Tradition continues to fall here on DelMarVa. One more symptom of the cultural decline of our great nation. It appears that Rock Hall will be joining Salisbury and Sussex County in jettisoning the Lord’s Prayer from its council meetings:
Thursday night, Mayor Bob Willis announced as the meeting started that the recitation might be the last: "We need to give this a good hard look, see what our options are, and where we want to go with this, with opening up the town meeting with the Lord's Prayer."
Town resident Gren Whitman contacted Willis by letter June 10, asking the council to pick an alternative to the Lord's Prayer, which he said is specifically denominational.
If prayers at government meetings endorse one religious group, they are unconstitutional.
At the beginning of the meeting, Whitman joined everyone in the Pledge of Allegiance, and sat down during the prayer.
There is a big difference between Rock Hall, Sussex County and Salisbury. In Rock Hall’s case, Whitman was man enough to stand up and object. In Sussex County they were threatened with a lawsuit. In Salisbury, our city council, sans councilwomen Debbie Campbell and Shanie Shields, thought that somebody MIGHT be offended.
Sussex should have waited UNTIL a law suit was actually filed. Salisbury should have not done anything. While we commend Mr. Whitman for his gumption, Rock Hall should also stand firm; at least until (or IF) a lawsuit is filed.
For all of you naysayers out there – I can’t wait until the Pledge of Allegiance goes as well. One more tradition gone. One more step down the ladder of cultural decline.
7 comments:
Another town to avoid.
God help us!
"If prayers at religious meetings endorse one religious group, they are unconstitutional." As the mayor stated, the law does not leave much wiggle room. Yes, saying the Lord's Prayer has been "traditional," but the law says that that practce is unconstitutional." What else need be said? As a Christian, this law infuriates me, but it's the law.
Anon 1435 -
It's only the law in the sense that the courts have "interpreted" the Constitution that way. Try reading it. There is NOTHING about the "separation of church and state". In fact, the Founders fully expected that the various states might have "established" churches. Only the federal government was prohibited from doing so. No state could interfere in your right to worship (or not) as you see fit.
While I am certainly uncomfortable with the notion of a state having an "established" church, I am even more uncomfortable with judges who legislate from the bench. That is what was done with this matter and many others.
further decay in the once great nation of America
I wonder who will admitt they are a democrat when the crap hits the fan.
What a joke. If it's tradition then keep with it. If someone doesn't like it then don't participate or attend.
Post a Comment