Published By: 1World Online
When the Supreme Court ruled that prayers can be said at town hall meetings they upheld the right for any consenting group to express their religious freedom. The act of praying is not one that should ever be censored or controlled by any government entity or any one individual.
It is, simply, a liberty given by the Constitution and one that can never be taken away.
It is sad that many organizations try to use the Constitution’s “Establishment Clause” to censor religion. The Establishment Clause is only for preventing any ONE religion from being proclaimed as the governing authority’s OFFICIAL religion.
That does not mean that a group of people attending a legislative event should be prohibited from saying a religious prayer that they all observe as being representative of their own personal, religious beliefs.
Where in one, local government meeting Christian prayers are being offered, in another meeting, Jewish or Muslim prayers may be observed.
Would it be fair to sit in a Muslim council meeting and object to all the Muslims attending for saying a prayer to Allah? Do you really think that would be allowed?
Should one Christian or Jewish person have all that power and control?
Exercising a religious faith, or a group of persons having the same religious faith, is not an official proclamation by state, although some people try to make it sound like that is what is being proposed.
The people’s right to gather and pray as they see fit is not a cause for negotiation.
People need to stop trying to censor another group’s religion with legal badgering because they find it offensive, or contradictory to their own.
Trying to reinterpret or amend the Constitution for their own selfish purpose is not only racist, but also a vain attempt to promote one’s own, social-progressive policies.
Joseph E. Rathjen is a freelance writer, columnist and an Opinion Writer at 1World Online – America’s Fastest Growing Research Engine.