better, if it off-loaded said nut-jobs?

Quote from: Doctor_K on July 23, 2010, 12:43:39 PM
So then in your opinion, is it a party of, by, and for the nut-jobs?  Or does it have the potential to be better, if it off-loaded said nut-jobs?

Well of course it (and the country) would be better off if the nut-jobs were off loaded.  I don't see that happening though.  The party leaders back in the 80s thought they could throw a few bones to the nut-jobs and use them like you said to get out the vote.  But unfortunately for them (and us), the lunatics have taken over the asylum and the result was the disaster of the Bush administration.  And nothing has changed in that party since he left office.  If anything, they've gotten even more bat-shit crazy.

Michele Bachmann. Queen bat-shit.

I think that a whole lot more people would be 'conservative' if the conservative movement believed in true individual freedom. 
Many conservatives vigorously demand financial autonomy, but do not mind having a theocracy that controls our spiritual and religious freedom.  They do not mind placing limits on public expression of 'inferior' religions or faiths.  They do not mind requiring us to live our lives according to their belief systems.  This is one reason whythe conservative movement is unable to close the deal with gaining more public support for their ideas...

^^I think you are absolutely right, Jaxson.

Schedule of Prayer Leaders for Future City Council Meetings:
First Baptist Church
Baptist First Church
Church of Baptists of Jacksonville
Mandarin Baptist Church
First Church of Baptists, Orange Park
Beaches Baptist Church

etc....

LOL!

A Fundamentalist Baptist Minister in Alabama, sorely tempted,
finally propositioned the Choir director one night after practice,
when they were alone in the Church.
  "Where should we do it, Reverend?" she enthusiastically replied.
  "Right here on the floor!" he panted.
  "It'd be too cold." she whispered. "How about standing up?"
  "Good Lord, girl!  Have you taken leave of you senses?" he shouted.
"If anyone came in, they'd think we were dancing!"

I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing
on the edge, about to jump off.  So I ran over and said "Stop!
don't do it!"
  "Why shouldn't I?" he said.
  I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!"
  He said, "Like what?"
  I said, "Well...are you religious or atheist?"
  He said, "Religious."
  I said, "Me too!  Are you christian or buddhist?"
  He said,"Christian."
  I said, "Me too!  Are you catholic or protestant?"
  He said, "Protestant."
  I said, "Me too!  Are you episcopalian or baptist?"
  He said, "Baptist!"
  I said,"Wow!  Me too!  Are you baptist church of god or
baptist church of the lord?"
  He said, "Baptist church of god!"
  I said, "Me too!  Are you original baptist church of god,
or are you reformed baptist church of god?"
  He said,"Reformed Baptist church of god!"
  I said, "Me too!  Are you reformed baptist church of god,
reformation of 1879, or reformed baptist church of god,
reformation of 1915?"
  He said, "Reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915!"
  I said, "Die, heretic scum", and pushed him off.

A man walks into the woman's section of a department store
and tells the sales clerk he wants to buy a bra for his wife.
  "What type of bra?" asked the clerk.
  "Type?" inquires the man, "there's more than one type?"
  "There are three types," replies the clerk, "The Catholic
type, the Salvation Army type, and the Baptist type.  Which
one do you need?"
  Still confused the man asked,  "What is the difference in
them?"
  The clerk responds, "It is really very easy.  The Catholic
type supports the masses,  the Salvation Army type lifts up
the fallen and the Baptist type makes mountain's out of mole
hills."

A man went to heaven and was being shown around by St. Peter.
As they went from cloud to cloud they came to various doors which
St. Peter would open. One showed a large group rolling on the floor
and talking in tongues.  "Our Pentecostals" he said..
  Next was a serious ritual. "Our Jewish persuasion" he replied.
Then another ritualistic service. "Our Catholics".
At the next cloud, he didn't open the door but instead put his
forefinger to his lips in the hush motion and they both tip toed
past.. Once past, the man asked what that was all about !?
  "Those are the Baptists", he explained. "They think they are the
only one's here".

Quote from: finehoe on July 23, 2010, 12:08:33 PM
^^And don't forget Sarah Palin's and Newt Gingrich's tirades against opening a mosque in lower Manhattan.

I oppose a mosque at ground zero.

Is no one going to stand for the rights of the fundamentalist religious to be democratically represented in all levels of government according to their respective voting bloc?

What about democracy?

Quote from: buckethead on July 23, 2010, 07:14:57 PM
I oppose a mosque at ground zero.

Good for you.  No mosque is proposed for ground zero.

If the majority of voters elected Mr Yarborough, those voters have every right to determine how meetings are conducted, right?

"Constitution!" you say? Balderdash. Merely a pesky obstacle for the majority to vote on.

Democracy. Remember? That's what we are. :)

Quote from: stephendare on July 23, 2010, 07:29:32 PM
what are you talking about buckethead?

I'm talking about democracy!

Why should religious zealots be denied representation in our democracy?

Let us not forget that our nation's founders also warned us against government by the mob.  It looks like an angry mob of Christians is trying to run this city in spite of the voices of the religious minorities that are also protected by our Constitution. 

Quote from: Jaxson on July 23, 2010, 08:50:18 PM
Let us not forget that our nation's founders also warned us against government by the mob.  It looks like an angry mob of Christians is trying to run this city in spite of the voices of the religious minorities that are also protected by our Constitution. 

It only takes a 2/3rds majority vote in congress to repeal the first amendment. :)

In summation, Democracy=Majority rule=Good.

(As long as I agree with the majority.)  :(

Quote from: buckethead on July 23, 2010, 09:28:28 PM

Quote from: Jaxson on July 23, 2010, 08:50:18 PM
Let us not forget that our nation's founders also warned us against government by the mob.  It looks like an angry mob of Christians is trying to run this city in spite of the voices of the religious minorities that are also protected by our Constitution. 

It only takes a 2/3rds majority vote in congress to repeal the first amendment. :)

Actually, 2/3 vote of each house of Congress, then be ratified by 3/4 of the states legislature or state conventions.

QuoteArticle 5 - Amendment

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

Not too difficult according to this video.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tznR4wPeS4M  This video probably more entertainment then reality (I hope!) but it's something to think about.

QuoteChurch plans to pack out Jacksonville council meeting

Submitted by Tia Mitchell on July 23, 2010 - 10:05am Death, Taxes & Politics

Council President Jack Webb's new prayer policy will be put into effect on Tuesday, July 27, the first meeting under his leadership. In today's paper, Jeff Brumley has a story about the reaction from religious leaders to Webb's decision to allow leaders of various faiths to open the meeting up with prayer.

Rev. Mac Brunson, senior pastor of First Baptist Church of Jacksonville, will give the prayer, a request made by council Chaplain Clay Yarborough. Under the old policy, it would have been Yarborough's job to pray at the beginning of each bi-weekly council meeting.

Brumley's story referencing a posting on the FBC Jax Watchdog blog that quotes Brunson as calling for members of the church to flood Tuesday's council meeting. According to the blog, members of the church were asked to walk in silently, hear Brunson's prayer, then walk out of the meeting silently.

"The purpose he says, is to send a message to the city that 'this is a city of prayer,' " the blog said.

Expect a Jewish faith leader to give the prayer fairly early on, perhaps in August or September. Webb has also said that he expects a Muslim to pray sometime during the course of his yearlong term.

So what do you think about Webb's prayer policy? What do you think about members of FBC Jacksonville packing out the audience during Tuesday's meeting to hear Brunson's prayer (if they indeed come)? Will you be there?

http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/403455/tia-mitchell/2010-07-23/church-plans-pack-out-council-meeting

If only they put that much thought into other things that actually helped somebody!

Glad to see they are wasting time and effort on a complicated prayer rotation system.

Any plans to hold a meeting without a prayer?

Quote from: Jaxson on July 23, 2010, 02:57:34 PM

A man went to heaven and was being shown around by St. Peter.
As they went from cloud to cloud they came to various doors which
St. Peter would open. One showed a large group rolling on the floor
and talking in tongues.  "Our Pentecostals" he said..
 Next was a serious ritual. "Our Jewish persuasion" he replied.
Then another ritualistic service. "Our Catholics".
At the next cloud, he didn't open the door but instead put his
forefinger to his lips in the hush motion and they both tip toed
past.. Once past, the man asked what that was all about !?
 "Those are the Baptists", he explained. "They think they are the
only one's here".

Hahahaha that is one of the funniest things I have heard!!

I think that we are crossing a dangerous line when we have public officials questioning the legitimacy of religions that are not to their liking and questioning such religions' place in public affairs.  Though I may personally disgree with other faiths, I would not use my public office to diminish them.

Can-O-Worms Opened

(http://api.ning.com/files/8npOYJPzNyVRh3x42rGnOmRXcAIQYOfoe1QPAQd8AI*ibY1UCmOQYdamQNS3z8aHLdspnvTSwkP9L6m-VEYbgjQd9KgCoCrs/canworms.jpg)

They should spend some time and put together a list COJ approved religions as well.

Yummy...As I said, I am waiting on someone to bring out the snakes and start rolling on the floor.

Anyone know if the "Wickens" will be represented? Clay would just love them! Or how about Scientology?

Suppose his supporters (a majority of voters who elected him to represent themselves) prefer to have him oppose any alternatives to the preferred religion or doctrine.

Isn't this what democracy is? The majority put him there and if we truly live in a democracy, he should do as his supporters wish. As for other councilpersons, they should do likewise.

Anyone disagree with the concept of Democracy??

One person, one vote. :)

buckethead.........I can not disagree with that principle! But would have to ask......is it right to have a specific religion touted as the one and only? I need to point out also, that would be the majority in his district and not in mine, but wish that all council persons truely represented their respective districts in that manner! This is an issue of religion though and I don't argue either politics or religion! Most people have an opinion on both and the chances of coming to an agreement on either is slim to nonexistant...........just mho!

Isn't every religion touted as "the one and only true religion"?

It almost sounds like there are very few fans of democracy in da house.

buckethead, the Bill of Rights, and especially the first, are to protect the rights of individuals from the tyranny of the majority.  Following your same logic, since Mayor Peyton won the last election in a landslide, everyone here (and elsewhere) who criticizes him should not have the right to express those opinions, and be forced to listen to Peyton supporters talk endlessly about how great he is.  (See Amendment #1 about free speech and redress of grievances).

Quote from: buckethead on July 28, 2010, 07:55:12 PM
Suppose his supporters (a majority of voters who elected him to represent themselves) prefer to have him oppose any alternatives to the preferred religion or doctrine.

Isn't this what democracy is? The majority put him there and if we truly live in a democracy, he should do as his supporters wish. As for other councilpersons, they should do likewise.

Anyone disagree with the concept of Democracy??

One person, one vote. :)

We are not a democracy.  Our nation's founders established our government to prevent mob democracy from running amok.  This is why we have the Electoral College.  This is why they gave state legislatures the power to elect Senators, and not the people.  Democracy is the basis for our government, but it is not the entire premise of our nation's politics.  A more accurate description of our government would be a 'representative democracy' or a 'constitutional republic.' 

That said, the will of the majority is great, but there are reasons why we do not have referenda on everything like we would if we were living in a pure 'democracy.'  Our representatives, while they are supposed to reflect the will of the people, are also expected to make informed decisions in our best interest. 

I recently spoke to a city councilman and asked if he supported sectarian prayer because it was the will of the majority.  He said no.  Why?  Because he said that demographics can always shift and that Muslims (for example) could end up in the majority in many areas.  If majority rules, he said, there will be many areas taking the route of Islam in public prayers.  He said to me that our nation's foundation in Judeo-Christian tradition should suffice in supporting his beliefs without going the route of 'majority rules.'

Very nice posts, Jaxon and Charles. This is the point I am trying (backhandedly) to make (perhaps a bit off topic) by illustrating the lunacy of a true democracy. (The very system we have been taught our governmental system is and should be).

Additionally, I would also assert a religious group has every right to representation a secular group or corporation has. A religious group does not have the authority to establish religious rituals in governmental proceedings whether excluding others or not. ( Does the first amendment apply to a city council? Congress shall pass no law.... yada yada yada)

Perhaps it is constitutional for a city/county to establish Christian prayer as the exclusive prayer performed at city/county functions and proceedings?

Quote from: buckethead on July 29, 2010, 11:31:07 AM
I would also assert a religious group has every right to representation a secular group or corporation has.

They should pay taxes then.

Quote from: finehoe on July 29, 2010, 01:57:13 PM

Quote from: buckethead on July 29, 2010, 11:31:07 AM
I would also assert a religious group has every right to representation a secular group or corporation has.

They should pay taxes then.

"Amen!"

Quote from: finehoe on July 29, 2010, 01:57:13 PM

Quote from: buckethead on July 29, 2010, 11:31:07 AM
I would also assert a religious group has every right to representation a secular group or corporation has.

They should pay taxes then.

Like ACORN, N.A.R.A.L, NAACP, Greepeace, The Sierra Club and N.O.W.? (et al)

Should we apply that same rule to federal elections? No federal tax liability = no vote? 

Not to mention the fact that members of a religious group have the same requirement to tax liability as do all citizens. (with the exception of clergy, which I see as a violation of the equal protection clause)