VA agrees not to interfere with holiday prayers

[gilliam]

The nation’s agency for military veterans has agreed to stay out of religious refereeing for now, backing down from its attempt to tell a minister how to craft a prayer for a Memorial Day invocation.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Fred Hindrichs told federal District Judge Lynn Hughes that the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs will not demand that Memorial Day prayers at Houston National Cemetery Monday be as non-denominational as possible.
“(The agency) will let the prayer go on this Monday,” Hindrichs told Hughes.
The change of heart came one day after the judge granted the Rev. Scott Rainey a temporary restraining order against the agency after officials told the pastor to edit his prayer to make it as general and non-denominational as possible. Rainey’s prayer, submitted for review at the agency’s request included the recitation of the Lord’s Prayer and thanked Jesus Christ, the Christian savior, in closing.
“The … prayer/message is specific to one belief,” wrote Arleen Ocasio, director of the Houston National Cemetery.

Read more: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/7583145.html#ixzz1NbvQU4M3

 

[Dale_M]

I think Rabbi Roy Walter’s comments are to the point. The government shouldn’t dictate prayer. On the other hand, the prayer planned by Rev. Rainey does not reflect that some veterans are not Christian, and his prayer lacks sensitivity to the religious beliefs of their families.

It is unfortunate that this became a legal issue. I would hope that clergy would use a little commonsense and self-restraint. If they feel they can not give a non-denominational invocation, they probably shouldn’t agree to give the invocation.

 

[valentino]

I just don’t get it.Of course the speech is directed toward one belief.Most people in this country are christians so it only makes sense.If you live in Iran it would be directed toward Muslims.Tibet toward Buddha.What’s the big deal?

 

[donsnow]

I can see both sides of it.

However, an evangelical pastor brings Jesus Christ to all people, in the prayer. What the listeners do with that is up to them, not about the evangelist.

God loves all of you,
Don

 

[mary_bobo]

I think Rabbi Roy Walter’s comments are to the point. The government shouldn’t dictate prayer. On the other hand, the prayer planned by Rev. Rainey does not reflect that some veterans are not Christian, and his prayer lacks sensitivity to the religious beliefs of their families.

It is unfortunate that this became a legal issue. I would hope that clergy would use a little commonsense and self-restraint. If they feel they can not give a non-denominational invocation, they probably shouldn’t agree to give the invocation.

And how would an invocation meeting your strange requirements go? Who or what would you invoke?

 

[Dale_M]

And how would an invocation meeting your strange requirements go? Who or what would you invoke?

:ehh:

Have you never heard of non-denominational prayer? Its not as if it is rare or something I just created. Invoking “God” or “Father” seems pretty standard.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

:ehh:

Have you never heard of non-denominational prayer? Its not as if it is rare or something I just created. Invoking “God” or “Father” seems pretty standard.

A prayer can be crafted that doesn’t offend non-Christians, and even non-Evangelicals. At a company Christmas party, I was asked to say the blessing, whch I did. A few people told me afterwards that my prayer sounded “too Catholic.”

 

[antonivs]

A prayer can be crafted that doesn’t offend non-Christians, and even non-Evangelicals. At a company Christmas party, I was asked to say the blessing, whch I did. A few people told me afterwards that my prayer sounded “too Catholic.”

Was your non-denominational prayer in Latin?

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

Was your non-denominational prayer in Latin?

Oh dear. You think that might have been it?

 

[antonivs]

Oh dear. You think that might have been it?

Either that or the incense.

 

[meltzerboy]

I just don’t get it.Of course the speech is directed toward one belief.Most people in this country are christians so it only makes sense.If you live in Iran it would be directed toward Muslims.Tibet toward Buddha.What’s the big deal?

However, if you lived in Iran you would be living in a theocracy where non-Islamic religions are not tolerated (as far as I know). The United States is a democracy, in which the rights of the minority as well as those of the majority are protected. How would you feel if you were a non-Christian living in a predominantly Christian country and the prayer invoked Jesus Christ? Now, I realize there may also be atheists who would be offended by any prayer, as well as polytheists who would not wish a prayer that mentions only one G-d. I never said I had all the answers, but I think if a prayer must be said it should be inclusionary as much as possible.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

Either that or the incense.

Or the sprinkling with Holy Water. Sometimes I’m just not alert.

 

[antonivs]

However, if you lived in Iran you would be living in a theocracy where non-Islamic religions are not tolerated (as far as I know). The United States is a democracy, in which the rights of the minority as well as those of the majority are protected. How would you feel if you were a non-Christian living in a predominantly Christian country and the prayer invoked Jesus Christ? Now, I realize there may also be atheists who would be offended by any prayer, as well as polytheists who would not wish a prayer that mentions only one G-d. I never said I had all the answers, but I think if a prayer must be said it should be inclusionary as much as possible.

Actually Jews and Armenian Christians are tolerated (barely) in Iran and each has a token representative in the parliament, but Baha'is are persecuted because their religion was started after Islam.

I think it is just polite and good manners to make any prayer or invocation as general as possible when you are addressing a mixed group.

 

[valentino]

However, if you lived in Iran you would be living in a theocracy where non-Islamic religions are not tolerated (as far as I know). The United States is a democracy, in which the rights of the minority as well as those of the majority are protected. How would you feel if you were a non-Christian living in a predominantly Christian country and the prayer invoked Jesus Christ? Now, I realize there may also be atheists who would be offended by any prayer, as well as polytheists who would not wish a prayer that mentions only one G-d. I never said I had all the answers, but I think if a prayer must be said it should be inclusionary as much as possible.

That’s the problem in this country.60yrs.ago since most of the country was christian people were allow to pray christian prayers.Then a small minority of saay athiests go to school were prayers are said and they are able to outlaw prayers in school.How riduculous.the majority should be able to voice their prayers.i know your Jewish and you should be able to voice your prayers In school but no one’s right should be taken away only the majority should be able to voice their prayers more often.Its not right that minorities have the right to ban laws against the majority in any cases and its not right for minorities to impose rights when it affects whole majorities.(I’m talking homosexuals effecting rights of all here)

 

[donsnow]

Good morning, all,

I think we Christians, under the provisions of the First Amendment, had the right to pray in school and anywhere else we desired. The First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech and that includes prayer.
If people of other religions didn’t exercise their freedom of speech to pray, that’s on them.

I’ve read through this thread, and from my viewpoint I can see an inadvertent discussion of the shredding of America’s Christian heritage. There’s not anybody here, shredding our Christian heritage. But the posts do describe the shredding of our Christian heritage. I think that as a result of this shredding, which has continued since the sixties, all Americans will suffer, Christians and non-Christians alike.

Just my two cents’ worth.

God loves all of you,
Don

 

[meltzerboy]

That’s the problem in this country.60yrs.ago since most of the country was christian people were allow to pray christian prayers.Then a small minority of saay athiests go to school were prayers are said and they are able to outlaw prayers in school.How riduculous.the majority should be able to voice their prayers.i know your Jewish and you should be able to voice your prayers In school but no one’s right should be taken away only the majority should be able to voice their prayers more often.Its not right that minorities have the right to ban laws against the majority in any cases and its not right for minorities to impose rights when it affects whole majorities.(I’m talking homosexuals effecting rights of all here)

And people today are not allowed to pray Christian prayers? You mean, of course, in the public arena. Well, back in the “good old days” 60 years ago, lots of things were different. Christian African Americans in the South had virtually no civil rights. Antisemitism in the North and South was rampant regarding hiring practices in a variety of industries, including public schools even in New York City. There was discrimination against Catholics as well in certain sectors and not yet the appearance of a Catholic President. The disabled weren’t even on anyone’s radar, and while there were always women in the workforce, the high-paying jobs were off limits. And, since you mentioned homosexuals, they were totally ignored and despised, and the topic of same-sex attraction was not even discussed. Other forbidden topics included people suffering from mental illness and cancer. None of these groups were absent; they were just invisible to the majority. Do you really want to go back to those “golden years” of Christian America?

 

[Not_Sure_1]

Obviously, he means going back to the good old days when Christians could freely worship their religion publicly (because religion is a public, not a private thing), without having to accomodate others. He does not mean going back to the racist attitudes of that time.

It’s like when some person says I wish I could live in the days of Mozart to hear his music. That does not mean that he wants to back to the days of serfdom and the black plague, he just wants to enjoy the music as it was.

Or like a Brit who wants to relive the days of the British empire. They are just nationalists who want to relive a day when Britain was strong. They do not actually want to exploit natives

When speaking of the good old days, it is a hope to relive the good of those days, not the bad.

Besides the good old days is always a “pipe dream,” and as such is not apt to be attacked with statements such as yours.

Good Day sir.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

And people today are not allowed to pray Christian prayers? You mean, of course, in the public arena. Well, back in the “good old days” 60 years ago, lots of things were different. Christian African Americans in the South had virtually no civil rights. Antisemitism in the North and South was rampant regarding hiring practices in a variety of industries, including public schools even in New York City. There was discrimination against Catholics as well in certain sectors and not yet the appearance of a Catholic President. The disabled weren’t even on anyone’s radar, and while there were always women in the workforce, the high-paying jobs were off limits. And, since you mentioned homosexuals, they were totally ignored and despised, and the topic of same-sex attraction was not even discussed. Other forbidden topics included people suffering from mental illness and cancer. None of these groups were absent; they were just invisible to the majority. Do you really want to go back to those “golden years” of Christian America?

I would add, “what ‘Christian’ prayers’” are to be said in public?" Catholic, Protestant, Evangelical, Fundamentalist? There was a court case in Texas where a high school football team said prayers before a game. The Catholics and Mormons were excluded from taking part in providing those prayers, and they sued.

I sense that “Christian” prayers mean Evangelical or Fundamentalist prayers in the minds of too many Americans. Non-denominational prayers ought to be the standard in public unless one is at a specifically denominational event. I can say my Catholic prayers at Mass and at home!

 

[antonivs]

I would add, “what ‘Christian’ prayers’” are to be said in public?" Catholic, Protestant, Evangelical, Fundamentalist? There was a court case in Texas where a high school football team said prayers before a game. The Catholics and Mormons were excluded from taking part in providing those prayers, and they sued.

I sense that “Christian” prayers mean Evangelical or Fundamentalist prayers in the minds of too many Americans. Non-denominational prayers ought to be the standard in public unless one is at a specifically denominational event. I can say my Catholic prayers at Mass and at home!

My father was taught to say the Protestant version of the Lord's Prayer (for thine be the kingdom...) in Public School.

I personally don't want the Public Schools involved in my children's religious education.  The schools have enough trouble teaching 3 Rs without adding a fourth.

The religious upbringing of my children is the job of my family and my Church. Please keep the government out of it.

 

[meltzerboy]

Obviously, he means going back to the good old days when Christians could freely worship their religion publicly (because religion is a public, not a private thing), without having to accomodate others. He does not mean going back to the racist attitudes of that time.

It’s like when some person says I wish I could live in the days of Mozart to hear his music. That does not mean that he wants to back to the days of serfdom and the black plague, he just wants to enjoy the music as it was.

Or like a Brit who wants to relive the days of the British empire. They are just nationalists who want to relive a day when Britain was strong. They do not actually want to exploit natives

When speaking of the good old days, it is a hope to relive the good of those days, not the bad.

Besides the good old days is always a “pipe dream,” and as such is not apt to be attacked with statements such as yours.

Good Day sir.

In what sense do you consider religion or worship a public, not a private, thing? I always thought the opposite. Of course, one should have freedom of worship at one’s church, synagogue, mosque, temple, or home as one sees fit, without fear of intimidation. However, in a public, non-denominational setting, shouldn’t this freedom be extended to everyone by means of a prayer or invocation appropriate to all parties? Aren’t all our freedoms (freedom of speech and the press, as well) based on a mutually shared sense of responsibility? This notion of public responsibility and compromise is I believe an integral part of living together in a free society. If the minority’s rights are not protected, then the majority’s rights are also imperiled. And, on a religious level, didn’t Jesus have something to say about protecting people who are marginalized?