2009.02.28
Discuss Saturday's commentary and letters
Freedom from government religion
Bob Crawford
Crawford, of Roanoke, is an artist and a writer.
The government prayer issue continues to occupy the General Assembly's time, diverting that body from the important state matters needing its attention, ("Religious breakaway," Feb. 24 front page). By now, legislators, if not the general public, should realize that prayer conducted under governmental auspices is government prayer or, as the courts call it, government speech.
Read more.
Read Saturday's letters to the editor.
RSS feed 
This is an outstanding article, Mr. Crawford, and hits the salient points in why any government sponsored prayer is problematic. There is only one correction that I feel I should point out.
You wrote:
"Another approach of government prayer advocates is based upon an assumption that the practice could be continued by inviting religious representatives from a rotating list inclusive of religions. Perhaps the advocates imagine a short list would be lifted from some authoritative broad-brush overview of religions.
"But when we picture the rotation, for example, Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Islamic, Buddhist (though Buddhists are divided on accepting the "religion" label), and perhaps a few others for the initial list, what becomes apparent is that this outcome is not the intent of advocates of government prayer."
In Virginia, it was made clear that if a town council doesn't want to invite representatives of certain religions, they don't have to. I refer to the case of Cyndi Simpson, a Wiccan priest who requested to be added to the Chesterfield County meetings' prayer rotation. She was flatly rejected, because the council members didn't like her religion (that's not conjecture on my part; they as much as said so themselves), and openly mocked her beliefs.
For the record, I believe the Wiccan religion is just as silly as any of the others, but one would think this was a slam-dunk case of a First Amendment violation, with the local government showing a preference of religious beliefs.
In fact, Cyndi won when she sued (after practically begging the town council to reconsider), because the trial judge rejected the County's argument that, since the prayers aren't required by law and are voluntary, they can invite whomever they want to give the prayers. Unfortunately, the County immediately appealed, and the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the ruling. They said that, because the County had invited a number of religious leaders (though only from the Judo-Christian faith), they'd "met the constitutional requirement by not advancing any one given faith."
So town councils, at least in Virginia, can legally deny any religious faith due representation as long as they allow a few, however narrowly defined. Ms. Simpson appealed to the US Supreme Court, but they refused to hear the case without giving any reason.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/wicchest.htm
So, once again the state of Virginia affirms that the majority can deny rights they find inconvenient (or just icky) to the minority.
Comment by Rob Miles — February 28, 2009 @ 7:55 pm
Mr. Crawford had an articulate and well reasoned commentary and I feel that he has 'hit the nail right on the head'. All need to accept that the place for religion is in church, synagogue, mosque, etc. All need to realize that the way we experience your "faith" is in your words and actions every minute of every day. People need to understand that any out loud public prayer at any function casts a religious shadow and if it is a government function it is not the place for religion, yours, mine, or theirs. While it is a ritual that may make some people uncomfortable, some people comforted and some people bemused, it is in fact just a ritual. A public prayer outside of a religious or ceremonial function is something, but it is not something necessary.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 28, 2009 @ 8:10 pm