![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Someday, I may have to do a huge linkspam roundup of lawsuits related to prayers at the start of city council meetings. The US has plenty of towns with a strong majority of citizens who think that "since we've used Christian prayers to start our meetings for many years, it must be legal and okay; anyone who objects is just trying to cause trouble."
Town du jour: Point Pleasant Beach, NJ, where a Jewish woman filed suit over starting the meetings with the Lord's Prayer and the sign of the cross. (They tried to avert the lawsuit by agreeing to a moment of silence instead--but refused to penalize the crowds who interrupted the silence with, surprise surprise, loud readings of the Lord's Prayer.)
The comments are a breathtaking array of antiSemitism and Islamophobia. That's kinda new for me; I'm used to seeing the anti-Wiccan versions. Apparently, they just recycle the same hate-rhetoric with different labels in the religion slots. (Of course, since Islam was mentioned--why, I have no idea--there are people screaming about the foreigners trying to take over the US.)
Occasionally, a comment or an article offers alternatives like, "Downtown churches could offer a place for local officials to pray before their meetings or could offer to host a weekly session in which the city -- or elected officials from anywhere -- could come and pray or be prayed over. They could host an event in a place that would be common to many to allow prayer to be said before public meetings." These tend to be ignored--how dare those heathens suggest that Christians do their praying somewhere else, not at government meetings?
The issues of prayers at graduation ceremonies and school functions held in churches are related, and inspire similar lawsuits, and similar backlash.
Town du jour: Point Pleasant Beach, NJ, where a Jewish woman filed suit over starting the meetings with the Lord's Prayer and the sign of the cross. (They tried to avert the lawsuit by agreeing to a moment of silence instead--but refused to penalize the crowds who interrupted the silence with, surprise surprise, loud readings of the Lord's Prayer.)
The comments are a breathtaking array of antiSemitism and Islamophobia. That's kinda new for me; I'm used to seeing the anti-Wiccan versions. Apparently, they just recycle the same hate-rhetoric with different labels in the religion slots. (Of course, since Islam was mentioned--why, I have no idea--there are people screaming about the foreigners trying to take over the US.)
Occasionally, a comment or an article offers alternatives like, "Downtown churches could offer a place for local officials to pray before their meetings or could offer to host a weekly session in which the city -- or elected officials from anywhere -- could come and pray or be prayed over. They could host an event in a place that would be common to many to allow prayer to be said before public meetings." These tend to be ignored--how dare those heathens suggest that Christians do their praying somewhere else, not at government meetings?
The issues of prayers at graduation ceremonies and school functions held in churches are related, and inspire similar lawsuits, and similar backlash.