PUBLIC PRAYER

The problem with public prayer is that most I’ve been around pay homage to organized religion By praying on behalf of all those attending, what about others in the audience who contend such supplications are falling on deaf ears and don’t share the same faith. How about the dreaded minority of non-believers? Their number is currently growing at a significant rate.

So what? Why should the majority worry about the minority? They can leave the room or stick fingers in their ears if they feel misrepresented. The reason is it’s rude and falsely presupposes everyone somehow believes the same.

I vehemently disagree with the right-leaning Supreme Court who recently ruled 5-4 that the mostly Christian prayers of the Greece, New York Town Council didn’t violate the constitutional separation of church and state. It appears to me the decision left open the possibility of significantly eroding the intent of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment stating the government “shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion.” Promoting Christian prayer in a public setting is a step in the direction of doing exactly that.

I instead agree with the Supreme Court ruling in Engle v. Vitale 370 U. S. 421 (1962). The State Board of Regents in New York had composed what they believed to be a nondenominational prayer they suggested, but didn’t mandate, be recited by all students at the start of each school day. It stated, “Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessing upon us, our parents, our teachers and our Country.”

The Court ruled the prayer was unconstitutional. Justice Black explained government instituted prayer “…was one of the reasons which caused our early colonists to leave England and seek religious freedom in America.” He made it clear in his opinion it was immaterial that no particular religion was targeted by the prayer. He noted the prayer targeted an entire group of religions that believe in an “Almighty God” and that was just as religious as would have been the case if only a specific God had been designated.

I have no problem at all when prayer takes place in a private setting such a believer’s home under circumstances where invited guests might reasonably anticipate the host might offer thanks and a blessing on the food being served. It would be nice if they, at least, considered my rejection of the power of praying; that they risk not being poisoned and any thanks go directly to the preparer of the meal.

I’d never make an issue out of it, but it somewhat bothers me when a devout Christian makes an effort to say a silent prayer of blessing and thanksgiving with bowed head and closed eyes when sharing a meal with others of unknown faith at a public establishment like a restaurant. It seems kind of egotistical to me. I wonder why such a prayer couldn’t just as well take place somewhere else. How about in private before entering the restaurant? Surely, the timing isn’t all that critical and the food would be equally blessed and thanked for.

Whether legal or not, Christian oriented prayer is promoted to open and close all kinds of public gatherings from the locker rooms of school athletic teams to the halls of all levels of local government. It’s been toned down a bit so as not to appear to favor one denomination over another, but there’s seldom a doubt of it being addressed to the Christian God.

Such prayers express submissive deference while invoking God’s inspiration to make sure things go smoothly. So, what’s so wrong with that? It assumes all those present agree with that religious hypothesis, which is often not the case. It tends to impose tacit acceptance.

Organizers of all situations involving strictly public settings should be sensitive to the likelihood that both believers of differing religious persuasions and non-believers may be in attendance.

Raymond A. Hult
agnosticliberal.com

Note: This post is in response to a couple of member suggestions that I post more frequently to agnostic.com if I'm going to openly advertise my above blog site