At Day of Prayer, politicians advocate for God in government

So I guess we can look forward to a Satanist giving prayers at the Capital? Hari Krishnas dancing through the corridors of power along with Animist worshipping the trees out front maybe? There are more than 4,200 religions, churches, denominations, religious bodies and faith groups around the world. Since the US Constitution forbids the establishment of a state religion any one of those God-Bothers can demand equal rights to have their religion represented in government. Do these idiots know what they are starting with this foolishness?

Let me suggest that prayer is a strange idea that is illogical given other premises of Christians. Why would a god change its careful plan, that includes all sorts of terrible things, because someone asks it to? Doesn’t that go against the idea that it has a plan and we shouldn’t question the plan? And, why would this deity choose to grant one person’s prayer and not another’s? Because one is more devout? I don’t notice the devout getting any special treatment in terms of who gets cancer and who gets killed in a traffic accident. I know it is irrational for me to expect logic from the illogical, but I can’t see we are doing any good by not pointing out these idiocies.

Also, let me point out the Jesus specifically recommends against public prayer. Why don’t “religious” people follow or even know what their idols say?

“Do these idiots know what they are starting with this foolishness?”

Ha! You mean the founding fathers when they guaranteed religious freedom in this country? The religious people who were gathered there were not there by government mandate. The National Day of Prayer doesn’t require people to pray, and contrary to the snide implication in the headline, the politicians who “advocate for God in government” aren’t engaged in anything that their predecessors didn’t do, including Washington, Lincoln and FDR.

I realize that today’s hip secular generation finds this all so strange and troubling, due to their public education no doubt, but if you did a little checking around you’d find that, as with most things, you’re in the minority on this one too.

“Today is the day that the Lord hath made, let us rejoice! And let us be reminded that one day every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.”

It’s kind of funny hearing Marcus Bachmann speak in public about bowing down on your knees and using your tongue…

Shame on any Democrats showing up for these things.

“Shame on any Democrats showing up for these things.”

Yeah, what’s Mark Ritchie doing there? Doesn’t he know that only republicans believe in God? He’s in trouble now.

Dennis I think you are basically WRONG. Circa 1813: President James Madison, signer of the Declaration of Independance, proclaimed a day of prayer. He later said such proclamations are not appropriate. “They seem to imply and certainly nourish the erroneous idea of a national religion.” In 1808, Thomas Jefferson, who wrote the constitution, also opposed declarations of national days of prayer by the Federal government. He wrote “Fasting and prayer are religious exercises; the enjoining them an act of discipline. Every religious society has a right to determine for itself the time for these exercises, and the objects proper for them, according to their own particular tenets; and right can never be safer than in their hands, where the Constitution has deposited it.” In other words the Founding Fathers wanted religion to be personal and between a person and thier God, not governmental and public.

The fact remains while you think this NDP is all Christian, according to our Constitution any religion must be allowed to participate. Citizens who want to honor God by killing chickens and drinking the blood have every right that Michelle Bachmann has to the National Day of Prayer.

I wouldn’t push the idea too hard or the Buddhists and Moslems are going to show up.

The National Day of Prayer WAS open to all religious denominations. In fact, one of the politicians who is Jewish, spoke a Jewish prayer while all of us sat and RESPECTFULLY listened. Not one of us (that I know) who attended the National Day of Prayer, or support the National Day of Prayer, tell you who don’t support it or want to come to it that you have to. So why all the hatred towards us? Why does it bother you so that we want to pray for our goverment? I don’t go and bad mouth all of the rallies that go on at the capitol that I do not support. At Rob C … we as Christians do not incinuate (sp?) that because we pray, that God is going to automatically do what we ask, how we ask it to be done. Rather, He hears our prayers and outpouring for repentance of this nation. And please enlighten me as to where Jesus advises against public prayer?

Pray all you want Sarah. Pray at church, pray at your house, pray on your front lawn for this great country! JUST DON’T DO IT IN MY STATE CAPITOL. that is all.

The State Capitol is as much yours to do any rallies you want, as it is mine to pray on the steps.

Poor pitiful Sarah and the rest of these sheeple. They are of the notion that praying is a public activity–that you must stand on the steps of the capitol and shout to the world “Look at me, I’m praying to my invisible Sky God! I’m better than all you heathens out there because I’m praying!” Sarah and the rest of the sheeple should read their Bible, which says prayer should be done in private. But then, how would they convince everyone they were better and holier than everyone else if they did it in private?

It appears that not all of us can have a mature conversation, and since it also appears that this has beckme a forum for attacking religion (which funny that you all claim to know so much about) I will leave this discussion and you all can go on with your remarks.

For Sarah:

“When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.”
-Matthew 6:5-6

The point Jesus is trying to make in this verse Is that our praying should not be done to impress men. Rather, it should be focused on God, the primary recipient of that prayer. This is not to say, however, that public prayer is wrong (James 5:14). He’s simply saying that prayer, whether public or private, should be focused on God, and should not be used in a proud or hypocritical way to make ourselves look falsely spiritual. Regardless of what you all say, it is not the intention of those who attended the event to make ourselves “appear” better than anyone else. Nor did anyone’s comments on here insinuate that idea.

I might add that the way in which most people pray – essentially begging – has been blasphemy in the Catholic church for centuries. When you pray you are supposed to pray that you better understand the will of god – not ask him for favors.

If any of them were serious about Jesus and the way He saw government, these pharisees would understand why you should “Render unto Caesar” and shut yourself away for prayer.

As Jesus said, “They have their reward”. Sadly, we all have to endure their hypocrisy in this world.

These people believe in freedom of religion only as long as it embraces their belief system.
—
“May we continue to stand boldly against tyranny,” she said. “We will work to restore our land to its foundations of religious freedom. We must never forget that these rights are given by God and that they are hated by unfaithful men.”
—
They *are* the people attacking freedom of religion. Many believe we should change this country into some version of theocracy.
—
“Any customer can have a car painted any color that he wants so long as it is black.”
Henry Ford
—
Some of these people are the beginnings of the Christian Taliban. They have forgotten that the Kingdom of God is not physical, or that God is not mentioned in the Constitution.

“God is not mentioned in the Constitution”

That depends on which Constitution you are talking about. The Minnesota State Consitution begins:

We, the people of the state of Minnesota, grateful to God for our civil and religious liberty, and desiring to perpetuate its blessings and secure the same to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution

And Section 16 of Article 1, the Bill of Rights:

The right of every man to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience shall never be infringed….

“Render unto Caesar”

Caesar is long dead.

Jimmy: Do you figure Judge Crabb, the federal judge in Wisconsin who found the National Day of Prayer unconstitutional, was using the Minnesota Constitution as her guide?

It is irrationally inconsistent to claim that our founding fathers wanted a government that included praying. Praying is not an important or valid part of some religions and certainly is not part of what atheists want to be doing. So, on what grounds would the government support a Day of Prayer? Why was it not placed in the US constitution or even mentioned by our all-knowing forefathers? Are you channeling that they really wanted a Day of Prayer even though they said the wanted separation between church and state?

I suggest the founding “fathers” wanted separation between church and state, because they added that to the US constitution. A national Day of Prayer, supported by the government is not defensible based on the constitution, rationality, of even the dogma of most religions. Because you want one does not make such want rational or even consistent.

@PBJ: I have no idea nor do I care.

@Rob C: The Constitution does not say anything about seperation. In fact, on 10/1789 George Washington wrote:

“Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, to requested me to “recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:”

Personally, I’m not very enthused about the federal government taking such steps, but I surely won’t claim the Founders didn’t include prayer in public discourse.

Figures. You bringing up the MN constitution is just a smokescreen. Classic troll.

John Adams, a founding father, signed the following treaty into law. John Adams wrote the words, and the senate unanimously approved the words without debate. Many of the founders were in the Senate at the unanimous signing.

So, what would the founders think? We know what they would think. Because they wrote it down and voted on it!

Article 11 reads:

Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—

Sarah,
Absolutely nothing wrong with public prayer. The point is, it shouldn’t be endorsed by government. That is what we fought a revolution against, and the founders did not want government promoting religion. I can bet there would be outrage if some Muslims showed up. At least by some. Please, pray to your hearts content on the capital steps. It can’t hurt. It should not be something promoted by the government though. Some day your religion might not be in the majority. You don’t want to set a precedent of the government promoting whatever religion is in the majority. that puts your religion at risk.

Also, Sara, you ask where Jesus condemns private prayer. As a Christian, I would reference you to a book called the Bible. It is very popular in your religion.

Matthew 6:5 – 7

5. And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites [are]: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

Jesus says you must definitely not pray as the hypocrites pray.

6 But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.
7 But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen [do]: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.

Here Jesus says when thou prayest, you must pray this way:
(1) enter into thy closet.
(2) shut the door.
(3) pray to thy Father which is in secret.
(4) use not vain repetitions.

(Prayer must be in private, not in front of other people.
Do not repeat things over and over again in prayer)

An attribute of a true Christian is: He only prays in private, never in public.

By the way, Sara, if you were praying without your head covered, you need to go quickly to the barber and get your head shaved!!!

1 Corinthians 11:5 – 15

5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with [her] head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.
6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.

Pray. Pray hard.

Then roll up your sleves and get back to work, slave!

“Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—”

It’s interesting that they thought it necessary to make such a declaration. Also interesting, it was later removed from the Treaty.

Right on, Alec! If Sarah feels the state capitol is “mine to pray on the steps” then she obviously isn’t taking Jesus’ words on the subject to heart. Nor is anyone who feels they have to make a big deal out of praying in public, and “love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men.” Okay, okay, we know you’re real pious and all, now please go home and do your religious posturing in private. Or does that take all the fun out of it?

Jimmy,
At the time, the world had been used to dealing with the British, Spanish, and Romans, who were intolerant of other REligions based on their own Christian fundamentalism.

the reason it was necessary to put in that clause was to assure other countries that America was different from other historical super powers. You see, in America religion was a private matter for individuals to decide. That is the American way and always has been from the founding. Not one single founder spoke up when Adams wrote that we are not a Christian nation. At the time of our founding, it was obvious, common sense, and taken for granted that we were founded on religious freedom, not just “Christian” values.

The treaty in question is The Treaty of Tripoli (1796-7). I find it interesting that John Adams wrote this clause given George Washington had to disabuse him of the notion that a majestic salutation was necessary, that a simple “Mr. President” is more than sufficient.

I also wonder at why some people attempt to divine the intentions of the Founding Fathers who have been dead for centuries in an attempt to justify their opinions that perhaps couldn’t withstand the harsh light of rational scrutiny. I know a lot of religious extremists engage in this sort of dishonesty, too.

Mention was made that Article 11 was removed from the Treaty. While not true, what happened is rather murky.

According to the Wiki article on the Treaty of Tripoli:
“The official treaty was in Arabic text, and a translated version by Consul-General Barlow was ratified by the United States on June 10, 1797. Article 11 of the treaty was said to have not been part of the original Arabic version of the treaty; in its place is a letter from the Dey of Algiers to the Pasha of Tripoli. However, it is the English text which was ratified by Congress.”

Additionally: “The Senate’s ratification was only the third recorded unanimous vote of 339 votes taken. The treaty was printed in the Philadelphia Gazette and two New York papers, with no evidence of any public dissent.”

Though Wikipedia is hardly authoritative, it does point in the direction of America “being founded on religious freedom, not just Christian value.”

I find it rather interesting how all of you who speak out so boldly against religion seem to know so many Bible verses and to which context us Christians should be using them.

“the reason it was necessary to put in that clause was to assure other countries that America was different from other historical super powers.”

Looks like the Treaties of Tripoli were made under duress, and included ransoms for Americans taken hostage. Regardless, it is obvious that the American government never has been a Christian theocracy; if it was we’d look a lot like the Holy Roman Catholic Church. Rather, the Constitution was based on Chrisitian principles of liberty.

And it’d be a waste of time to try to convince me that the Founders held Christians in the type of contempt I see in posts above.

Anonymous, maybe it is because certain people – i.e. Christianists – cherry-pick certain verses and use them out of context to push their self-serving agendas at the expense of everyone else? Hmmm.

Seems to me that the Founding Fathers had a healthy distrust of organized religion hence the emphasis on religious freedom rather than a certain set of values.

When politicians pray, god weeps.

What the heck is “Christian principles of liberty”?

I googled on “Christian principles of liberty,” and saw that this concept is a dead-end for me given that I am a rational humanist who is atheistic. This God business has no meaning for me, and you know what, I am just fine the way I am.

Very succintly put, Joey.

Jimmy, Jimmy Jimmy: “the Constitution was based on Christian principles of liberty.” No Jimmy, it was not.

There is no principle of individual liberty that comes from Christianity. That’s foolish. For 2000 years, Christianity supported kings, princes, popes… with “Kneel and kiss my ring…” theologies of power. 2000 years of serfdom and slavery and “divine rights of kings.” Learn something about history. Stop letting liars trick you.

Your assertion is simply false. Our principles of liberty came from the enlightenment which was the movement of reason. Our principles of liberty came from men who were “deists” and free masons, who believed in the individual and the rights of the individual. “Christians” do not believe in liberty, they believe in forcing others to submit to their delusions and fantasies. Look at how they treat their fellow citizens.

These “Christians” believe in what the founders called “the tyranny of the majority.” They believe that if they get 51% they can force people to submit to their will. That’s not liberty; it is an abuse of democracy to inflict the will of a majority upon an unwilling minority.

True people of faith don’t think like that and they don’t act like that. Look at how they bragged of “victory” for getting 52% of he votes on Prop.* in California. Where is their “Christian” concern for the liberty of the 48% who disagreed. Their concern is only for winning, because they have no faith. These are cults who believe in nothing but the power that lies hold over the ignorant.

I think many confuse Christianity with Catholicism. Christianity is defined IMO in the New Testament where government is seen as irrelevant and corrupt. It espouses a very laissez-faire approach to religion relying on discussion rather than force to achieve converts.

I agree that the Founders had no use for organized religion; keep in mind that many or most were freemasons so would have had a very Protestant outlook and preferred not to follow the Catholic or Anglican tradition.

I’d love to hear the response of Catholic’s to Jimmy’s assertion that they’re not really Christians. If I remember correctly, many Catholics have been taught that they are the only true Christians (something that Russian Orthodoxy and Greek Orthodoxy also lay claim too).

“I find it rather interesting how all of you who speak out so boldly against religion seem to know so many Bible verses and to which context us Christians should be using them.”

Yeah, that is interesting. We bother to read what Jesus supposedly “said”. Christians should try that. Also, why do you need men (and I do mean men) telling us what these word really say or what the “context” is? Isn’t god capable of getting his message across without help? Jesus literally says you should pray in a closet. That does not need “interpretation”, it is crystal clear what he means.

Rob C – By you taking whatever verse you please out if the Bible and using it “against”Christians, is like pretending you understand a book because you read one line of it.

Ha! Pretty funny that the ad at the bottom of the page was for “scientology.org”. Stick that in your prayer-pipe and smoke it!

“assertion that they’re not really Christians”

I didn’t make that assertion. Catholicism is a branch of Christianity. Over the last millenium it has also been a government. My point is that all Christian religions are based on the New Testament.

When I read the New Testament it is clear that Jesus didn’t impose his beliefs on people, but appealed to their own judgement. That’s liberty.

The ever “anonymous” says “Rob C – By you taking whatever verse you please out if the Bible and using it “against”Christians, is like pretending you understand a book because you read one line of it.”

I don’t believe that Rob C is using anything against Christians. He’s pointing out the very real tendency of FAUX Christians to cherry-pick the Biblical admonishments that only inconvenience others, and ignore the ones that point up their own bad behavior. If anything, Rob C makes a good point in defense of true Christianity.

Steve H- I would tend to agree with you about the fact that the tendency of faux Christians (as you called them) is to pick and choose which Bible verses to use. However my point in the comment that I made is that verses are being used out of the Bible without really understanding the entire context of which the book was written. In essence, you are doing the very thing you dispise most in us Christians. Also just remember that just like any other “group” of people, not everyone is the same.

Anonymous, does anyone really, really know the entire context in which the Bible was written? I merely point out the myriad constellation of churches, denominations, cults, etc. etc. etc.

Before you hit the rest of us on our heads with your Bible, you might want to go after those faux Christians first.

Just saying.

Anonymous — You know nothing about my upbringing or education. Trust me, I know a great deal about the Bible, its contextual allusions and the historical milieux in which it was written. You appear to be trying to make the point that it’s okay for “us Christians” to quote the Bible to make a point, but not for others. WRONG!

The only thing wrong with Christian principles is that most Christians have stopped believing in them.
Oh, they want the ten commandments to be displayed prominently and prayer in school and Bible verses on our building and the word “In God we trust” on our coins. But they have long since abandoned the actual teachings of Christ.
How many “Christians” are for kicking out some hard working illegal immigrant who is living in a shack trying to earn money to feed his poor family back home?
Many Christians say “tough luck” when people who are sick and can’t afford health care can’t afford to see a doctor.
How many Christians accuse the poor of just being welfare freeloaders…to lazy to work?

Christ said that the second greatest commandment was “Love your neighbor as yourself.”
And “For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’ They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ He will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least among you, you did not do for me.’”

So it really doesn’t do any good to call this country a Christian nation founded by Christian principles if we are not going to follow Christ’s teachings.

Christ expects a lot more from us than to to put some words on a coin or mention God’s name in the pledge of allegiance or put the ten commandments in a public place. Those are just actions to make many people think they are following Christ’s teachings.

Deeds not words. Actions not talk

And the Lord sayeth, “Go into thy neighbor’s house and taketh his gold and silver for the poor. If he complaineth, put him in prison.” So sayeth the Lord.

Whether one wants to admit it or not, Our nation was founded on a belief in God – starting with the first load who came here. The first document states one reason for the pilgrim’s journey to this country was to “advance Christianity” Had it not been for this journey there would have been no America. Immorality of their own countries also people to America.
I remember a time when we had the freedom to extol God in the public schools. This was before school shootings and imorality among our students – when schools were successful.

“Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord”

The reason you can’t find the vile woman who puked hysterically funny religious blatherings and paranoia publicly over the “socialist” corporate welfare recipient of at least $30,000 of the money of all Minnesota citizens of all and no religions, is because she isn’t a woman!

The “Christian” mental health clinic founder, TP Rep. Bachmann’s husband — has his own public prayer warrior, who is not a woman at all. She is a right-wing evangelist man disguised as a woman.

Perhaps Marcus Bachmann should have been at work instead of praying, then his property tax payment wouldn’t be LATE.

Bonnie, the first load who came here didn’t give or know a rat’s ass about your Gawd, and your holy warrior pilgrims wouldn’t show up on the opposite coast for at least another 13,ooo years.

“Had it not been for this journey there would have been no America.” What an ignorant thing to say. With all the people that came before, and after, from other countries, it was inevitable, even without the millions who lived here before 1492.

“I remember a time when we had the freedom to extol God in the public schools.” So, you’re retired then? On Monday, March 8, 1948, the United States Supreme Court held that the use of tax-supported property for religious instruction and close cooperation between school authorities and a religious council violated the Establishment clause. Because pupils were required to attend school and were released in part from this legal duty if they attended the religious classes, the Court found that the Champaign system was “beyond question a utilization of the tax-established and tax-supported public school system to aid religious groups and to spread the faith.”

Repeating a lie is no different than telling it.

Dear God,

Please protect me from your followers.