or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

Why would anyone want to say a prayer before a football game? Pray for what? A fair referee? Good weather? How absolutely trivial. Freedom from injured players? Better. The safety of the troops in Iraq? An end to violence? Much more worthwhile but I presume you're already doing that in church.

What [b]do[/b] you want to pray for? Sample prayer, please, so that I can see whether I'd be upset.

We don't get prayers before football games in the UK - nominally another Christian country - because I don't think more than a handful would consider that God has really got anything to do with it. I would suspect that you'll not hear prayers before football in many - if any - other countries either. Certainly not Italy, France or Spain as I've been to matches there and not Brazil or Portugal as I've watched live televised matches. So, the Catholics are quite happy to "Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar?s, and unto God the things that are God?s." Is God a footie fan? I would also reckon that you won't hear prayers in any Isalmic countries as their prayers are much more personal - but, here, I'm guessing.

I suppose that if you believe that the sheer numbers of people - believers or not - who have no option but to listen in some way amplifies the effectiveness of your prayers then I can see your reasoning for wanting to do it - but it's a pretty strange god that you believe in under those circumstances.

Why do you all have this idea that God - if suitably coerced - will interfere in the minutiae of your lives? He's certainly demonstrated how notice He took of the prayers prior to Hurricane Katrina.

Do you [b]really[/b] think that God answers your prayers and actually [b]does[/b] physically intervene in your life? Again, I'd be interested in any examples.

just asking.

Neil :)

Up front I will say I don't care if you wanna pray in front of a football game.

And I am a Christian. We pray when we see an ambulance or a police car with sirens on. We pray before meals. We pray when whenever.

But the distinction I make is this. When its a private organization - like a pro team or a non-school team, pray away - you have the right to make that call.

When its a government funded team, or event, well it isn't right that the government single out one religion for inclusion to the exclusion of the rest. Because the government is by the people - all of the people, not the majority of the people.

And Merry Christmas, thats just fine its a greeting, but a prayer is more intimate and can exclude. Heck some Christian denominations I have been exposed to refuse to use the word Lord in prayer(they also expunge King from the hymnal).

No one is saying, that you can't have a private quiet time to do whatever you want to do. If you want to make a personal silent prayer to the god of your choice, no one can or should stop you. But if I were Jewish or Budhhist or whatever, I'd feel uncomfortable if the price of participation on a school team, which my family's tax dollars paid for, was to be asked to pray to someone else's god.

Sure, I wouldn't sue. I would stand silently and respectfully, as I have done when I attended a synagogue for a funeral.

But why do we feel the need to presume we have the right to ignore the feelings of others, just because we are the majority. Thats not what I take out of the Golden rule, which Jesus said was the highest rule.

James

According to snopes.com, that is not a Paul Harvey rant.

Second, the government sponsored event of a football game is bound by the full context of the 1st amendment - it shall neither promote nor discourage any religion.

Clearly, it is promoting (a) religion if the government sponsors a prayer. However, any fan may pray on their own. I certainly support that.

In fact, if someone starts praying aloud in the stands, and others join in, I see no legal issue. (as long as the fan isn't employed by the government)

And I'll take issue with a few points:

"If I went to a football game in Jerusalem, I would expect to hear a Jewish prayer.

If I went to a soccer game in Baghdad, I would expect to hear a Muslim prayer.

If I went to a ping pong match in China, I would expect to hear someone pray to Buddha."

Why would one "expect" to hear them? Should all governments be aligned with a particular religion? And just how many Chinese are Buddhists? I thought most were into Taoism (if allowed anything).

""But what about the atheists?" is another argument.

What about them? Nobody is asking them to be baptized. We're not going to pass the collection plate. Just humor us for 30 seconds. If that's asking too much, bring a Walkman or a pair of ear plugs. Go to the bathroom. Visit the concession stand. Call your lawyer!"

That's just the point. No person, whether in the minority or majority, should feel uncomfortable in a government sponsored activity because of religion. "Just humour us, pray on your own." And no person should have to physically leave, or otherwise "tune-out" during your prayers.

"Unfortunately, one or two will make that call."

Fortuneately, some people still feel it necessary to uphold the constitution. These people protect the Life, Liberty, and Happiness for us all.

"Christians are just sick and tired of turning the other cheek..."

Then that doesn't sound good for the Christians. They aren't following the teachings!

"Our Bible tells us to pray without ceasing."

So don't cease. Pray on your own without having to get the government involved. No one is stopping you but yourselves.

"Now a handful of people and their lawyers are telling us to cease praying. "

That's not true - they are telling the government to stop sponsoring it. There is a big difference, and you are being disingenuous to suggest otherwise.

In Jerusalem, I think the prayer is said before a suicide attack, not a football game.

In Baghdad I'd expect to here bombs. Muslims have compulsory prayers anyway. 3 times a day I think.

And In China You pray what and when the guv tell you to pray.

The legality doesn't interst me at all. Not one iota. I merely brought up the "Constitution" angle as from a distant vantage point such as mine, it looks like a religious war.

OK. Gloves off.

What does interest me is that you, Christians, feel that when a large number of people are gathered together for a purpose [b]totally[/b] separate from religion, you feel that you have the right to force your religion upon all of them without even assessing if you're in the majority! That's what it is, you know, forcing them - Muslims, atheists, Buddhists, Hindu, Catholics, even, and all less comitted Christians - to pause in their anticipation of the game, their conversations, drinking their cola and eating their hotdogs - damnit, their lives - to allow you to indulge yourselves for a couple of minutes in something [b]totally[/b], in their eyes and those of any impartial observer, irrelevant to the game.

I seek an understanding as to what you believe gives you the right? Not in "Constitutional" terms but just in the small day-to-day morality of common existence. In my opininion, nothing does, that's what.

You can pray [b]any[/b] and [b]every[/b] other time. Why does your religion require this open display of piety? I would conjecture that it's simply to put the thumb firmly and publicly on the neck of anyone who is not of your creed and cement your self-perceived position as the State Religion.

Why anything extraneous to the sport? We are all gathered there to watch a football match. Why can't we just get there, anticipate the game, watch the game and then go and have a post-mortem on the game in the pub?

Without a vote, we can never be sure that we have the Tyranny of the Majority or even the Minority. The one - and the only thing - that we can guarentee is that we're all there for the game.

Why do we need religious or, for that matter, patriotic displays? I cannot see that either really serve any purpose. As I said in my post, we don't have the National Anthem before British League matches and I don't feel that we're the worse for it. Internationals, we play the oppositions anthem so we have to play our own (bloody dirge) or that would just be too silly.

Neil :)

escalating us up to American State Church. I don't think anyone else has done that for us. :) Just kidding.

I think I said that it would be fine if anyone doesn't want to participate in the silence before a game. So, if other religions don't want to then don't. I think that's ok isn't it?

I just don't know how to make it any plainer that if someone doesn't want to participate in a moment of silence then don't. I also don't know how to make it any plainer that if someone doesn't want to accept my spiritual beliefs or anyone else's then don't. But why, or how, can it "bother" someone if a lot or a majority, or even a minority wants to pause for a few minutes before whatever they do to have a prayer?

Also, for your statement about not having a National Anthem before your matches: Well, ok. If that's what you guys want, then, cool. But I still don't understand why it bothers some folks because we do.

BTW, I really like the way you thank God, and God bless us, as well as a lot of other phrases you use that definitely refers to God or diety. I just think it's funny (a good funny) that you are an atheist but you still use a lot of these phrases. :) (This is with respect not disrepect) Thanks,

I will never understand this argument. I have never kept anyone from praying. Every Sunday when I am reading my newspaper at Panera Bread, a youth group comes in and sits near me. They pray. They talk about the bible. They do all those christian-y types of things. Never have I (nor management at Panera Bread) tried to take away their public right to do this. I have stated before that if any child wants to pray at school, there is plenty of time during recess or lunch where the child can pray. If a teacher tells any child that he CANNOT pray on his time, I would stand by the childs side and fight for his right. Professional football players seem to pray at all times during the game. You will always see players in a "prayer circle" when the game ends. Apparantly, the Steelers and the Seahawks prayed more convincingly this past weekend then the Broncos and the Panthers (which is suprising in the Panthers case since they are in the bible belt). If Mike Illitch (owner of my beloved Detroit Red Wings) decides he wants Joe Louis Arena to pray before games, then that would be his right. It is his team, and as owner of the team he could set aside that time. So far, for some reason that business decision hasnt occurred to him yet. (By the way JD, if you do have a close relationship with the big fella, cant you do something about the Lions?)

The only thing I can gather from this whole thing, is that Christians really do want a state sponsored Christian religion. They want it known before each and every day at school or at sporting events that the USA is a Christian government. Why else create such a fuss? Sure we mean atheists are asking for strictly science to be taught in science classes in lieu of supernatural. Is that too much to ask?

As far as Christians founding this country, that is true. But are you sure that your version of Christianity today would be up to snuff compared to theirs? Would William Bradford even call you a Christian? Well, thankfully....we've evolved.

you said that. I dont understand this NEED for a big group prayer. Let the games begin I say. I dont NEED a silent time.

Also, I have the unique ability to talk on my cell phone, eat a cheeseburger, and drive at the same time. Im sure all of you could get yourself a good prayer in on the way to the game.

Neil throws the "Thank God" in for a sarcastic twist, nothing more, and you can bet that if it is in one of Neils posts, he INTENDED it to be there.

I would answer his question myself, but I am right now feeling too damn lazy to look up what "plebicite" means! :D

Cheers!

porn for all, but not prayer?

In the Stern discussion you were real big on freedom of speech, but not if that speech is to say a prayer?

I am confused at the inconsistancy?

They HAVE rulled that you CAN have the 10 commandments, as long as you include other historical documents of a similar nature.

The case your refering to was because the judge had no authority to have this manufactured and installed in the first place. THAT is why it came back out. The judge took an activist stand on this, much like the opposition takes and activist stand against it. bottom line, a judge can not have statues created at tax payers expense and have them installed. There ARE judges that DO have the commandments hanging in their court rooms though.

I am sure we would make much more headway with discussions like this in a face to face over a beer or three. :D

Neither you nor any other Christian, nor any adherent of any faith, has ever had a problem with the government for peacefully practicing your religion.

Your problems with the Constitution occur only when you use public resources to subsidize your faith. God doesn't exist. If that sentence offends you, pull your head out.

Seriously, sarcasm is verbal and intended to hurt. I do sarcasm but rarely here [b]and[/b] I'll flag it so you know.

This is merely a combination of cultural conditioning and, possibly, just a little irony...

Now you all have a nice day and, by the way, "plebiscite" is the correct spelling of [b]my[/b] typo and means a vote.

Bummer. Must really get a spell-checker.

Absolutely it is meant to be raucous at football games, as well as other sports. However, please reread my statement (quoted below). I specifically said it would be during a time of silence and that it wouldn't give them the right to be raucous --not the whole game. Again, if someone wanted to be disruptive during a moment of silence for those who want to pray then they can. However, I feel that would just show how selfish and "malicious" they could be. I wouldn't say anything to them but (for whatever it's worth) I would have absolutely no repect for them. And, yes, I know it wouldn't matter to someone like that but it matters to me.

"It is very that the majority would be silent during this time but if they don't want to they don't have to. However, I don't think that would give them the right to maliciously try to be raucous ."

I am not saying that all sporting events should be preceded with a prayer. I am saying that if a group of people want to they aught to have the right to do so. I would never force my belief on anyone and I don?t think that was the intent.

Your example is not on point at all. I am not saying that the Christians should march down and have a pre game prayer before the Manchester United take the field. That would be ridiculous. There is a time and place for everything and I have been to high school games that begin with a prayer. It is a tradition of some communities just like the singing of the national anthem.

I have read all of the above posts, and this is my conclussion...

I wear my countries flag on my shoulder to protect and uphold the constitution. That means that I will lay down my life to make sure that EVERYONE regardless of their opinion or belief may practice it freely. If you don't like me, or our government, that is for you to decide, and it is your right. However disrespectful of me, you might be, I will still try to respect you and your beliefs, and as long as you are not infringing on someone else's rights, I will not have any problem with your excercise of those rights.

That said, let me comment to those who are not Americans. We go to great lengths to try and be non-offensive while in other nations. That means that if you are in a country/community where the majority of the population is muslim, it would be in poor taste to eat or drink openly in public during daylight hours while those around you are observing their holy period of Ramadan. I don't have to agree with the views of the community or the culture that makes that community what it is. I should, however, be required to be respectful, after all, it is THEIR community.

As for schools and religion in America, I don't think that a state-run school should invoke any single religion on its students, but if the community determines that it wants its schools to do this or that, the community (who pays the taxes and funds it) can do something about it. The town were I live voted down ALL elections where the schools would have gotten more funding, simply because the school board was worried someone would sue them at Christmas time, so they took down a nativity scene.

I know that sounds harsh, but that is the right of the community. I do not agree with the whole of Christmas, since I feel it is a pagan holiday, along with Easter. Yes, I am Christian, but I celebrate both of these each week when I commune with my Lord. I don't need to have a special day only once a year to do this, since I do so each week. But even though I don't agree with a holiday, I WILL NOT Infringe on someone else if they are bent on publicly displaying it. If you don't agree with the community, be respectful, and if you can't do that, MOVE!

If you have a problem with a person's public display of their spirituality, are there any other "public displays" that you have a problem with? If not, why single-out spirituality?

Find someone displaying something in public (sexual orientation, affection, protests, smoking, drinking, a fat gut, etc.), and I'll find another who's offended by it.

However, my emphasis is on a different word that you used.

"It is very that the majority would be silent during this time but if they don't want to they don't have to. However, I don't think that would give them the right to maliciously try to be raucous ."

I respect your appreciation, but the fact that these football fans we're discussing are in a football stadium, during a football game, and not in a church or at a religious celebration, means that they have the to be raucous.

what is the direct quote or law?

Subsidizing the establishment is paying for buildings and such, not activities such as a Christmas tree or nativity scene or even the "faith based inititives" that have been found to be constitutional.

How do you explain that? Should be "easy" again for you to explain how we currently DO have the money going to these charities that are run by religious organizations AND has not been stopped by the courts.

Your serve, but your down a point. :D

was if his "facts" are indeed fact then I asked him to prove that Christ did not die and was raised from the dead. Sure we haven't seen anything like that happen and I've been in the medical field for almost 30 years. But that does not prove that it has never happened. I can't see or touch air but I sure believe that's what keeps me alive. (yeah, I know that's an old one but hey...)
I asked Mr. Absolutely to prove his "facts" are actually facts as well. He believes they are but can you actually prove it scientifically?

me to stop trying to present you with an arguement that wasn't ever going to win you over and just look where you are at and where you are going.

From the place you are at, there is no point discussing religion as a valid point, but only if there is a legal right or not to do "this" "there".

Opinions of what SHOULD and SHOULDN'T be are pointless and requiring you to prove there is no god is just as much of a waste of time as you telling me to prove there IS a god. Not going to happen either way. Save ourselves a lot of time on that score.

See you in court! :D

Picture Mr. Nicholson breaking through a door with an axe proclaiming "Here's Jelli!" :)
Absolutely and I have been around on the whole Christianity thing many times. I do not discredit his intellect, but at the end of the day one can only know 'so much'.
As the old proverb goes "Mans greatest knowledge is the knowledge that we know nothing". I know Absolutely is going to disagree with that too though! :)

I didn?t write anything about freedom of speech. I am writing about the difference in what one can do and what should do. There is a difference. I agree with you that freedom of speech as defined by the constitution gives you the right to say and write what you want to regardless of its content or message. That does not mean that I believe that right makes offensive remarks that demean one based upon their spiritual beliefs is right.
Our impasse is that your personal beliefs cause you to feel as if what you say is most important and the affect of what you say is not important at all.
I am not condemning you for voicing your opposition to my or any other religion.
The quotes you included were not mine.

there is a law, doesn't make it constitutional nor right. Barring alcohol sales is anti-capitalism and anti-American. You are prohibiting business from it's right to make money.

Jesus did turn water into wine.....not a refreshing pepsi. At least according to the myth.

The government must pass a law to spend money... It's called an appropriations bill when being debating...

The courts have decided that money can be spent in certain circumstances. So long as HS football game prayer meets the same court determined criteria, everyone should stop complaining.

But the courts decided that you can't force everyone at the game to listen to a broadcast prayer. (Note, I didn't say it was a few people and their lawyers that did this.) Therefore, those who feel opposite should stop complaining.

I think we would all be much better for it if we did not bother with so much subtlety, and only resorted to the law when a true act of coercion occurred. And then, respond with greater authority than the courts do now.

i have no problem with you praying every day all day, if you choose. Just don't expect me to pay your bills if you pray instead of earning a living!