Prayers banned at council meetings

[Silvertusk]

Another win for secularism

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-16980025

[neo-x]

You are giving them much more credit, my friend, than what they have actually achieved - which is, nothing. Nor we have lost anything because of it.

I live in Pakistan, a country where prayer is not allowed anywhere on govt platforms, not schools, only some private christian schools can do such a thing. What if they stopped prayers in that place. What exactly was the kind of prayer that was being practiced. Was it prayer, as a ritual or the people who did it really meant it? Have they stopped a tradition or really something spiritual. I think it is the former and not the Latter.

I mean where I live, it is not even considered something very important to follow Christ. So I really do not see why it is that much important. If someone wants to pray they can pray in their heart. A true prayer is heard before you even speak, at least that is what the Lord taught us. You don't have to follow ceremony on prayer everywhere.

Though I do think it is more of a legal struggle between theists and non-theists rather than a spiritual one. For me an interesting question is, can a Christian bring the same type of case to the court claiming he wants to have his rights to pray be given to him, if the board doesn't like it, they may change.

[Silvertusk]

I realise I am speaking in relative terms here - and it is a lot worse in other countries - but it is just another sign of the times - when Christianity is slowly being filtered out of what was essentially a Christian country. It just makes me sad - even in a country where it is suppose to be free to worship.

[jlay]

Canned prayers at council meetings are no loss. I hope we do filter out this hollow religion that has repaced genuine faith.

Oh, if real people of God would be driven to their knees in their private homes, it will do far more than some traditional prayer said in public.

[Silvertusk]

I totally get what both of you are saying and I agree - however - this is a story made public that will fuel the secular support within this country - like I said - sign of the times - or end of the times when prayer is seen as against someone's "human rights".

[jlay]

Understand. I say bring it on. God's people need to get past this stuff. People were genuinely attracted to the early church, not because it found favor in the eyes of the government, but because it was real. Christianity spread like wildfire when it was banned my most of the known world.

[Stu]

I realise I am speaking in relative terms here - and it is a lot worse in other countries - but it is just another sign of the times - when Christianity is slowly being filtered out of what was essentially a Christian country. It just makes me sad - even in a country where it is suppose to be free to worship.

A little off-topic but... would you say America is essentially "a Christian country"?
Was America founded on religious principles?

I ask because I've been in debates before with people who say that not only is America a secular country but that it's foundations too are secular.

[Ivellious]

when prayer is seen as against someone's "human rights".

Prayer in and of itself is not a violation of human rights. The problem is when one religion is given specific rights over other religions. For instance, I presume most Christians would not accept the idea of all religions represented getting a prayer at each meeting, despite their religion being just as important to them as Christianity is to the councilmen.

I also agree that these types of "traditional" prayers are by and large useless and shallow, and often only performed because it feels natural. So I don't see the big deal in saying that if you want a relationship with God through prayer, you can do it outside the public forum.

A little off-topic but... would you say America is essentially "a Christian country"?
Was America founded on Christrian principles?

I ask because I've been in debates before with people who say that not only is America a secular country but that it wasn't even founded as a religious country.

This question kind of has two answers. The first is, yes, America was largely founded by a group of Christians that were persecuted for their specific branch of Christianity. Many of those values implemented in the law were Christian, because those who wrote them were Christian (though I would argue that most of those general concepts are present in many religions).

The other answer is that America was specifically founded as a nation against the idea of a national church. That is, "freedom from the government establishing a religion." Most people using this answer say that, while the Founders may have been Christian, they carefully made it certain that America would not give one religion specific advantages or privileges (including Christianity).

I agree more with the second group. Just because someone founds something does not make it an inherently religious institution. The law says the government will not impose religious beliefs on the people. End of story.

[jlay]

As far as I know, none of the fouding fathers (FF)were religious refugees. Yes, the early settlers came to the new land to escape religious persecution and seek a pure faith community. The Pilgrim movement certainly had an impact, but we should not confuse the Pilgrims to the FFs. The Pilgrims began their exodus to the US in 1620, about 90 years before any FF would be born.

The FFs were educated men of various Christian background. Some had differing views of relgion in government. None of them excluded the Christian religion from government, but all were against a state run religion as they were all too familiar with the abuses of the Church of England. It is pretty clear that the FFs sought to protect the CHRISTIAN faith when they forged the founding documents. Seperation of church and state is probably the most bastardized interpretation of the framers intent.

All that said, the USA is not a Christian nation. It may be, or may have been a nation of Christians. In fact, I would say that the Republic was best suited for people of Christian persuasion to prosper. In terms of a man made government, our Republic was suited to people of Christian faith and moral ethic, although it excludes no one. There is nothing in the founding documents requiring religious belief of any kind. Nothing that mandates or officiates the practice of religion. So, no question that the USA was not founded as a religious country. But that doesn't mean it wasn't founded to accomodate Christian worship. I'd say it does.
The founders were wise to do avoid legistlating any official religious stance. This doesn't mean that the Christian faith wasn't integral in the early US government. It was. And if not intended, it (Christianity) certainly was never restricted. Prayer and bible reading were common occurances in all areas of the legislation and the judiciary. And the government at all levels made special recognition of Christian practice.

To accomodate the variety of religions today, most prayer is a generic form. No particular diety is invoked. This is empty and dead prayer. Meaningless. To do away with it, means absolutley nothing. Some people want public prayer to invoke the name of Jesus, but this too me is akin to the prayer of the Pharisee. Prayer is not to prove some point. It is intimate. That doesn't mean corporate prayer cannot be intimate, it can. But praying just to soapbox the name of Jesus is a misuse of prayer, IMO.

[Stu]

Thanks, good insights.