Since 1958, the Salisbury City Council has begun each legislative session by reciting the Lord’s Prayer. Tonight, that tradition will come to a halt. The council will not recite the prayer and instead observe a “moment of silence”. Is this a positive direction for the new city council?
Eliminating the prayer was originally proposed by newly elected councilwoman Laura Mitchell. The council has been briefed by the city attorney. Three proposals are currently on the table:
- Continue with a tradition of over 52 years.
- Eliminate the Lord’s Prayer and substitute a “moment of silence”.
- Institute a program of having a local clergyman begin each meeting with a non-sectarian prayer.
Because there is no consensus on council, Cohen announced last Monday that she would “err on the side of caution” and begin tonight’s meeting with a “moment of silence”.
Is eliminating the prayer a wise policy? In short – NO. Reciting the prayer is a tradition that is even older than the council saying the “Pledge of Allegiance” (which began a few years after the council started reciting the prayer). No one outside of council appears to be objecting to the prayer. No one has filed a lawsuit against the city for beginning each meeting with the prayer. We are then forced to ask – Why now?
Has there been an outcry from local citizens who are not part of the Judeo-Christian tradition upon which our nation was founded? To the best of our knowledge the answer to that question is no.
Is Cohen uncomfortable leading the prayer? If so, that problem can be easily eliminated by asking another councilmember or a member of the audience to do so. However, it should be noted that Cohen made no objection during her first term on council.
Are Mitchell or councilman Tim Spies somehow offended by reciting the prayer? If so they can stand respectfully, and silently, while the prayer is said.
Arguing that beginning each meeting with the prayer is “unconstitutional” is little more than a red herring. IF someone sues the city, it is likely that a judge would rule that the prayer is unconstitutional. However, there is no reason to bow down before the false god of secularism until a judge forces the city to do so. The council should at least wait until such a suit is filed before deciding to scrap a tradition that appears to be near and dear to many citizens.
Tradition is not a bad thing. Simply because a minority MAY be offended is not sufficient reason to abolish a practice that appears to have served the city well for over 50 years. Should the city end its practice of reciting the “Pledge of Allegiance”? Some Christians refuse to say the pledge because their allegiance is to God and not to a government. Yet, they stand respectfully while others recite the pledge. They are not offended because such a practice is a matter of individual conscience and they respect a nation which upholds our right to worship (or not) as we choose.
Again we ask – Why now? Taking offense at a practice is different than being harmed. It is not the place of government to protect us from being offended. To those who are offended by the tradition of reciting the Lord’s Prayer we simply state that they can either buck up or file suit. To the members of the Salisbury council who wish to abolish a half century old tradition we can only hope that they realize their error before it is too late.
39 comments:
I wonder if Obama will now make you pray to Allah and read the Koran, and buy a prayer rug at Walmart to keep in the chambers.
The total takeover of our culture by Judaism.
What's the problem? Is Laura Mitchell an atheist. I think the tradition should continue. I am so sick and tired of people trying so much to be politically correct. It sickens me. Why even bring it up if nobody has complained or sued about it. For your information our country was founded on Chritian principles if you don't like that then find yourself another country to live in.
Anon 0859 -
Blame the Jew? You've got to be kidding me! As far as I know, neither Laura Mitchell, Tim Spies, or Shanie Shields are Jewish. Laura proposed dropping the prayer on April 19. At the time Shields supported a moment of silence or a rotation of clergy. Ditto for Spies.
Cohen is wrong in her decision to support this. That hardly makes this some "Zionist conspiracy". Unless you are man or woman enough to sign your name, and be publicly tagged as an anti-Semite, stick to the real issue.
Actually this is the takeover of our culture by anti christian bigots.
Laura Mitchell is a bigot, as is Jim Ireton. Both of these people despise those that do their best to follow the Christian faith.
As for Shanie, how can the black christian community not stand up and tell her to put a stop to this anti christian crusade?
Actually this is the takeover of our culture by anti christian bigots.
Laura Mitchell is a bigot, as is Jim Ireton. Both of these people despise those that do their best to follow the Christian faith.
As for Shanie, how can the black christian community not stand up and tell her to put a stop to this anti christian crusade?
I appreciate your take on the issue, but have a problem with part of your logic. You admit it is probably unconstitutional, but advocate "letting it ride" until someone complains by filing suit. If you know a government practice is unconstitutional, it is very hypocritical to turn a blind eye to it until someone sues. Everyone complains about the lawyers and our sue happy society. If it's wrong, it's wrong, tradition aside. You can't pick and choose which laws you will follow. Get rid of the prayer without being forced to do it. That's the adult thing to do. A moment of silence should offend no one.
9:30
Well said. Why continue a tradition if it is unconstitutional?
Anon 0930 -
No, it's not hypocritical at all. There are state and local governments all over the country that are doing this (and similar things). The Ten Commandments are on the walls of the Supreme Court. Remember, the key word is "probably". We don't know for sure until a judge rules. I would also argue that the nation's courts have rule wrongly on this up to now. The Constitution does not call for a "separation of church and state".
IF (that's a big IF) someone sues, then the council should re-visit the issue. I don't think that the Salisbury taxpayer should foot the bill for protracted litigation. They just don't need to change the policy now.
I'm not seeing a crowd of people asking the Wicomico Council to stop doing the same thing.
Here we go again....we hire a appoint a new person on the council and she immediately wants to change things that have been going on for years...I would think that the condition our county and city are in we would WANT to start each meeting off with prayer...we need the guidance cause doing it on our own sure isnt working...taking prayer out sure isnt gonna change a thing...
Seperation of church and state is never mentioned in any government law or document. Anyone who thinks we can't intermingle religion and government has no understanding of the original letter that first mentioned this notion. The purpose of the mention of religion in the Constitution was to keep the government from controling the church and vice versa as it was in Europe and other nations.
Judeao-Christian values built this great nation and the elimination of such will be to our detriment.
We should not hold on to things hust for tradition's sake. Jesus said that to do something just for tradition, instead of having a basis in truth is sin. We should hold on to the prayer because it is the truth.
If we trun away from God, he will turn away from us. Be very careful for what you ask for. Without Him, we will perish.
First we vote for people that will change things. Second, this city and country is made up of people from all walks of life with different religious backgrounds, and to limit the begining of these sessions with the lords prayer without regards for other religions is wrong. Third, believe it or not Christianity isnt't the only religion in the world you closed minded fools.
Shows the continuing deterioration of Salisbury City Government. Glad I don't need to go to that God forsaken place too much.
Wait, so you admit the practice would be found unconstitutional, but want the council to continue?
G.A. I beg to differ. Your argument that it's okay because it's done all over the state and country sounds like my first grader who wants to do something just because "everybody else gets to." Didn't your mother ever ask you if Johnny jumped off the bridge, would you follow him just because he did it? It's like speeding because you're going with the flow. But as long as I don't get a ticket, that makes it all right?
How many of "them" are at the council meeting?
I object to it, so your statement that nobody objects tot he Lord's Prayer being said is incorrect. Move on.
Anon 1055 -
Semi-clever, but no cigar. There is NO statute which states that what the Salisbury City Council has done for over 52 years is illegal. Therefore, until someone files a law suit, and a judge issues a ruling, it isn't de facto illegal.
Don't like it? Call up the ACLU and have them list you as the name plaintiff in a lawsuit.
Anon 1058 -
See the above paragraph. As I noted in the post, the government isn't here to protect you from being offended. Are you being harmed by speech?
Another instance of where we have allowed prayer to be removed.
Look at our schools since prayer was removed from there?
A tradition that has been going on for 50yrs. What about before that? Salisbury is a lot older than 50.
Here we go again. I understand 4 hrs. of the work session was devoted to this. Work on the big picture such Salisbury poor economy and do not mess with tradition.
If the council chooses not to call on the name of God at the beginning of their meetings, I am sure they will be mindful of the times they call upon His name as swear word or an extra word just for emphasis. Perhaps they can start to use each others last names in place of Oh My God and use Oh my Ireton, Oh my Cohen etc. I wonder how many times in the course of the day we all use God’s name in a way that demeans Him. No matter what law is passed the character of God will remain the same; no law will change who God is and what relationship we should have with Him. He is called Faithful and True. I hope we become aware of all the ways we use His name, as a curse word or as a word of worship after all we will be held accountable for each and every word that we say. God told Moses (in the OT) to tell the people not to take His Name in vain. So if you can't begin a meeting showing reverence please don't use Him as anything else.
Of course it should be a moment of silence, gang. Think Lady Liberty and what she stands for. I'm as Christian as they come, by the way.
Think about how this came up- Mitchell gets elected, and it's one of the first things that she does. Why? I can't know, but here's some fuel for the conspiracy theorists that follow this blog.
It has NOTHING to do with Mitchell's faith. She is in SAPOA's pocket,and is aligned with Jonathan Taylor. Do these folks fight fair? Personal attacks, ala Barrie Tilghman, are the norm.
All this is is bait- they will take ANY of the council majority's comment or votes and hope they can be bashed for them.That's what they do,folks.
G.A,
Would you be harmed by a moment of silence rather than a specific prayer for a specific religion? You can say the Lord's Prayer, I can choose not to. It is a silly argument to say that we should wait to be sued to change something. Name one place where there was a lawsuit over saying the Lord's Prayer before a public meeting and it was upheld in a lawsuit. Just one. Cannot? That is because it hasn't happened. Why on earth would we want to put more money in the hands of the lawyers when we KNOW what the result of the lawsuit would be? A moment of silence is perfectly acceptable.
The date 1958 says it all. Salisbury is not at all what it was in 1958, when men were in charge of City Council, minorities were not included, and only Christians served as Council members. The Lord's Prayer is considered a Christian prayer; Salisbury has many non-Christians. The prayer is recited in probably every Christian church every Sunday, a setting where it is appropriate. A City Council session is not a church service. Just because we have a "tradition" of some 52 years does not make it right to continue. A silent prayer for those who want to pray will ensure that prayer is still being continued. And, before I attract any negative responses, I am a devout Christian.
anonymous 2:04, shall we call you "Father" too? Come on now. Anyone who feels the need to make such a final statement IMHO is completely full of crap. I'm not saying I disagree with your message in general. I'm just saying, IF you were so devout, you wouldn't have to make such a statement. By the way, my NAME is on my comment as I am NOT afraid of anything I say with YOU or with God.
Signed,
A Devout Blogger. LOL
I get why 2:04 puts the qualifier on there. Any time someone goes against the conservative slant of many of your viewers, the accusations start flying. If it's not antiChristian, it's wet pants liberal, whatever that is. Or bleeding heart, or satan lover, or unAmerican; the list goes on.
Look what happened when they took prayer out of schools. Looks like our council will continue to spiral downwards as well.
Thank you, 2:51; that's exactly why I (2:04) inserted that qualifier at the end. I am also a conservative, but not so much that I don't see when it's time to make changes. Repeating the Lord's Prayer at a government meeting is way outdated. Like it or not, Christians are not the only religion in America or Salisbury. It's well past time to go to a moment of silence or get a generic prayer. Certainly a small committee of religious leaders--not all Christian--could write such a prayer.
There are many many Christian Zionists. It is an oxymoron but they claim to be nonetheless.
There is a movement to exorcise Jesus Christ from public discourse in America. That is a simple fact. Its origins are Zionism - a political ideology of one-world government led by elite bloodlines of Jews. Namely the descendents of the Jews who killed our Lord Jesus Christ.
Sorry you are offended by our Lord's Prayer folks. Wait until you meet him in the afterllfe . . . then we will see the taking of offense!
Cohen has stood respectfully for four years and said her own faith's prayer. She was not the one who brought this up, but she is acting in her role as government official to protect the city from liability.
I hope they keep prayer in, but I respect the dignity Cohen has always shown. Got to wonder if someone is bomb throwing here, especially after reading the ridiculous article about meeting length.
Also, I would rather see the Lord's Prayer out than it continue to be blasphemed by hypocrites.
they need not waste their time on Prayer they need a refresher course on Rules of Order
When did the MAJORITY have to listen to the minority? I'm tired of having to change things around just to satisfy a few people. That is what is going wrong with this country. We try to satisfy the few and the rest of us just have to sit there and take it.
I agree with the post above. They took God out of the schools and look where it has gotten us. These kids don't know that they WILL be accountable for their actions. Most of the kids now days think mommy and daddy will come to their rescue or the court will just slap them on the wrist. In most cases that IS what happens. Boy they are in for a big surprise on judgment day!
That's what you get when you vote for democrats.
In a democracy, majority rules...the majority in our society are Christian. Everyone else can observe the moment of silence and pray their own prayer. If this were an Indian culture, then prayers would reflect those beliefs. It's not, it's a Christian culture...so pray the Lord's Prayer, like we were ALL taught.
Are you ashamed? Pray aloud!
Our government isn't here to protect you from being offended.
Our ancestors from foreign countries had to assimilate... became AMERICANS.Religion of any sort is NOT forced upon us.(Separation of church & state)
If you're offended by the recitation of the Lord's prayer, then go where you know it's NOT being said. (or move to another country)
Take a poll & see exactly how many are Christian at the next meeting. Pray the prayer of the majority, but pray a prayer. We all need it!
Correction, G.A., Cohen never said she was "uncomfortable." She said she "can't" lead everyone in the Lord's Prayer. I talked to her, did you?
The commenter who talked about Mitchell suddenly making this an issue got my attention. I saw her on TV going to the podium for public comment while she was running for office. Why didn't she say something then? You combine this with the attack piece on Cohen Sunday, including Boy Mayor's quote after his pet Mitchell didn't get V.P. and it does sound like some political forces are dumping on Cohen right out of the gate.
Is that what this post is about, G.A.? If Louise Smith kept doing something "unconstitutional," you'd be screaming bloody murder.
To my mind, there's much more important hurdles for the new council to overcome. WHY is this even an issue at this juncture?
taking prayer out of anything only leaves room for the Devils work to begin penetrating the Council. Laura is a Wicken, she is a puppet for the devil a wolf in sheeps clothing. We Christian's need to stand firm, so what if not saying the Lord's prayer offends me or another council member that's ok? but no ok to offend a non-christian. This country was founded on Christian principles in the beginning those fled here to start a new Christian nation, WAKE up AMERICA, wake UP Salisbury. STAND firm on the Godly PRINCIPALS not the Worlds which is Satan. We can only choose 1 way, either God's or Satan the battle will not end until Jesus returns. Fight with prayer, start at home.
Post a Comment