Potential "Interfaith" Prayer On My Campus

[DrugFreeAlcoholic]

Hello all. I'm a long time lurker on IIDB, and I post more often at CF (I have about 1,700 posts there). I'm not sure where to put this thread, so for now I'll put it in The Lounge and the mods can move it whereever they see appropiate. Right now, I'm currently taking general education classes at a community college (such as Calculus II, yeah, major general education class, that one).

Ok, so a week ago, I decide to follow my friend into his meeting at the campus ministry department (yeah, my baloney detector went off too), and we talked about things the school could do on the International Day of Peace. It was an okay meeting, except I didn't have a precise definition of "peace" to work with, so I kinda got the feeling these people were a bunch of new-age, tree-huggin', woo-woos or hippies.

The only thing that made going to the meeting worthwhile was that I stopped a potential prayer activity. She planned to have a moment of silence followed by a large group prayer. I said that might not be a good idea as it may violate the first amendment, the separation of church and state, and we must take into consideration that not everyone is a Christian or believes in a deity.

Wonderful, eh? So yesterday, my friend gets an email from this lady saying that on the day of peace, we could have a nice moment of silence... followed by an "interfaith prayer" ... damn. :( I wasn't sure exactly what she meant by "interfaith," but it didn't sound good, and still seemed to infringe the separation of church and state. Intuitively, I thought people of differing faiths would pray together, or people would pray to a different deity than they normally do.

So, my friend replies to her and says that it may still offend some people of differing faiths, I add that it may offend atheists like me (somehow, I didn't think she'd give a damn about the atheists, but I decided to throw that in anyway).

Today we received an email explaining that interfaith prayer implies that people of different faiths would pray together. We’re still not happy with this. It's still organized prayer that violates the first amendment, right?

That’s all I’ll write for now...

[Kosmo]

What is this campus ministry? Is it a club or something? The reason I ask is that I wonder why this is a violation of the separation of church and state.
A public school letting a religious club have a public prayer doesn't violate the separation of church and state unless there is some obligation to the student body.

On another note, I think a better way to demonstrate your support for 'Peace Day' would be a public display of interethnic sex. ;)

[placebo messiah]

you should go and represent

say hi to the noodleman for me

tell him I want a bike

[DrugFreeAlcoholic]

What is this campus ministry? Is it a club or something? The reason I ask is that I wonder why this is a violation of the separation of church and state.
A public school letting a religious club have a public prayer doesn't violate the separation of church and state unless there is some obligation to the student body.
The campus ministry is an office. I surmise it's somehow affiliated with the "Crusade for Christ" club we have here, but I'm not certain. Hopefully it's secular. ^.-

The "interfaith prayer" on the day of peace is on the public scope, not just for that particular club. That is why I'm expressing concern over it.

I'm not sure how yet, but we might have an entire group of people pray in the middle of the courtyard or something.

you should go and represent

say hi to the noodleman for me

tell him I want a bike
Will do. :thumbs:

[jaded_revenge]

I've never understood the idea of an interfaith prayer... No matter how many you do, you've missed out on some religion or prayer style. The christians always wan't a longer prayer then the lesser religions and Atheists/agnostics don't really pray.

I don't find group prayer offensive, I find it intimidating. I have a few religous friends, and whenever I go to one of their birthday parties they all suddenly go into deep group prayer. I'm not easily intimidated, but when you realize the thirty something people standing around you are insane you begin to wonder when the bonfire starts.

[WCH]

You should inform her that the violation of separation is not so much forcing people to pray to a specific god, as forcing them to pray at all.

[EasyTarget]

As far as I have seen, "ministry" = Christian, and "interfaith" = various Christian sects. I don't think any religion other than Xianity uses the word "ministry," so count on everything else to be minimized and "the Xian god wants you to be nice" to be maximized.

[linwood]

I don`t believe this is an infringement of CSS.

Prayer, even organised prayer is allowed as long as it`s not organised by a school official.

At least to my knowledge.

Correct me if I`m wrong.

Edit:
Sorry I may be misunderstanding exactly what a campus ministry dept is.
It in itself sounds like a violation of church and state by it`s very existence.
Is this dept part of the school admin?

[DrugFreeAlcoholic]

Sorry I may be misunderstanding exactly what a campus ministry dept is.
It in itself sounds like a violation of church and state by it`s very existence.
Is this dept part of the school admin?
I'm not sure, I may be misunderstanding it as well. I'll inquire more about it next week though.

[Vortex]

TL –> CSS

[Dick Springer]

Regardless of legal questions, this activity simply is another manifestation of the attitude so well espressed by Senator Joe Lieberman when he said "What unites us as Americans is our faith in god."

With respect to being involuntarily roped into participation in group prayer, my most egregious personal experience was at my uncle's funeral. He lived in a New York suburb and had an eclectic assortment of friends. The minister, without announcing his intent, he had us all join hands and then went into a prayer in the name of our lord, Jesus Christ. Who could make a fuss when everyone was mourning?

[Professor]

Regardless of legal questions, this activity simply is another manifestation of the attitude so well espressed by Senator Joe Lieberman when he said "What unites us as Americans is our faith in god."
Or Barak Obama's statement.

We first need to understand that Americans are a religious people. 90 percent of us believe in God, 70 percent affiliate themselves with an organized religion, 38 percent call themselves committed Christians, and substantially more people believe in angels than do those who believe in evolution."
Americans are religious people? Apparently I'm not an American. By his own later statement, around 10% of us aren't religious people. Since the U.S. population is only around 10% black, it makes as much sense to declare that "Americans are a non-black people," but I suspect he would be offended by that characterization of our nation.

But Obama is entirely unable to put himself in the shoes of non-believers. Otherwise he wouldn't have said...

It is doubtful that children reciting the Pledge of Allegiance feel oppressed or brainwashed as a consequence of muttering the phrase "under God." I didn't.
How astonishing that a Christian like Obama wouldn't feel oppressed by the phrase "under God." :rolleyes: He just can't get over the idea that all the little children really, deep down, believe just like he did. This shouldn't really surprise me I suppose. Christians have spent centuries arguing that the jews only pretended not to believe in Jesus' divinity so that they could pursue lives of immorality. I wonder if Obama would be making the same argument today if the pledge said "under Jesus" and it was jewish families who were protesting.

Then there is Nancy Pelosi's recent comment on the house floor,

We all agree - 'one Nation under God' - what a beautiful pledge. We all agree.
Yes Nancy... except for those of us who don't agree, but we don't count. I still haven't forgotten how she publicly raked McDermott over the coals when he chose not to include "under God" in the pledge, a right which is often invoked to argue that the pledge isn't compulsory religion. She stated that...

All House Democrats expect the Pledge of Allegiance to be delivered as it is written with the phrase 'under God' and with respect for the pledge.
This rather pointedly ignores the fact that McDermott himself is a House Democrat who didn't seem to feel that way. Just another example of the "we all really believe" argument. (By the way, daily recitations of the pledge in the House only began in 1988.)

And let's not forget John Kerry arguing that even atheists are really spiritual even if we don't want to admit it.

Spirituality is a fundamental for us. I mean, it's the-it is the overpowering, driving foundation of most of the struggles that we go through here on earth, in my judgement. I am a believer in the Supreme Being, in God. I believe, without any question in this force that is so much larger and more powerful than anything human beings can conceivably define.

I think the more we learn about the universe, the more we learn about black holes and the expansion of the universe and the more we learn what we don't know about: our beginnings and-not just of us, but the universe itself, the more I find that people believe in this supreme being.

...

It's all a matter of spirituality.

I find that even - even atheists and agnostics wind up with some kind of spirituality, maybe begrudgingly acknowledging it here and there, but it's there.
The list goes on and on. Liberal theists agree with fundamentalists that everyone really believes in God, they just tend to prefer passive-aggresive language like that above, rather than the openly aggresive language used by Robertson, Falwell, etc. Sometimes I prefer the more honest approach of the religious right.

After all, Senators Diane Feinstein Barbara Boxer proudly co-sponsored the 2002 senate resolution condemning the 9th circuit decision in the Newdow case, co-sponsored the 2003 bill to use federal funds to restore still operating Catholic missions, and led the fight to preserve the Mt. Soledad cross by declaring it to be on federal land. With friends like these...

The fact is that none of the democratic party leadership really believe in the separation of church and state. They simply don't want the state to endorse conservative religious values. They welcome LiberalGod into the halls of congress and our schools. After all LiberalGod is the only true God and everyone, even atheists and conservatives, really believes in Him even if they only do so begrudgingly. :rolleyes:



Note: In the process of researching for this post I downloaded the 2006 California democratic platform (http://www.cadem.org/atf/cf/%7BBF9D7366-E5A7-41C3-8E3F-E06FB835FCCE%7D/2006_platform_final.pdf). I need to read it a bit more closely, but at first glance much of the language regarding religious freedom in the 2004 platform (http://www.kintera.org/atf/cf/{CCC02147-2FC6-45A1-96FD-C95D72F7D4B2}/2004Platform.pdf) seems to have been removed. For example I don't see the section respecting "freedom of conscience." That isn't promising.

[Padre Bear]

Consider the following approach to common prayer.

From the beginning of recorded history and before, humanity has wrestled with the question how have we arrived here and now. Numerous cultures have struggled to answer that question; some with story, some with what they confess as history, some with simple assertions about the nature of life as it is lived in the present. Those who a believe in a personal God have spoken in personal names and some believe the name should never by spoken, still others accept no name and honestly question the possibility of knowing any such god. Let us respect each person in the honesty of their faith or lack there of. Let us commit ourselves into the tasks respecting each other and serving our common cause. Let us consider some of the words of Francis of Assisi and how they can bind us in common cause if not common worship.

Where there is hatred, let me sow love;
where there is injury,pardon;
where there is doubt, faith;
where there is despair, hope;
where there is darkness, light;
and where there is sadness, joy.

Grant that I may not so much seek
to be consoled as to console;
to be understood as to understand;
to be loved as to love.
For it is in giving that we receive;
it is in pardoning that we are pardoned;
and it is in dying that we are born to eternal life. Amen (remember the meaning of "Amen" amounts to "I agree". It is not specifically "holy" language)


Note: In any true interfaith situation each must sacrifice, listening more then they speak of their own belief.

[Oresta]

In any true interfaith situation each must sacrifice, listening more then they speak of their own belief.

Group prayer doesn't - indeed cannot - provide for the participating atheists to "speak to their own [dis]belief", save by staying seated, not joining hands in the circle, bowing heads and clasping hands,etc. For some, as jaded-revenge posts, it can be intimidating not to do so. My husband and I (We are both retired) got super dirty looks from another retiree when we sat out the stand-and-be-led-in-prayer drill at a political meeting. Who is the rude one here?

Other than in churches or at funerals, I never participate because I don't believe in prayer or worship or faith. It is important that those who do believe be made aware that we are also among them; they shouldn't assume everyong wants to pray at public gatherings.

[Padre Bear]

Group prayer doesn't - indeed cannot - provide for the participating atheists to "speak to their own [dis]belief", save by staying seated, not joining hands in the circle, bowing heads and clasping hands,etc. For some, as jaded-revenge posts, it can be intimidating not to do so. My husband and I (We are both retired) got super dirty looks from another retiree when we sat out the stand-and-be-led-in-prayer drill at a political meeting. Who is the rude one here?

Other than in churches or at funerals, I never participate because I don't believe in prayer or worship or faith. It is important that those who do believe be made aware that we are also among them; they shouldn't assume everyong wants to pray at public gatherings.

oresta, atheists have dozens of beliefs. A philosophy, such as, secular humanism may be one of them, spiritual beliefs are not. I suggested a belief in respect for others and common cause, such as, world peace, may be onefor use in common reflection.

[crazyfingers]

oresta, atheists have dozens of beliefs. A philosophy, such as, secular humanism may be one of them, spiritual beliefs are not. I suggested a belief in respect for others and common cause, such as, world peace, may be onefor use in common reflection.

I was asked to represent nontheists at an interfaith memorial on 9-11 a couple of years back. I found that the ethic of reciprocity, the golden rule, made good common ground material. Of course, interfaith gatherings tend not to be the kinds of things that the more fundamentalist theists tend to attend.

[Oresta]

oresta, atheists have dozens of beliefs. A philosophy, such as, secular humanism may be one of them, spiritual beliefs are not. I suggested a belief in respect for others and common cause, such as, world peace, may be onefor use in common reflection

In your post #13, you use refer to this as a "common prayer;" also the terms "common worship". What is any atheist to worship? To whom is he/she to pray?

What do you mean by "spititual beliefs"?

[Padre Bear]

In your post #13, you use refer to this as a "common prayer;" also the terms "common worship". What is any atheist to worship? To whom is he/she to pray?

What do you mean by "spititual beliefs"?

You're correct I should have said meditation. I tried to make that clear in the rest of the content.

By spiritual beliefs I mean belief in a deity or divine spirit.

I, also, would or should have edited the last line of the meditation based on the prayer attributed to Assisi.

[Oresta]

I appreciate your response. My post expressed my objections to explicit prayer, particularly at secular affairs such a professional conference luncheon.

[Padre Bear]

I appreciate your response. My post expressed my objections to explicit prayer, particularly at secular affairs such a professional conference luncheon.

It may be inappropriate but it is likely to continue to happen in many contexts since it is private speech.