|
|
|
| Wed, Nov. 25 - - Mobile - RSS | |
|
|
Police prayer bill defeated in committee
Prayer bill defeated in Senate
Date published: 2/24/2009
By Chelyen Davis RICHMOND-- A Senate committee has killed a bill that would have prevented the state police from banning prayers to Jesus Christ at public police events.The bill was introduced by Del. Charles Carrico, R-Greyson, to reverse a state police ruling requiring non-sectarian prayers at events like trooper graduations and memorial services. Carrico said the non-sectarian prayer requirement violated the freedom of speech of state police chaplains. "I personally feel that you are promoting a religion when you say non-secular, because it's a no-God religion," Carrico said yesterday. His bill, which had earlier passed the House of Delegates by a wide margin, was killed on an 8-7 voice vote in the Senate Courts of Justice committee. The issue of praying to a specific deity at public events arose after a federal appeals court upheld a Fredericksburg City Council ban on referring to Jesus Christ in public prayers that open council meetings. The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear the case. As a result of the court's ruling, State Police Col. Steven Flaherty had directed police chaplains--who are troopers who volunteer chaplain services--to avoid denominational prayers at public events. Six chaplains resigned in protest, igniting a controversy that had a group of ministers criticizing Gov. Tim Kaine and Flaherty for the directive, saying it violated the chaplains' right to pray according to their own conscience. Carrico's bill would have said the state police could operate a volunteer chaplain program, but could not regulate how those chaplains express religious beliefs. "They have rights just as much as you and I. They wear a uniform, I understand. But they volunteer their time, this is above and beyond what they're required to do as a trooper," Carrico said. "They should have the right according to the dictates of their conscience to be able to pray and do their job as they feel they have a right under the constitution." A lawyer from the attorney general's office said he believed Carrico's bill was constitutional, and the Family Foundation supported it, arguing that previous legal precedent protects the right of chaplains or others to deliver public prayers as they see fit. "The government should not be telling people how to pray or not to pray and that is exactly what this state police policy does," said Chris Freund of the Family Foundation.
Date published: 2/24/2009
so do you just ignore the first part?
(posted by
senor
, Feb. 24, 2009 6:30 pm)
there's no need and it's unconstitutional to require prayers at all as a official function of govt. Your rights end where others begin. What makes your right to pray out loud greater than the right of others to not be offended by it? Why can't people pray to themselves or during the other 23h59m of the day? The authors of the amendment were clearly against public religious officials, days of prayer, and the like.
Here we go again.
(posted by
lifeisbeautiful
, Feb. 24, 2009 4:02 pm)
How can you stop someone from praying the way they
deem responsible and according to their own beliefs. If you
don't like don't listen. It does not infringe on anyone's rights
to ignore the prayer. "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the
free exercise thereof;" free exercise means free exercise.
Wrong msdaisy
(posted by
peachesmom
, Feb. 24, 2009 11:51 am)
The law of freedom of expression and religion does not mean only in private. If people are offended by a certain religion then they do not have to participate but have absolutly no right to step on the rights of others weather in public or private. A man did not my display of the American flag. It was on my property, displayed correctly so I just told him not to look at my house if it bothered him. Telling these Chaplins not to mention the Jesus Christ is just wrong.
Had it passed the General Assembly...
(posted by
Tamerlane
, Feb. 24, 2009 6:13 am)
this bill would have (rightuflly) lasted in an appeal court about as long as a gob of spit on a hot coal stove. Those who insist on praying to only one form of the Christian godheads reinforce the belief that Christianity is a polytheistic religion, and that ain't so according to Constantine (The Great).
Cont.
(posted by
msdaisy
, Feb. 24, 2009 6:04 am)
Just because you think that the Christian faith is the one and only true faith does not make it so. Nor does that give you the right to push that belief onto anyone else. You said the Christian faith has been persecuted, but in fact it’s Christians that seem to think they can totally take over religion all together. I suggest you take an example from Michael Shochet who stated, “The prayer is not about me it’s about helping others”. And; “a prayer that alienates others would not be comfort for all.”
|
 |
|||
|
|||
