Religious Freedom And the Law? (priest, preacher, pagan, pray)

[Sunstone]

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, one of the nation's most conservative courts, appears to have contradicted itself when ruling in two cases concerning religious freedom.

In the first case, it ruled that a school had to allow students to pass out proselytizing Christian literature, while in the second case, it ruled that a board of supervisors could refuse to allow a Wiccan to lead prayers before board meetings.

"The Fourth Circuit says it's constitutionally mandatory for a public school to give students proselytizing Christian flyers, yet it's constitutionally okay for a local government to refuse to hear nondenominational prayers from denominations its board members dislike. In other words, potential discrimination against a Christian evangelical group is verboten, but outright and public discrimination against a Wiccan, offering up nondenominational prayers, is perfectly fine. Common sense dictates that these two decisions cannot be sustained simultaneously - especially if equality is a principle of value."

Furthermore, these rulings seem to have been influenced by various Christian groups who filed friend of the court briefs:

"Turning to the political context, the CEF case was brought by the Christian Legal Society on the merits, with the National Legal Foundation, another Christian organization, submitting an amicus (friend of the court) brief...The political reality is that these organizations are using equality principles to further Christian ends; except in the courts, their devotion is not to equality, but rather to Christianity above all other faiths. (If one knows the political lay of the land, it should come as no surprise that the NLF supported the Board of Supervisors against the Wiccan preacher, in the Simpson case. So much for the principle of equal treatment of religious groups by government.)... Here, equality is little more than a litigation tactic. Christian groups such as these quite publicly have made clear that they want to roll back the Establishment Clause in order to empower Christianity."

From: http://www.wildhunt.org/2006/08/reli...m-and-law.html

Has a principle of equality been violated here? Is the Fourth Circuit trying to pull a fast one on us?

[YamiB.]

I do think that this is a case of them playing favorites with religion.

I personaly think that both cases should have not been allowed. Though I think the second one could have been solved in a much simpler manner by simply having the person who wanted to lead the prayer asking if everyone was ok with such a thing.

[BrandonE]

Please, please tell me that both of these are currently being pushed up to the Supreme Court? Admittedly, I haven't read a lot of background on these, but this sounds like a horrible miscarriage of justice. I'll have to read more on this. Thanks for pointing it out Sunstone.

[nutshell]

Originally Posted by Sunstone

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, one of the nation's most conservative courts, appears to have contradicted itself when ruling in two cases concerning religious freedom.

In the first case, it ruled that a school had to allow students to pass out proselytizing Christian literature, while in the second case, it ruled that a board of supervisors could refuse to allow a Wiccan to lead prayers before board meetings.

"The Fourth Circuit says it's constitutionally mandatory for a public school to give students proselytizing Christian flyers, yet it's constitutionally okay for a local government to refuse to hear nondenominational prayers from denominations its board members dislike. In other words, potential discrimination against a Christian evangelical group is verboten, but outright and public discrimination against a Wiccan, offering up nondenominational prayers, is perfectly fine. Common sense dictates that these two decisions cannot be sustained simultaneously - especially if equality is a principle of value."

Furthermore, these rulings seem to have been influenced by various Christian groups who filed friend of the court briefs:

"Turning to the political context, the CEF case was brought by the Christian Legal Society on the merits, with the National Legal Foundation, another Christian organization, submitting an amicus (friend of the court) brief...The political reality is that these organizations are using equality principles to further Christian ends; except in the courts, their devotion is not to equality, but rather to Christianity above all other faiths. (If one knows the political lay of the land, it should come as no surprise that the NLF supported the Board of Supervisors against the Wiccan preacher, in the Simpson case. So much for the principle of equal treatment of religious groups by government.)... Here, equality is little more than a litigation tactic. Christian groups such as these quite publicly have made clear that they want to roll back the Establishment Clause in order to empower Christianity."

From: http://www.wildhunt.org/2006/08/reli...m-and-law.html

Has a principle of equality been violated here? Is the Fourth Circuit trying to pull a fast one on us?

Let me read the actual cases and I'll tell you what's up.

I'll get back to you.

[angellous_evangellous]

Originally Posted by Sunstone

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, one of the nation's most conservative courts, appears to have contradicted itself when ruling in two cases concerning religious freedom.

In the first case, it ruled that a school had to allow students to pass out proselytizing Christian literature, while in the second case, it ruled that a board of supervisors could refuse to allow a Wiccan to lead prayers before board meetings.

"The Fourth Circuit says it's constitutionally mandatory for a public school to give students proselytizing Christian flyers, yet it's constitutionally okay for a local government to refuse to hear nondenominational prayers from denominations its board members dislike. In other words, potential discrimination against a Christian evangelical group is verboten, but outright and public discrimination against a Wiccan, offering up nondenominational prayers, is perfectly fine. Common sense dictates that these two decisions cannot be sustained simultaneously - especially if equality is a principle of value."

The use of "verboten" here is derogatory, inflamatory, and a signal that this is propaganda.

Furthermore, these rulings seem to have been influenced by various Christian groups who filed friend of the court briefs:

"Turning to the political context, the CEF case was brought by the Christian Legal Society on the merits, with the National Legal Foundation, another Christian organization, submitting an amicus (friend of the court) brief...The political reality is that these organizations are using equality principles to further Christian ends; except in the courts, their devotion is not to equality, but rather to Christianity above all other faiths. (If one knows the political lay of the land, it should come as no surprise that the NLF supported the Board of Supervisors against the Wiccan preacher, in the Simpson case. So much for the principle of equal treatment of religious groups by government.)... Here, equality is little more than a litigation tactic. Christian groups such as these quite publicly have made clear that they want to roll back the Establishment Clause in order to empower Christianity."

From: http://www.wildhunt.org/2006/08/reli...m-and-law.html

Has a principle of equality been violated here? Is the Fourth Circuit trying to pull a fast one on us?

I'd rather look at another interpretation of the case before I form an opinion.

[angellous_evangellous]

[Green Gaia]

I'm somewhat familiar with the Wiccan case, since that happened here in the Richmond, VA area, (religious discrimination in VA, go figure ). The suit was over prayers at a Board of Supervisors meeting. Christian clergy (and the occasional rabbi) volunteered and were invited to offer prayer before the start of the meeting. When a Wiccan priestess volunteerd to give a prayer she was refused and told that In a letter from the county's attorney, "that only members of "Judeo-Christian" religions can pray on the board's behalf," (December 7, 2002, The Washington Post, B1). She and her religion were mocked at the public meeting, Chairman Kelly Miller termed [Wicca] a 'mockery,' and Supervisor Renny Humphrey made a crack, wondering whether Ms. Simpson was a good witch or a bad witch," (October 9, 2002, The Richmond Times-Dispatch, A-16).

At first, she won the case but in the appeal the 4th U.S. Circuit Court ruled in favor of the county government, allowing them to discriminate against religions not Judeo-Christian.

[Green Gaia]

Originally Posted by angellous_evangellous

The use of "verboten" here is derogatory, inflamatory, and a signal that this is propaganda.

I'm not sure what you find objectionable about 'verboten' it's simply German for 'forbidden.'