Atheists target city prayer
By Mike Wiggins, The Daily Sentinel
Originally published 11:38 a.m., May 21, 2008
Updated 11:43 a.m., May 21, 2008
- Email this
- Print this
- Comments
- Change text size
- Subscribe to print edition
- iPod friendly
GRAND JUNCTION — Each Monday they meet, after they recite the Pledge of Allegiance but before they read a proclamation or recognition, Grand Junction City Council members take a moment to pray, reflect or simply stand quietly.
The pause comes during an invocation usually given by the leader of a local church. Pastors, presidents of congregations and other religious figures ask higher powers to give the council guidance and wisdom. Some seek peace or a blessing over the city.
But a local atheist group wants to put an end to the practice that has been a part of the city's council meetings for years.
Several members of the Western Colorado Atheists have asked the council to eliminate the invocation, arguing the prayers violate the First Amendment and make residents who don't subscribe to any religious belief feel unwelcome.
"We do feel excluded and marginalized. We wonder who else out there is feeling excluded and marginalized," said Anne Landman, one of 13 members of Western Colorado Atheists who wrote a letter to the council.
In a written response, City Attorney John Shaver told the group he and City Manager Laurie Kadrich are willing to meet with members to discuss their concerns in greater detail. A meeting date has not been set.
For complete Daily Sentinel story, click here.
Post your comment
Registration is required. Click here to create your free user account, or login below.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
May 21, 2008
11:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
doesn't seem like an unreasonable request.
why are there prayers being said at the beginning of a council meeting in the first place?
May 21, 2008
12:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
Michael writes:
"...arguing the prayers violate the First Amendment and make residents who don't subscribe to any religious belief feel unwelcome." - article
So these atheists somehow believe that Congress made a law that mandates the Grand Junction City Council to do this??? That is what the 1st Amendment is all about - the US Congress making laws and recognizing one religion over another. So on top of being atheists they are also stupid and ignorant atheists?
As for feeling unwelcome......there is no other country on this earth that makes so many feel so welcome and bends over backward to do so. They have no clue and they (as am I) are not entitled to feeling welcome 24/7 at every thing I do or participate in. They truly need to grow up and learn a little tolerance of their own. No one is making them pray to or worship any God or god(s). Shut up and wait until it is over.
May 21, 2008
12:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
bubbles writes:
Why not??????
May 21, 2008
12:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
steel writes:
When I don't feel welcome somewhere, I just leave.
May 21, 2008
12:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
Steph writes:
The prayers are just as useless as having witnesses swear on the Bible. They can talk all they want but if it's in their best interest to lie, they will. Definitely time to remove God out of the entire equation.
May 21, 2008
12:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
michael, it's pretty clear you don't quite grasp what is going on.
no, congress did not pass a law sayign they had to say the prayers.. that isn't hte point however.
it is that they, as elected officials, OFFICIALLY bring in ministers for prayers.
again, ELECTED OFFICIALS OF GOVERNMENT are bringing in religious leaders for prayers. the two should have nothing to do with each other as indicated in our constitution.
they have a very valid point. and are far from stupid or ignorant.
in fact, judging by your comments i'd say you are the one ignorant to the laws. of course, you are probably offended by these people wanting to be free from religion in government and that explains your decision.
"They have no clue and they (as am I) are not entitled to feeling welcome 24/7 at every thing I do or participate in. "
true in a lot of cases. but not in your representative goverment.
"They truly need to grow up and learn a little tolerance of their own. No one is making them pray to or worship any God or god(s)."
actually you need to learn tolerance (and the law). They are making it public business to conduct prayers. and as members of the public they have a right to not have that be.
a moment of silence and reflection is fine as it doesn't include or exclude anyone. but an invocation is a violation of their rights -- like it or not, bud.
trust me, their argument is much more logical than anything you put forth -- and i'm far from an athiest.
May 21, 2008
12:26 p.m.
Suggest removal
Steph writes:
After the past 7.5 years, it's crystal clear how dangerous it is to mix religion with politics. If they have to believe in a magic sky fairy, that's fine but don't force it down anyone's throat. IF the prayer makes the prayer feel better, do it on your own time.
May 21, 2008
12:26 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
michael, why do you believe these prayers at a public meeting should be allowed?
May 21, 2008
12:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
FortCollins22 writes:
Since when is seeking peace and blessing over the city such a bad thing?
How about giving an Atheist representative or all religious representatives a chance to do this. Why not include everyone? I say, give the Atheists a chance to be heard and bless the council in their own way for guidance in the community!
May 21, 2008
12:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
Steph writes:
I bet these people would feel differently if a Muslim or Buddhist "priest" was brought in to lead a prayer. Typical Christian hypocrisy.
May 21, 2008
12:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
Michael writes:
TheDenverB - If all that you say is true and right and lawful, why does the US Congress have a chaplain and why do they open each session of Congress with a PRAYER????? Why do ALL branches of the US Armed Forces each have a chaplain and each conducts prayer??? Why does the Presdient of the United States (not just Geo Bush) hold PRAYER breakfasts at the Whitehouse on a regular basis??? BTW - ALL of what I mentioned includes prayer and ministers from ALL denominations.
It is people like you that are twisted and warped and have been fed a lie for the last 66 or so years that there is to be NO religion or mention of God in the public arena or at all associated with any of our government agencies. That is the biggest load of crap ever fed to the American people by the ACLU. For almost 190 years prayer and religion and God were part of our goverment, our public schools, and our daily lives. I, and those like me (85%+ of Americans) are not going to cave on this to people like you or these idiots in Grand Junction. I will bet you any amount that this invocation stays and the atheists lose. Thank GOD!!!!
May 21, 2008
12:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
MarineGrunt writes:
Too easy... Next!
May 21, 2008
12:36 p.m.
Steph writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
May 21, 2008
12:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
snowsurfer writes:
Too many morons in the Grand Valley in general. It must be something in the water or some kind of weird vibe radiating out from Clifton.
May 21, 2008
12:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
"If all that you say is true and right and lawful, why does the US Congress have a chaplain and why do they open each session of Congress with a PRAYER????? Why do ALL branches of the US Armed Forces each have a chaplain and each conducts prayer??? Why does the Presdient of the United States (not just Geo Bush) hold PRAYER breakfasts at the Whitehouse on a regular basis??? BTW - ALL of what I mentioned includes prayer and ministers from ALL denominations."
it's not a question of why. it's a question of why it was allowed, and it was allowed -- simply -- because a majority of folks in this country are religous (christian).
but does that make it right? no. it doesn't. and i feel those thigns should be taken off our gov't payroll. that's clearn in our constitution....
AND I'M THE WARPED ONE?? please. i'm sure there's jews and muslims in this country that are equally as religious who feel the same way as i do.
"or almost 190 years prayer and religion and God were part of our goverment, our public schools, and our daily lives. I, and those like me (85%+ of Americans) are not going to cave on this to people like you or these idiots in Grand Junction. I will bet you any amount that this invocation stays and the atheists lose. Thank GOD!!!!"
see, there you go proving your true colors. again, none of that is right or acceptable by our laws. it was ismply tolerated. well, now, it is becoming less and less tolerated as people like you become less and less the majority.
what do you truly lose if they do remove this invocation? does it somehow remove god from your life? can you not pray on your own time, or during a neutral moment of silence?
of course, all logic is out the window with you - as it's clear you are scared that by removing god from our public instituions will somehow damn this country and you'd rather continue pushing your GOD on other people.
again, i'm no athiest. in fact i don't really agree with a lot of the condoscention many of them perpetuate... however, i do agree with logic and our laws. And i would also like to be free from other's religious views. i have mine, you have yours. lets keep it that way and lets keep it out of our government.
"will bet you any amount that this invocation stays and the atheists lose."
okay. how does a six pack of beer sound. you can buy it for me on the first sunday we allow sales. or does that also offend you?
May 21, 2008
12:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
steel writes:
Steph, was your mom spooked by a Christian when she was pregnant with you? Lighten up.
May 21, 2008
12:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
"Since when is seeking peace and blessing over the city such a bad thing?"
it's not. but people should do that on their own time, or at a religious service. not at city council meetings.
"How about giving an Atheist representative or all religious representatives a chance to do this."
well, that would be fair. but why not eliminate it all and let our elected officials get on with the business we would like them to take care of (and often ineficiently as it is)
"Why not include everyone? I say, give the Atheists a chance to be heard and bless the council in their own way for guidance in the community!"
well, that would require athiests believing in blessing others... again, leave it at a moment of silence for EVERYONE to express their own thoughts to themsleves -- which is exactly how it should be unless you go out seeking religion.
May 21, 2008
12:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
"
If these Godless whinning minority don't like it the can leave the council meeting and come back after the the moment of "silence", reflection and prayer."
why? that implies they need to accomodate for people who believe in religion -- which means people who believe in religion are more important than them in the public eye.
your logic (as usual) is horrible, chase.
but again, i don't expect much from a person who spends as mcuh time on a site he constantly complains is full of crap. get a life, bud.
May 21, 2008
12:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
Katmom writes:
The invocation SHOULD stay. TYhe Constitution says that we can't tell people who/what to worship; it doe NOT say we can't say a simple prayer or have a moment of silence in respect! There is also nothing in the Constitution that specifically prohibits praying, no matter where it's done. That's freedom of speech!
May 21, 2008
12:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
it's funny to see people who believe in god get offended by the mere fact that some dont -- and then angrily try and justify their own beliefs through bashing others.
what if a jewish group was complaining that they didn't like having a christian minister do an invocation every day?? are they more valid because they believe in god yet don't want some other religion forced on them?
or, lets say (for the sake of dicussion) that we became a muslim-majority in this country and an imam prayed every day before congress, could you see yourlselves wanting to be free form hearing that every day as christians?
just because you are in the majority in this country doesn't make what you push on others acceptable -- even if we have a longstanding tradition of it.
May 21, 2008
12:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
katmom, you clearly don't understand the law either.
freedom of religion means freedom from religion as well. again, you want to worship and pray for the city and commmunity, then do. that's great and awesome andd has it's place in your private life or in your church...
but not in my government. personally, i think it's a waste of time they should be spending on more important matters -- like running a government.
May 21, 2008
12:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
MarineGrunt writes:
Oh man... I mostly agree with DenverB.
Other then... "but again, i don't expect much from a person who spends as much time on a site he constantly complains 'every poster' is full of crap. get a life, bud."
Fixed that to fit you better! No need to thank me..
May 21, 2008
1 p.m.
Suggest removal
HolierThanThou writes:
Praying in court or city hall?
I prefer to say my prayers before entering such houses of ill repute.
May 21, 2008
1 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
tell us why the people present at the city council meetings can't be free from your religion.
May 21, 2008
1:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
lol. marine, i appreciate the humor, as i know that both you and i know that chase is on here way more than the both of us.
hope all is good in your world today. keep cool out there.
May 21, 2008
1:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
T1anda writes:
Oh Steph, if I called Obama a "chimp" what would be your reply??
May 21, 2008
1:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
well, not that you asked t1, but my reply would be that you are a racist.
or at least throwing out racist terms for a black man in order to get a rise out of someone on an internet message board.
which, by default, would make you a racist.
May 21, 2008
1:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
Michael writes:
freedom of religion means freedom from religion as well. - TheDenverB
What???? Are you serious??? How can both exist at the same time??? One is expressly written into the US Constitution - Freedom OF Religion combined with Freedom OF Speech gives us all wide latitude in expressing our religious beliefs - ANYWHERE WE WANT TO.
Please tell me.....where the hell is freedom FROM religion guaranteed in the US Constitution? Exactly where is it???? And I do not mean IMPLIED or taken from another document that is not a governing document...like a letter written by a Founding Father or some other obscure reference. Your belief that this exists is another example of the brainwashing that the ACLU has perpetrated on the US over the last 40 odd years because it ain't there.
May 21, 2008
1:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
MarineGrunt writes:
Nothing but love, B!!! We may disagree, but you have a good point 95% of the time! (I would brag about my 99% rating, but that would be tooting my own horn a little much! ;))
I have said this once and I will say it again...
If you cannot read "Freedom from Religion" out of "Freedom of Religion" then your no better then Stalin and Hitler! It shows you will use any tiny speck of BS to prove your god is real. If your so sure... why do you get so up set? Why MUST you prove he is real every time someone disagrees? Why is the # of people showing up to religious org's is shrinking at a awesome rate? Got something to hide?
Inquiring minds want to know!
May 21, 2008
1:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
"freedom of religion means freedom from religion as well. - TheDenverB
What???? Are you serious??? How can both exist at the same time???"
really man, i can't help you to understand this further for two reasons:
1) you need to take a civics class and learn our laws
2) you simply don't want to understand the athiest side of things.
sorry bud, but my discussion of this matter with you is over. CCD is accepting applications for the fall, though. you might want to check out the class schedule.
May 21, 2008
1:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
and this isn't about freedom of religion. i agree that you have a choice to worship whatever you want, or nothing at all. so do you.
but this is about separation of church and state.
and yes, yo have the freedom to say what you want. so do our elected officials.
but they don't have the freedom to make a prayer an OFFICIAL part of a GOVERNMENT meeting.
if you can't see that, then really --- go take a community college course.
May 21, 2008
1:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
MarineGrunt writes:
NotChaseB... All the Founding Fathers were chirstian? Your history teacher needs to be slap in the mouth!!!
Full of FAIL!!!
All of what you listed below mean NOTHING when... 'Freedom of Religion" was put in the Bill of Rights!
You MORE then welcome to move to a god fearing Country! Like... Saudi Arabia! They practice the type of zealotry you seem to embrace!
May 21, 2008
1:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
once again chase has completely worthless arguments.
again, i could care less what the tradition of this country is. we are NOT an expressly christian nation.
and we are growing further and further away from those traditions by the day (and by the immigrant, for that matter).
so again, our laws say one thing and we do another. that doesn't make it right.
if you want things to stay the same, then work to change the laws to expressly say this is a christian nation....
"If the Jew and Muslims don't like it that's their problem. That would be like Christians going to Israel or Saudia Arabia and complaining because they proclaim their countries to be founded by people of Judism or Islamic people and are a nation of the above mentioned."
not really. again, we don't have a national religion. and we are, whether you like it or not, a melting pot in this country.
so learn to listen to the law and realize that others are starting to as well... because your stupid justifications just don't fly with anyone who can actually put thoughts together.
May 21, 2008
1:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
Michael writes:
If the Founding Fathers had wanted us all to have "freedom FROM religion"...then why the hell didn't they simply add that to the other rights in the 1st Amendment??? Were they all too busy? Did they have to leave for the day and forgot to get back to that in the morning? Were they late for church? Did they just assume that we would imply it was there and that was OK??? These men made language an art form as that was the only way they communicated. They were men of letters and they wrote volumes. I like the way TheDenverB and his ILK always tell me to get an education and enroll at CCD when I catch them being UNABLE to answer a very simple question like where the hell is freedom from religion in the US Constitution???? They cannot answer it so they respond with what they think is witty humor.
May 21, 2008
1:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
Here`s a thought, let them pray in the parking lot.
The council not only allows prayer, it encourages it, makes sure it happens, and officially sanctions it. That is a bit different from just letting folks pray any time they want to.
Christians are so stingy, why not have a rotating religious leader leading the prayer? You know, a WICCAN , a Jew, a Grand Junction Muslim, and on and on and on. Christians never want to share.
Can`t wait for all the Christians on this board to chime in and agree to various religions sharing this precious moment before the council really does something.
May 21, 2008
1:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
"We aren't the ones complaining so how can we be the ones that are angry"
you tell me. you seem pretty pissed off that these athiests would even consider asking for this request.
"It's you and youe Godless buddies that started this fight back in 1947 and we intend to finish it. "
so it's a holy war to you? pushing god wherever you get the chance...
"You and your bunch are the fringe minority in this country and it is Christians that do not have to accomodate you."
that's not very christian of you...
"DenverB you are beyond common sense and your opinion and the other Godless fools out there doesn't matter one way or the other."
actually, athiesm is based on common sense. and so is my logic here. nice try, though, chase. you really have not won any points over with me.
"You're like a bad guest who comes into someone elses home and complains because he can't re-arrange the furiture to his liking. "
again, bad analogy. if this WERE a christian nation (and not just in your mind, but officialy) that owuld be the case. but it's not, and until it is you are flat-out wrong.
enjoy your closed mind. i'm going to enjoy a bratwurst for lunch.
May 21, 2008
1:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
MarineGrunt writes:
Only christians are Good Americans? Might big statement, hoss.
So all those who fell fighting for your Freedom to open your mouth and say something stupid, and did not believe in god do not count? Only dead christian Marines, Soldiers, Sailors and Airman are really served their Country? You got my ire up now, boy!!!
Why didn't thay add "Freedom From Religion" to the Bill of Rights? Maybe they thought the population would have half a brain and be able to make they distinction their selfs! I guess they were wrong.
As for busy.. Yeah I would say they were busy... BUILDING A COUNTRY!!! Just little things like that.
Can any of you god lovers tell me why you get so mad when someone says something opposite of what you believe???
May 21, 2008
1:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
"Your melting pot is going to be in Hades and all your lame and old, old parroted atheist arguments are predictable and laughable."
lol. again, i'm not an athiest.
but your fire and brimstone version of religion certainly doesn't sound like something i'd be a part of either.
and why would i not believe that we are a melting pot? hell, in my office right now i'm the minority as a christian-raised white guy. the jews, muslim and budhist all outnumber me. if that's not a melting pot, then what is?
and micheal, again, this is about separation of church and state. stick with us on this, okay?
i could give two craps what you believe or if you believe in anything at all. i have a freedom to NOT BELIEVE IN GOD if i want to in this country. that is my freedom from religion.
i also have a right to have my govt and religion separate. feel free to look up that law.
May 21, 2008
1:38 p.m.
MarineGrunt writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
May 21, 2008
1:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
RockyMtnMan writes:
I believe that when we (Christians) start to think that the Constitution of the US, or the Bill of Rights, should direct our lives and give us rights as Christians, we are going in the wrong direction. While we have certain rights being citizens of the US, it is not always true that we have rights as Christians. I would even say that the bible says otherwise. The two greatest commandments written in the bible are "Love the Lord your God, and love your neighbor likwise". Does that mean that you are to love your fellow Christians "only in church and on Sundays"?, or does it mean that we are to love EVERYONE "24/7". I believe it is the latter, and even includes other posters that we may disagree with. Every once in a while, or should I say always, it is good to give up your "rights" to preserve the friendships and love for your neighbors, which I would say are equally created by God.
May 21, 2008
1:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
P_Denver writes:
May I suggest a compromise? Allow those that care to have a dedication/focus/prayer session to do so BEFORE the “official” start time for the meeting (i.e. 7:45 for an 8 AM meeting). Then it’s on their own time and not on the government’s clock.
Would this be acceptable, or do the folks who want this practice stopped altogether then object to having such a session in a government facility at any time?
May 21, 2008
1:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
you have yet to prove anything i have said wrong, chase. or to even offer up an argument against this that isn't steeped in your fear of "godless" people. or your off-base belief that this is officially a christian nation and all others should bow down to that.
so how am i eating crow?
your disillusionment is so humorous to me. and i know grunt gets a kick out of it too.
May 21, 2008
1:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
freedomfighter1 writes:
we need to seperate the state and religion. I have no problem with people getting together and praying, but I do have a problem with it being mixed into goverment meetings. For some of us Christianity and other religions are tools used for opression. I do not want any religious belifs mixed into decisions regarding my life.
May 21, 2008
1:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
dilligaf writes:
Praying does accomplish things in politics. George prayed and god spoke to him and said he was on our side and to attack Iraq.
May 21, 2008
1:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
P_Denver writes:
To all who wish for "separation of church and state"... I understand your frustration in having to listen to stuff you don't believe in. But as others have pointed out that phrase is not actually in the Constitution. To be sure, it's in other period literature (Jefferson's letters, if I'm not mistaken) but not actually part of our laws. So we are stuck with freedom of religion, as noted in the "prohibiting" sentence below. I'm not crazy about it, either, but I think the writers did it this way for a reason.
An extremely literal reading of the below would seem to indicate that anyone can practice any religion anywhere. We know that's not true; the courts have put restraints on practicing all religions. But I don't think they have addressed the pre-meeting public prayer yet. If the athiest organization wants to ban prayers at state and federal functions they should formally address the issue in the courts.
They'll probably win.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Article the third [Amendment I]
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
May 21, 2008
2 p.m.
Suggest removal
EastVail writes:
I wonder what god will tell the city countil to do.
May 21, 2008
2 p.m.
Suggest removal
Steph writes:
T1anda. What would I say if you called Obama a chimp? I would say that you are apparently no Christian or a very hypocritical one. Which means you'd fit in very well with the other "christians."
May 21, 2008
2:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
Squatch writes:
If you dont like it dont listen to it you freaks. Whatever happened to if you dont agree with something dont do it?
May 21, 2008
2:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
temurlan writes:
I am not religious, I'm spiritual though. I don't shove my beliefs down anybody's throat. What makes it OK for atheists to shove their beliefs down mine. A belief is a belief.
May 21, 2008
2:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
freedomfighter1 writes:
P-I believe that article was directed tothe people of this country and for their private and public lives. I do not believe that goverment officials (during work hours) should practice their personal beliefs. Now after work they can pray or even preach. But this is only my opinion.
May 21, 2008
2:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
GGRR writes:
"If the Founding Fathers had wanted us all to have "freedom FROM religion"...then why the hell didn't they simply add that to the other rights in the 1st Amendment???"
The founders were not perfect, they were not psychic, they could not see 230 years into the future. They tried their best, and did a good job (obviously), but they did make mistakes. Ya know, slavery, womens rights, and a whole mess of other stuff. This is why the constitution has been amended in the past, and will be in the future.
May 21, 2008
2:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
steel writes:
Steph, you called Bush a chimp way back at the beginning of this set of posts. T1anda asked a legitimate question in response. Again, we're called racist when we repeat what you say.
May 21, 2008
2:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
csatswra writes:
Just remember everyone.... Majority rules and always will.
May 21, 2008
2:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
"I don't shove my beliefs down anybody's throat. What makes it OK for atheists to shove their beliefs down mine. A belief is a belief."
that's the whole point. they aren't shoving their beliefs down anyone's throat and they aren't demanding time at the pulpit to espouse their beliefs of no god.
they are simply asking to not have anyone share any of their beliefs in a gov't meeting. not them, not the christians, not anyone.
i don't see why this is a problem for thinking people who know what it means to respect one another.
"If you dont like it dont listen to it you freaks. Whatever happened to if you dont agree with something dont do it?"
i think you've missed the whole discussion here. they shouldnt be subjected to listening to it in the first place in an official gov't meeting.
May 21, 2008
2:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
bubbles writes:
I can't even believe this, what a shame the way you are all acting and talking to one another. You all need prayer, and I pray God will forgive you and open your eyes to the truth. One day you will stand before HIM and be judged.......
May 21, 2008
2:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
kirbysfriend22 writes:
Atheists have a freedom to not worship any religion. The government is "of the people, by the people and for the people".....thus, the government is the atheists, as it is the Cristians, Muslims, etc. Religion is intended to be seperate from all government entities so that the people which are represented (all citizens) are not mis-represented in their beliefs.
"If you don't like it just leave?" That government belongs to those atheists. They have a right to not have their beliefs infringed upon. That's why we're fighting over in Iraq, isn't it? To bring the same freedoms to those people.
Those folks can meet and pray on their own, in their homes, at their place of worship any time they want. That's how they can express their freedom of religion.
If you want government sponsored prayer, you're un-American and you should move to another country. This is a land of freedom.
May 21, 2008
2:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
DougH writes:
Memo to: HotChasB - You said: This country was founded by Christians from the puritans, pilgrims to the Catholic Spanish settlers in the southwest. Our Founding fathers used the Bible as a model to write The Constitution and Bill of Rights and God is mentioned in most historical documents.
The Bible was not the model for our constitution and Bill of Rights. Try the Magna Carta , English common law amd plain old compromise and common sense.
This country was founded on the belief in religious freedom and not having religion as part of our government. Try reading up on what Thomas Jefferson has to say about this. He was the guy that wrote the Declaration of Independence.
Just because the Europeans that settled here were Christians, does not make this a Holy Christian Nation.
Separation of Church and State is a bedrock principle of our Democracy, no matter what the evangelists would have you believe.
May 21, 2008
2:20 p.m.
TheDenverB writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
May 21, 2008
2:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
mis_kia79 writes:
How can anyting that violates our first amendment right be voted into law? People don't vote! You may not be a believer in prayer, but just like any other public display; rallies, petitions or boycotts, as a US citizen, it is our right. We need to vote and stop allowing personal offense to change our rights. If they don't want to pray, wait outside til they are finished or better yet don't go. What does an atheist have to offer anyone anyway? Nothing but empty words.
May 21, 2008
2:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
Arioch writes:
Why are you atheists always trying to get in my business? The prayers I say and the livestock I sacrifice are between me and Zeus.
May 21, 2008
2:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
"You all need prayer, and I pray God will forgive you and open your eyes to the truth. One day you will stand before HIM and be judged......."
you need to worry more about how you will be judged than how other will be judged. that seems to be the problem with overly religious types, they don't seem to agree with the free will of choice their god gave to everyone...
acceptance and love were jesus's most important teachings, it would be nice if his followers started following them. folowed by judge not lest ye be judged....
May 21, 2008
2:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
temurlan writes:
I'll concede that the prayer before the meeting doesn't belong, but where do you draw the line? Will religious attire be banned for those attending the meeting?
I just seems like those demanding something like this in the name of tolerance are the least tolerant people of all.
May 21, 2008
2:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
"If they don't want to pray, wait outside til they are finished or better yet don't go.
again, you seem to place those that believe in god above those that don't and think they should have rights that athiests dont..
i could care less what your religious and personal beliefs are, in this country we are all equal - regardless of our beliefs. and by your logic, if they don't agree with that then they don't deserve a say in government. if you believe that, then you are a horrible countryman.
it doesn't belong as a function of our govt. if those peopel want to pray THEY can go outside and not waste MY time in government.
"What does an atheist have to offer anyone anyway? Nothing but empty words.""
and that proves my point. you think \less of these people because of their specific belief in (or not in)god. and that is fine, but it doesn't mean they have any less rights than you do.
May 21, 2008
2:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
Ztliano writes:
Let's give devil worshipers some public city council time as well.
May 21, 2008
2:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
i will pray (again, chase, i'm not an athiest) for you to hopefully gain some acceptance in your life. you seem to need it.
but again, i don't want anyone pushing their religion on me through government. i think that's a pretty american ideal, in fact, as it's one of the main reasons we broke from england oh so long ago.
but you chose to ignore that. so i'll pray for you that you can see it someday.
and what is redundant and boring is your blindly religious position on this and your constantly bigoted attitude towards anything different from you, chase.
at least i'm open to logical thinking. i can't say the same for you.
May 21, 2008
2:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
"'ll concede that the prayer before the meeting doesn't belong, but where do you draw the line? Will religious attire be banned for those attending the meeting?"
why would it? it doesn't take up official meeting time... i think lines can be clearly drawn.
"I just seems like those demanding something like this in the name of tolerance are the least tolerant people of all."
i don't see that at all. while some athiests can be very intolerant and condoscending, the basic principle of this is respect and tolerance for everyone in our local government -- who aren't always christian or even religioius.
personally, i find it to be a waste of time and don't like seeing my gov't do this. it has nothing to do with a respect for or against god, it's just a matter of appropriateness. which these people, and many others, don't feel praying in govt is.
May 21, 2008
3 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
bporous...why do you believe these folks who want to be free from religion at council meetings should "go pound sand"?
no offense...but your claim that yo'ure an atheist doesn't exactly pass the smell test
May 21, 2008
3:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
Shaupeen writes:
Sorry I'm late! Looks like I should have been here sooner with this:
Remember, today is yet another opportunity to completely ignore NotChasB.
May 21, 2008
3:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
Steph writes:
Steel. Did you read my response at 2:00? Apparently not. I never called anyone racist? Where did you get that from? Can your brain ever wrap itself around this question?
May 21, 2008
3:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
Freshynana writes:
I have a great idea... Lets get all you god fearing folks together. All of em, muslim, jesus freaks, jewish. Lets get you all together to "discuss" who's god is real. Oh wait you already did. Its called WAR. Religion is hypocrisy. It has no place in our government but somehow it has always been there... I'm a good person I don't need some make believe book to tell me that.
May 21, 2008
3:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
Spencer writes:
What is the rational behind the opinion that we should not have freedom from religion? I am agnostic and all that means is that in my opinion religious beliefs are unknowable. Not saying that they are wrong, just unknowable. Whether or not they pray before a city council meeting means nothing to me but I am just curious as to why people would believe that we should not have freedom from religon. Should it be forced upon us? I'm not saying that it is but just not following some of the logic.
May 21, 2008
3:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
CaptainObvious writes:
First of all, why do people need to pray before city council meetings? Why can't they do that in the privacy of their homes or in their places or worship? Problem solved.
Second, you're probably right Shauppen, but it's so much more fun to antagonize him. What's the most crowded place in the zoo? Right in front of the monkey cages. Why? Because it's entertaining to watch the primates fling poo at themselves. Same thing with NCB. But the monkeys have better aim and more friends.
May 21, 2008
3:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
T1anda writes:
The DenverB...Please look at Steph' post at 12:36 p.m. She implied that someone in DC. is a "chimp"!! look after the word Hmmm?
Now my question to Steph once again, is how would she like it if I called Obama a "chimp"??? How bout Hillary?? or McCain???
I guess she get's a free ride when it comes to name calling huh??
Oh well, I guess that is the only tactic she enjoys when posting!!!
Hmmmmm indeed!!
May 21, 2008
3:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
JSeifert writes:
These invocations and prayers are done in the beginning to give guidance and to remind the people making laws to be honest and true. Swearing on the bible was done at a time we most people believed and most still do that lieing after swearing on a bible is a sin and stops them from doing so.
May 21, 2008
4:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
eagleye writes:
I'm a Christian pastor. A very conservative one, at that. So it might come as a surprise to some that I am not in favor of having clergy give invocations at the opening of government functions, such as city council sessions. Here's why:
"Invocation" literally means "in the name of." A religious invocation means to begin something in the name of whatever God/god/goddess the participants acknowledge and worship. When I begin a worship service in my congregation, I do so in the name of the triune God, because that's Whom we believe in and worship.
But at a city council meeting, who knows what people there believe in. I'm guessing most, perhaps all, of the Grand Jct. city council members are Christian. But how do we know? They aren't there to worship; they're there to conduct city business. Plus, besides the council members, there are many others present. How can I presume that they all believe in the same God (or believe in any god, for that matter)?
So inevitably, such "invocations" (and usually, invocations at the start of legislative sessions are really prayers, not true invocations) end up doing one of two things: Assume all believe the same thing, or else appeal to the lowest common denominator ("In the name of the Father/Mother/Spirit/Higher Power/Good that's Within You/Force/Whatever").
The former is presumptuous and the latter is offensive.
Keep the moment of silence, when people can pray or focus or doze. But get rid of the invocation led by clergy. My $.02.
May 21, 2008
4:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
temurlan writes:
Spencer,
Nothing guarantees "freedom from religion". I have heard of "freedom of religion" though. It would be impossible to have the former, unless you lived way out in the woods somewhere. Even then, the trees might remind you of the Druids. I conceded the point on the meeting prayer. Keep in mind that there needs to be balance with the total picture.
Tolerance is a two way street.
May 21, 2008
4:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
jvb writes:
I pray before sex for endurance whereas my wife provides the guidance. Sometimes prayer works; sometimes prayer does not work; however, no one is harmed. Would I pray in the public arena? Would you?
May 21, 2008
4:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"It is really none of your business if the council members want to pray at the meetings"
this is the most ignorant statement i've read here today.
obsessedwithcharlesb shows us why yet again the far religious right has absolutely zero credible data to support their position that they should be allowed to force the practice of their superstitious beliefs on the public.
May 21, 2008
4:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
PajamaPulitzer writes:
eagleye:
I am calling you out on your claim to be a Pastor. Name your church please.
We can't pick and choose to observe only Constitutional Amendments with which we agree.
Michael 12:02 is right on the money. The 1st Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..."
It does not say anything about City Council meetings. Since the Constitution grants power from the Federal government downward it can be assumed that the city council is free do do whatever they wish.
If you are reading the same 1st Amendment I am and you interpret from it that it prohibits prayer at a City Council meeting anywhere in the US, then you are a complete imbecile. It's a shame that our brave soldiers have to fight and die for a moronic idiot like you.
May 21, 2008
5:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
rg writes:
Those who opt for prayer in the public arena will surely be content when a majority of Muslims do it five times daily. Richard Grimes, deicide.
Deicide Corner:
Oh, threats of hell and hopes of paradise!
One thing at least is certain -- this life flies;
One thing is certain, and the rest is lies;
The flower that once has blown forever dies.
-- Omar Khayyam
May 21, 2008
5:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
prohibits?
nay.
i take it to mean that that we shoudn't mix govt and religion on any level. and if you think it's a shame soldiers fight for my right to inperpret that that way, then you sir are nobody i'd want to call a fellow American.
May 21, 2008
5:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
and why should he have to prove himself to you as a pastor? if you don't believe him, that's your deal.
how about you tell us specifically who you are, so we can hassle you in person?
May 21, 2008
5:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
PajamaPulitzer writes:
TheDenverB: Can you even explain your interpretation "that we shoudn't mix govt and religion on any level"?
Tell me what part of the 1st Amendment says anything remotely close that.
May 21, 2008
5:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
eagleye writes:
Pajamapulitzer: I have served as pastor of Mountain Valley Lutheran Church, Eagle, Colorado since 1996. I have been a Lutheran pastor (Wisconsin Synod) for 19 years.
I am certainly not saying that the Constitution bans prayers at public meetings. Nor would I picket City Hall because they have clergy giving the invocation. And most certainly, I wouldn't join the ACLU to fight this practice.
I'm just saying that as a Christian, I do not agree with practice of beginning legislative sessions with a religious prayer. When we ask people of various faiths (or in some cases, no faith) to join us in calling on our God (in my case, that would be the triune God), that's violating what Scripture warns us against in places like Romans 16:17 and 2 Corinthians 6:14.
I would defend to death the right of those gathered at city council meetings to pray. I would gladly share my faith in the triune God with anyone (and do so regularly). But to presume that all who have gathered for a civic function are joined together in faith is giving a false witness.
That this viewpoint puts me on the same side as the atheists is ironic, I'll grant you.
May 21, 2008
5:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
PajamaPulitzer writes:
Let me be perfectly clear; It's a shame that our soldiers have to die to defend our Constitution freedoms all while moronic idiots interpret the Constitution any way they choose.
May 21, 2008
5:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
Charles_B writes:
I love how fragile Christians come out of the woodwork clutching their pearls and wringing their hankies whenever someone upsets the holy-waters of their religious entitlement programs.
They can't exist without the government subsidizing their fruitless pursuits of immortality. They're metaphysical socialists. They aren't getting what they need from church and/or bible-class so they need the government to give them philosophical handouts.
I had to work all my life to *earn* my wealth of rational understanding. Nobody was taking from the wise and giving to the ignorant when *I* was coming up.
I had to read books and actually *think* about things.
Like tumorous growths, all religious components of government should be cut out. They only grow more malignant with time.
The Grand Junction City Council seems as good a place as any to start the operation.
May 21, 2008
5:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
PajamaPulitzer writes:
eagleye: If the majority of the Council Members want to open with prayer then I don't see how that's anyone's business but theirs. If the locals don't like it then elect a new council.
I agree that we should "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's". But our freedoms are Creator-given and government can't bestow them.
If I stop blowing cigar smoke in your face I have not given you clean air. You had clean air to begin with.
Thus, the Constitution exists to ensure that our Creator-given freedoms are not squelched by the government.
May 21, 2008
5:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
"It's a shame that our soldiers have to die to defend our Constitution freedoms all while moronic idiots interpret the Constitution any way they choose."
i agree. look at our president, for example.
May 21, 2008
5:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
pjpulitzer....i'm glad you've taken the bait and will do your best to insist that there is not separation of church and state.
i always love watching the religious right folks run up against our local regular experts on the subject.
very entertaining.
quick question....why don't you think the citizens present at city council meetings don't have the right to be free from religion as a captive audience?
May 21, 2008
5:24 p.m.
Suggest removal
PajamaPulitzer writes:
Charles_B: Your rants are so filled with ignorance and platitudes I don't even have to bother calling you a moron. You do a lovely job of it yourself.
May 21, 2008
5:24 p.m.
Suggest removal
Charles_B writes:
PajamaPulitzer begged our permission:
"Let me be perfectly clear..."
Permission granted. Please continue:
"It's a shame that our soldiers have to die to defend our Constitution freedoms..."
Indeed, indeed.
"...all while moronic idiots interpret the Constitution any way they choose."
So true. So true. It's a shame George Bush, Alberto Gonzales, Dick "Fifth Branch" Cheney, John C. (no evil) Yoo, etc. aren't being hauled before a war-crimes tribunal.
I totally agree with you PajamaPeabody. Those guys are "moronic idiots" along with anyone who admires or defends them.
May 21, 2008
5:26 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
"But our freedoms are Creator-given and government can't bestow them."
well, that may be what you believe. but not what those that don't believe in god believe.
and you are no better or worse or right or wrong than them in anyone's eyes but your own, bud.
May 21, 2008
5:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
PajamaPulitzer writes:
jay: The citizens present at the city council meeting have absolutely zero freedom from religion as granted by the Constitution. There is no such Constitutional protection.
They are in no way a captive audience and are free to leave at any time.
May 21, 2008
5:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
PajamaPulitzer writes:
DenverB: Just because you disagree with the faith of the Framers of the Constitution, that does render history changed.
Your life has been enriched by their beliefs and their sacrifices. It's too bad you don't even appreciate that.
May 21, 2008
5:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
gotcha...so if they don't want religion forced upon them, they aren't welcome at city council meetings...which are paid for with their taxes.
interesting theory.
is that the story you're sticking to?
May 21, 2008
5:31 p.m.
Suggest removal
PajamaPulitzer writes:
Charles_B: Keep talking. You make yourself look worse that I ever could.
May 21, 2008
5:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
PajamaPulitzer writes:
Jay: They are NOT constitutionally protected FROM religion. That's correct.
Who ever said they are not welcome at the meeting? Not wanting to be there and not being welcome are two vastly different animals.
Denver_B just tried really hard to offend me. He failed, but if he had succeeded would he have violated my 1st Amendment right to freedom of speech? No. Because I don't have a right of freedom FROM speech. Does that make sense?
Freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. It's really quite simple.
May 21, 2008
5:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"hey are NOT constitutionally protected FROM religion. That's correct.
Who ever said they are not welcome at the meeting? Not wanting to be there and not being welcome are two vastly different animals"
so in addition to believing that the separation of church and state is simply a myth...you believe that if folks don't want to have religion forced upon them, they shouldn't go to city council meetings in gc.
do i have your positions correct, pjmama?
May 21, 2008
5:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
TioPato writes:
How about a nice game of chess, anybody?
May 21, 2008
6:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
Charles_B writes:
TioPato asked:
"How about a nice game of chess, anybody?"
Not until the Bishops are replaced with secular pieces.
May 21, 2008
6:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
PajamaPulitzer writes:
jay: The US House of Representatives still opens each day with Prayer so I doubt that the atheists are going to prevail in this suit.
The folks in GC are free to elect a council they find more suitable. Until that happens I guess they can wait until the prayer is over and then go into the meeting.
I find it interesting that some people are so thin-skinned and opposed to religion that they can't handle a 30-second prayer. They tend to accuse the with faith of "forcing their beliefs on others", but is that not exactly what the atheists are doing?
The tolerance crowd is always short on tolerance when faith is involved. It's quite hypocritical.
May 21, 2008
6:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
Charles_B writes:
PajamaPolk:
All of your arguments amount to: "That's the way it is, so that's the way it should be".
How about putting forward a rational reason why there *should* be a prayer at a GJCC meeting.
You can't.
There are plenty of appropriate times and venues to pray to imaginary friends and salute the supernatural outside the realm of government.
May 21, 2008
7:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
prk166 writes:
"give the Atheists a chance to be heard and bless the council in their own way for guidance in the community!"
Uuuuuuuummmmmmmmmm.......... bless in their own way? We're talking about athiests!
May 21, 2008
7:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
RockyMtnMan writes:
Sometimes Christians may have rights as US citizens (Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Religion, etc.)that in certain instances may go against the teachings found in the bible. I believe the right (until overturned in the courts) of prayer at government meetings may be one of these instances. I read in my bible that we are supposed to go into our room and shut the door before we pray(Mt. 6:6), not on the street corners to be seen by men(Mt. 6:5) These verses are just prior to the well known "Lord's Prayer". I believe as Christians we only 2 "rights" that we should be concerned with:
1. Love the Lord your God
2. Love your neighbor as yourself
(Mt. 22:37 - 40)
May 21, 2008
8:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
LetFreedomRing writes:
Posted by TheDenverB
"just because you are in the majority in this country doesn't make what you push on others acceptable -- even if we have a longstanding tradition of it."
I have not read most of the posts, but I thought I would respond to this one. So you are stating here that it is not acceptable for the majority to push their beliefs on the minority, but is it true that it is also not acceptable to push the beliefs of the minority on the majority? I guess we are at an impasse.
What is the problem with having tradition in a country? Are you also someone who doesn't believe in putting your hand over your heart at a flag ceremony? God forbid you feel like you have to do anything that has to do with tradition.
The bottom line is you can't please everyone and really honestly why do we have to? If you don't like the prayer, you don't have to participate, be respectful and just stand there or if it is just too much, leave until it is completed. There are always situations in life that you are not going to like.
They also mentioned that they feel like they are being left out. Well suck it up, get over it and move on. This isn't 3rd grade recess. Not everyone is going to like you or want to please you. It happens all the time.
May 21, 2008
8:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
kathyM writes:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."
The atheists claim that religion is being forced upon them ("establishment of religion") with the traditional prayer/moment of silence at the beginning of a government meeting. But if it's eliminated, then are the atheists "prohibiting the free exercise" of religion? Seems hypocritical to replace an OPTIONAL prayer with no option at all.
May 21, 2008
10:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
Let us test this tolerance thing. Instead of praying or staying silent, let the atheists, agnostics and anyone else make rude noises with their arm pits during the prayer.
Do you think the Christians will refrain from glaring at them or asking them to leave the room?
What if we don`t like your two choices and instead, overlap your prayers with donkey noises? Unless this is really a Christian nation, we could do that. Right? No time in jail or anything.
May 21, 2008
10:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
patronusa writes:
Nauseating but entertaining post. The posters, like pjpulitzer and the other weirdos, who keep sticking to their guns about how religion somehow goes hand in hand with government are obviously old testament, old school, and probably just "old" in age. they sound like they're lying in their death beds (hence the pajamas and numberous posts throughout the day) and just praying like hell that their god saves them from their hypocritical ways and forgives them for being everything jesus wasn't- intolerant and hateful.
May 21, 2008
10:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
Charles_B writes:
LetFreedomRing:
The problem with your speech is that within it you pose no rational reason why the "tradition" of the public prayer in a government setting should continue.
Your argument rests on the faulty premise that *tradition alone* compels us to continue an activity that is unnecessary, presumptuous, and arguably in conflict with constitutional guarantees.
Unless you can point me to some evidence that praying is a vital tool of governance then I submit that it's not only a waste of time; it contravenes equitable representation.
May 21, 2008
11:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
CaptainObvious writes:
Charles B @ 6:13:
"Not until the Bishops are replaced with secular pieces."
Ha! Good One!!
May 22, 2008
9:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
DoubtingThomas writes:
I tried to stop my local city counsel from praying before meetings too. It started with a letter to my rep. Then a letter went to the
entire counsel. The next thing I know is a local news station wants
to interview me about my request. It hit the news and the papers and
did a round on the local talk shows. In the end, I was ignored. They still say prayers before the meetings. My request was not for them to stop praying, for they as INDIVIDUALS have that right. My request was for them to pray one extra time. I suggested that they say their prayer anytime before the meeting, ie. in the car, walking to the building, or upon taking their seat at the meeting. Then when the meeting has concluded, I asked them to say an additional prayer.
NO DICE. Their "let's spread our christianity all over God's Earth" mentality will not allow them to take that prayer outside of official government business. I surely thought my request for an extra prayer was the way to go too.
Now to comment on a previous posting: Michael wrote
...why does the US Congress have a chaplain and why do they open each session of Congress with a PRAYER????? Why do ALL branches of the US Armed Forces each have a chaplain and each conducts prayer??? Why does the Presdient of the United States (not just Geo Bush) hold PRAYER breakfasts at the Whitehouse on a regular basis??? BTW - ALL of what I mentioned includes prayer and ministers from ALL denominations..."
Those are excellent questions that the atheist community would like answered!!! Why is it that christians have chaplains in the military but wiccans don't have priests or priestesses? That's a bit unfair as well.
HERE"S THE QUESTION: What difference does it make to have these prayers involved within government activity as opposed to each individual that participates, praying on their own. I mean, is the person reciting the prayer effectively praying for all of the aspects that you would cover if you were given the floor for the prayer? I wouldn't think any two people would present the same prayer. So why you would let someone else pray for you is also beyond me.
To the Colorado Atheist group: keep it up, remain standing for your convictions, if you allow these people to continue to divide the community by excluding you, then you're not doing your civic duties. My effort to insist on not being excluded in these counsel meetings hasn't stopped, just placed on hold. I have to focus my attention now on my Flying Spaghetti Monster display that I plan on displaying on my capital lawn for the upcoming holiday season, right next to our Mythra scene (aka nativity, for the christians).
You atheists should see if there are any Pastafarians around there and see if they also plan to errect an FSM for the holidays.
May 22, 2008
11:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
rg writes:
"Suck it up," even if the prayer is to a jew god an arab god an indian god or the spagetti monster and by all means "love your neighbor as yourself" "suck it up." Richard Grimes, deicide.
Deicide Corner:
Eskimo: "If I did not know about God and sin,
would I go to hell?"
Priest: "No, not if you did not know."
Eskimo: "Then why did you tell me?"
'Love thy neighbor as thyself?'
Hide that motto on the shelf!
Let it lie there, keep it idle
Especially if you're suicidal.
May 22, 2008
12:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
pjmama is a great example of the sheer idiocy of the far religious right:
"I find it interesting that some people are so thin-skinned and opposed to religion that they can't handle a 30-second prayer. They tend to accuse the with faith of "forcing their beliefs on others", but is that not exactly what the atheists are doing?
The tolerance crowd is always short on tolerance when faith is involved. It's quite hypocritical."
wow. so if american citizens don't want religion forced upon them as a captive audience in a public meeting paid for by their tax dollars...they are, in pjmama's mind, "forcing their beliefs on others".
i don't even know what to say other than this "our way or the highway" attitude is why some of the extreme fundamentalists are ruining what otherwise would be a good reputation. well...them and the pedophiles.
May 22, 2008
12:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
Fresh writes:
I don't understand why the denver b is even trying to talk to people like not chas b. it is clear this guy has no interest in discussion.
it is people like him that we should be protecting our country from. and michael, you really don't have a clue about how the laws of this country work or are intended to work do you ?
WOW!
May 22, 2008
1:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
Fresh writes:
maybe we should allow satanic prayers after the meeting concludes.
what do you say christian zealots ?
May 22, 2008
3:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
CaptainObvious writes:
Oh yeah! I love the intolerance the religious people show when anyone so much as challenges all of the perks they've enjoyed for soooo long. What a bunch of spoiled brats. PJPuke basically is throwing a hissy fit (or would that be a heretic fit?) because she might not get her way. Get used to it lady! More non-secular change is on the way! And it'll be highly entertaining to watch you whine.
May 22, 2008
4:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
mrNiceGuy writes:
My favorite reason for reading articles with religious reference is when NotChristianB gets all riled up. I love the way he preaches how people should live for God, yet reduces himself so easily to insulting people (the way a good Christian should Chas? Is there scripture on how to adequately berate non-christians into the light of God?). I still believe he's a wolf in sheep's clothing only here for attention. He takes the appearance of an extreme Christian, yet behaves like the Godless heathens (sp?) he likes to cast stones at. Always entertaining!
May 27, 2008
9:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
urbanaut writes:
"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness these firmest of the destinies of men and citizens." -George Washington, Orations of American Orators