Posted 11 months, 16 days ago in 
Loading ...
With all the hubbub about the prayers at the beginning of the city council meetings, I think back to one of the most intelligent, caring men I’ve met.
Jim was an old-school atheist. He and my grandfather, a Southern Baptist, would sit in front of the fireplace during the winter debating biblical passages. While I don’t remember much about him, I do remember a few gems of common sense that has helped me shape my life.
When asked about prayer in school, Jim stated he didn’t have a problem with it, as religion does teach good morals and common sense. When asked about prayer at governmental assemblies, he stated that while he wasn’t a believer in god, our government needs all the help they can get.
The man wasn’t vitriolic in his atheism, never attacking religion at all. He said that he knew in his heart that his belief was true, and didn’t need to disparage other’s private beliefs. He also felt that there were many other, more important issues that should be attacked, debated and resolved.
In light of today’s economical disaster, our state of security at our borders, local issues with drilling, employment, school issues and the increasing meth problem, I fully agree.
KEVIN MCCURLEY
Grand Junction
23 Responses to “There are bigger problems than prayer at public meetings”
Posted December 9th, 2008 at 12:00 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
While it is true that the prayers at the beginnings of the city council and county commissioner meetings are a small issue, that does not mean that they are right, or should be allowed to continue. Just because there are bigger problem in the world doesn’t mean we should ignore the smaller ones.
Posted December 9th, 2008 at 2:51 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
just why do you find it so offensive, scott?…and why are you so intolerant of it?…why does it bother you and others that anybody wants guidance with difficult choices?…i’ve said it before and i’ll repeat it now…the time and effort spent disparaging and debating this topic could be much better spent with bigger issues.
Posted December 9th, 2008 at 4:17 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
It bothers me because it’s wrong.
Posted December 9th, 2008 at 4:49 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
and , this is the real question, WHY IS IT WRONG?…because it concerns the separation of church and state?…which isn’t in the constitution?…i can think of many bigger, more threatening “wrongs” that should be of immediate concern…this is the last i’ll say on the subject, because to put it simply, it’s a waste of energy and time on either side to argue over a danged prayer…i’m rollin my eyes as i type…sheesh
Posted December 9th, 2008 at 5:28 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
It’s wrong because it promotes one religion in a forum that should be non-religious according to the Constitution. The fact that the term “Separation of Church and State” doesn’t appear verbatim in the Constitution is irrelevant. That is simply a term coined by Thomas Jefferson to describe the effect that the Establishment clause of the First Amendment has.
Whether Christians accept it or not, a sectarian prayer is by nature exclusive against those with different beliefs. If no attempt to recognize any other beliefs is made, as is the case with the county commissioners, then those of differing beliefs are permanently excluded. A meeting of the commissioners is to conduct the business of the county. What benefit does a sectarian prayer convey to that business? And if is is such a small matter, then why continue it since it excludes part of the citizens that the commissioners represent?
Posted December 9th, 2008 at 5:51 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Scott,
“Whether Christians accept it or not” Just a reminder, friend, SOME Christians.
hitek,
Will you explain why 60 seconds of silence so that all might pray silently or not is insufficient to satisfy you?
Posted December 9th, 2008 at 6:03 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
dc,
Correction accepted. No offense intended.
Posted December 9th, 2008 at 6:07 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
None taken.
Posted December 10th, 2008 at 6:17 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
dc, it’s plenty sufficient for me…my problem isn’t with the prayer or lack thereof, it’s with the expenditure of energy fighting for/against that few seconds or minutes, whatever…i guess you could say that i find this topic somewhat of an enigma, simply because we have so many more important (in my mind, anyway) issues to debate and come up with answers for…i’m not trying to offend anybody on either side of the argument, tho i’m not sure why a moment of silence wouldn’t satisfy both sides…i hate enigmas…
Posted December 10th, 2008 at 6:34 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
A moment of silence would be fine. In fact, that was the #1 suggestion that the atheist group made to the city council last summer, as well as to the county commissioners this fall.
The city council chose the more troublesome approach of modifying how the invocations are done, and the county commissioners rejected the suggestions outright. The moment of silence apparently isn’t good enough for them. I encourage you to go to a meeting and ask them why.
Posted December 10th, 2008 at 7:11 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Commissioner Rowlands’ insistance that she will pray to Jesus in spite of the clear constitutional guidelines is reminiscent of Nixons’ claim that, ” If the President does it, it’s not illegal”. It may be that defiance, that personal claim of exemption from the law that is so disturbing to many.
I wouldn’t mind being allowed to choose which laws are applicable to me and which I could ignore. Would you?
Posted December 10th, 2008 at 8:26 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
You are right dc, in my case it is Rowlands’ insistence that she WILL pray to Jesus on her government pulpit, that is most disturbing. It is worse than arrogance; it is a declaration that she intends to use her post to show off and grandstand her specific religiosity. She has also clearly stated that she would enjoy a challenge to this “right” … and why shouldn’t she? Even if they lose in court it is good PR with the majority of voters in this community.
Posted December 10th, 2008 at 9:50 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
These commissioners are politicians playing to their constituents. They have nothing to lose even if what they are doing is unconstitutional. They would not mind if the county was sued in order to force them to change. They would be just as proud, even after they lose the suit, just like liberal protesters are proud to go to jail when their protests violate laws or city ordinances.
I say sue them and stop their unconstitutional practice.
Posted December 10th, 2008 at 12:47 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Stop your holiday shopping & praying. It appears to be one big FAIRY TALE after all:
“Astronomers have calculated that Christmas should be in June, by charting the appearance of the ‘Christmas star’ which the Bible says led the three Wise Men to Jesus. They found that a bright star which appeared over Bethlehem 2,000 years ago pinpointed the date of Christ’s birth as June 17 rather than December 25.”
So Jesus was a Gemini, not a Capricorn. Or, did he even exist at all? Who will the commissioners pray to now?
Posted December 10th, 2008 at 1:05 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
The date chosen to celebrate Christ’s birth was made to coincide with the Winter Solstice celebration in an attempt to draw more Pagans into the fold.
Posted December 10th, 2008 at 1:09 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Ash,
Exactly right. An additional clue is the fact that the shepards would not have been out in the fields with their flocks in late December.
And don’t even get me started on the discrepancy between Matthew and Luke on the year.
Posted December 10th, 2008 at 1:20 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Well, isn’t it true that the holiday was chosen in December so that Jewish children celebrating Hanukah would not feel left out?
Posted December 10th, 2008 at 1:25 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
I had not heard abut the Hanukkah reason. It seems there could be a few good reasons put together. I do not know if the actual date was recorded at some time (?) but it would reason with not so many people knowing how to read or write, the matter of anyone’s exact birth/death dates may have been hard to keep track of.
Posted December 10th, 2008 at 1:32 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Ash, I WAS KIDDING!
Posted December 10th, 2008 at 2:28 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Aw heck bullish, who knew?! I did not want to stomp on your cute theory!
Posted December 10th, 2008 at 2:30 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Were they even using the Julian calender in those days?
Posted December 10th, 2008 at 2:41 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
dc, yes, just barely
Posted December 10th, 2008 at 3:24 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
dc,
The Julian calendar was introduced in 46 BCE. It was replaced by the Gregorian calendar around 1582.
My google-fu is strong…
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.