US National Day of Prayer Ruled Unconstitutional

[JoeyKnothead]

From the article here:

A federal judge in Wisconsin ruled the National Day of Prayer unconstitutional Thursday, saying the day amounts to a call for religious action.

U.S. District Judge Barbara 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.

For debate:

Should the National Day of Prayer be considered constitutional or not?

[WinePusher]

No, Congress is not supposed to establish a particular church as a state church. The Day of Prayer doesn't do that. There is no Constituttionally mandated separation of faith and state.

A secular state such as the United States of America is not supposed to endorse any particular religion, but it's also not supposed to favor religiousness over non-religiousness.

I'm sure you can find someone to oppose whatever the government spends money on.

Probably. So?

A national day of prayer does not endorse any particular religion. It is for people of ALL faiths, not just christianity.

[Goat]

No, Congress is not supposed to establish a particular church as a state church. The Day of Prayer doesn't do that. There is no Constituttionally mandated separation of faith and state.

A secular state such as the United States of America is not supposed to endorse any particular religion, but it's also not supposed to favor religiousness over non-religiousness.

I'm sure you can find someone to oppose whatever the government spends money on.

Probably. So?

A national day of prayer does not endorse any particular religion. It is for people of ALL faiths, not just christianity.

Not all faiths pray. Plus, there are atheists.

So, that kills that claim.

[East of Eden]

A secular state such as the United States of America is not supposed to endorse any particular religion, but it's also not supposed to favor religiousness over non-religiousness.

Not according to the Founders. This is what SCOTUS Justice Joseph Story (appointed to the Supreme Court by James Madison, the "Father of the Constitution") said,

§ 1868. Probably at the time of the adoption of the constitution, and of the amendment to it, now under consideration, the general, if not the universal, sentiment in America was, that Christianity ought to receive encouragement from the state, so far as was not incompatible with the private rights of conscience, and the freedom of religious worship. An attempt to level all religions, and to make it a matter of state policy to hold all in utter indifference, would have created universal disapprobation, if not universal indignation.

Get that? Not only was religion to be encouraged, but specifically Christianity. There is no way those men who wrote the Constitution would have thought a National Day of Prayer was unconstitutional. In fact, the First Continental Congress declared a day of prayer and fasting.

[East of Eden]

No, Congress is not supposed to establish a particular church as a state church. The Day of Prayer doesn't do that. There is no Constituttionally mandated separation of faith and state.

A secular state such as the United States of America is not supposed to endorse any particular religion, but it's also not supposed to favor religiousness over non-religiousness.

I'm sure you can find someone to oppose whatever the government spends money on.

Probably. So?

A national day of prayer does not endorse any particular religion. It is for people of ALL faiths, not just christianity.

Not all faiths pray. Plus, there are atheists.

So, that kills that claim.

OK, so which particular religion does it endorse?

[WinePusher]

No, Congress is not supposed to establish a particular church as a state church. The Day of Prayer doesn't do that. There is no Constituttionally mandated separation of faith and state.

A secular state such as the United States of America is not supposed to endorse any particular religion, but it's also not supposed to favor religiousness over non-religiousness.

I'm sure you can find someone to oppose whatever the government spends money on.

Probably. So?

A national day of prayer does not endorse any particular religion. It is for people of ALL faiths, not just christianity.

Not all faiths pray. Plus, there are atheists.

So, that kills that claim.

Well, atheists consider themselves to be people of no faith. Those faiths that don't pray need not participate

[Goat]

No, Congress is not supposed to establish a particular church as a state church. The Day of Prayer doesn't do that. There is no Constituttionally mandated separation of faith and state.

A secular state such as the United States of America is not supposed to endorse any particular religion, but it's also not supposed to favor religiousness over non-religiousness.

I'm sure you can find someone to oppose whatever the government spends money on.

Probably. So?

A national day of prayer does not endorse any particular religion. It is for people of ALL faiths, not just christianity.

Not all faiths pray. Plus, there are atheists.

So, that kills that claim.

Well, atheists consider themselves to be people of no faith. Those faiths that don't pray need not participate

Yet, they have to pay for it, and have it imposed on them.

Let it be privately funded , and outside of government.

[Wyvern]

I have absolutely no problem with people praying, or even having a Day of Prayer if they like. What I do have a problem with is MY tax money being used to promote religions that I do not agree with. The government of the United States of America is supposed to be secular.

No, Congress is not supposed to establish a particular church as a state church. The Day of Prayer doesn't do that. There is no Constituttionally mandated separation of faith and state.

If such a large number of US citizens feel so strongly about the Day of Prayer, it shouldn't be too hard to gather private funds sufficient to keep having it, right?

I'm sure you can find someone to oppose whatever the government spends money on.

EoE of all people I am very surprised that you would be in favor of this government sponsored day of prayer. You have been known to be critical of government spending and intrusiveness in our personal lives and this does both plus it is entirely unneeded. You have also been critical of the government getting involved in areas best performed by the private sector which this definately falls under as well.

[Lux]

Not according to the Founders. This is what SCOTUS Justice Joseph Story (appointed to the Supreme Court by James Madison, the "Father of the Constitution") said,

§ 1868. Probably at the time of the adoption of the constitution, and of the amendment to it, now under consideration, the general, if not the universal, sentiment in America was, that Christianity ought to receive encouragement from the state, so far as was not incompatible with the private rights of conscience, and the freedom of religious worship. An attempt to level all religions, and to make it a matter of state policy to hold all in utter indifference, would have created universal disapprobation, if not universal indignation.

Get that? Not only was religion to be encouraged, but specifically Christianity. There is no way those men who wrote the Constitution would have thought a National Day of Prayer was unconstitutional. In fact, the First Continental Congress declared a day of prayer and fasting.

I know that, but as you can see, that is a 142 year old statement, and what's more, it's talking about the past. It was the general sentiment and it would have created indignation to do otherwise.
It is talking about the time the USA Constitution was adopted, which was somewhat 230 years ago, I believe.

As we move towards a more tolerant society, it is inevitable that some things change. Not everything that was accepted when the Constitution was written is accepted nowadays, and if we were to never question our laws and our ways we'd never move forward. Take slavery for example: it wasn't abolished until the 1860's by the thirteenth amendment. Should slavery still be allowed simply because the founders didn't mention it should be abolished?

[Lux]

A national day of prayer does not endorse any particular religion. It is for people of ALL faiths, not just christianity.

It endorses the particular religions that include prayer, which is not every religion nor ALL faiths. I never said it only endorses christianity, but that the government is not supposed to favor any number of religions, not even religion over irreligion.

What's wrong with privately funding the Day of Prayer? What are the specific reasons why the Day of Prayer should be publicly funded, keeping into account that there are many out there who practice religions that don't pray and some who don't practice any religion at all?

[perfessor]

What's wrong with privately funding the Day of Prayer? What are the specific reasons why the Day of Prayer should be publicly funded, keeping into account that there are many out there who practice religions that don't pray and some who don't practice any religion at all?

I'm not sure that there is any funding involved, save whatever it costs to record a vote in the Congressional Record.

As an atheist, my reaction is basically a shrug. If people want it, no big deal, they can have it.