Open meetings with a prayer?

[Skeptisch]

The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled the municipal council in the Quebec town of Saguenay cannot open its meetings with a prayer. What do you think of this ruling?

Supreme Court rules against prayer at city council meetings - Montreal - CBC News

 

[Quintessence]

I think that banishment of religions from the public sphere is not neutrality, it's endorsement of the "religion" of secularism. The solution should be to encourage religious (and irreligious) pluralism for the opening prayers or invocations, not to banish them entirely. Celebrate diversity, don't erase it.

 

[Deidre]

A few moments of silence, to pray, meditate, etc…before a meeting is perfectly fine. But, to recite a prayer before a meeting? That is wrong in my eyes. Not everyone who is religious subscribes to Christianity…who could be in attendance. (not to mention non-believers who are in attendance)

It is a secular venue, not a church. I never liked prayers before meetings in secular venues, even when I was a Christian.

 

[SkylarHunter]

I don't agree with mixing religious practices with secular activities. There are places and appropriate times for praying if people want to. People of all kinds of views and beliefs attend city council meetings and they shouldn't have someone else's faith thrown at them.
I think more and more secular life and religious beliefs need to be apart, with very clear boundaries. Yes, people have the right to practice their religion freely but in the appropriate place at appropriate times.

 

[Nietzsche]

I think that banishment of religions from the public sphere is not neutrality, it's endorsement of the "religion" of secularism. The solution should be to encourage religious (and irreligious) pluralism for the opening prayers or invocations, not to banish them entirely. Celebrate diversity, don't erase it.

You run the risk of individuals using it for their own ends. Which has been done countless times before. Pray on your own time.

 

[Quintessence]

You run the risk of individuals using it for their own ends. Which has been done countless times before. Pray on your own time.

Shifting cultural norms towards embracing pluralism, including religious pluralism, will be slowed, halted, or even reversed if all we do is stuff it in a closet. If you don't want to support pluralism in that way, that's fine, but I do.

 

[Jainarayan]

I think we've been fighting religion for so long now, because of the misbehavior of a few of them that by shunning all religion we're throwing the baby out with the bath water. Mind you, it's not an unjustified feeling, but it is unfortunate because we're not being exposed to other beliefs and practices.

 

[Nietzsche]

Shifting cultural norms towards embracing pluralism, including religious pluralism, will be slowed, halted, or even reversed if all we do is stuff it in a closet. If you don't want to support pluralism in that way, that's fine, but I do.

I don't want government involved with any manner of religious services. The government should be utterly indifferent & just generally ignore matters of faith. The thicker the wall between Church(es) & State, the better both will inherently be.

 

[leibowde84]

The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled the municipal council in the Quebec town of Saguenay cannot open its meetings with a prayer. What do you think of this ruling?

Supreme Court rules against prayer at city council meetings - Montreal - CBC News

I think it is a great decision. There is absolutely no need for theists to pray before council meetings, and the activity can reasonably be expected to cause non-theists to feel excluded from their own Government.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

All sessions of the houses of parliament and the lords start with prayers.
not only by the C ofE chaplain but also other churches and Rabbi. Those with no faith need not attend, indeed no one must attend.

 

[leibowde84]

I think that banishment of religions from the public sphere is not neutrality, it's endorsement of the "religion" of secularism. The solution should be to encourage religious (and irreligious) pluralism for the opening prayers or invocations, not to banish them entirely. Celebrate diversity, don't erase it.

Theoretically that is a great idea, but in practice it will cause nothing but chaos. Think of how many lawsuits will be brought up when certain religious groups are not permitted to share their prayer. There is no way that the council can accommodate every religion.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

Seems fair enough. Keep god & religion out of governance or you're in for some real trouble. That aside; which god would they offer prayers to before meetings start? Presumably the Christian god and they'd set a precedent for offering Christianity undeserved privileges in society.

I think that banishment of religions from the public sphere is not neutrality, it's endorsement of the "religion" of secularism. The solution should be to encourage religious (and irreligious) pluralism for the opening prayers or invocations, not to banish them entirely. Celebrate diversity, don't erase it.

Secularism is not a religion; it's the state not favouring one religion over another which is by definition 'neutrality'. Establishing prayers to one specific deity inevitably leads to an atmosphere of entitlement. The secular approach in the case of actually having prayers would be to have prayers to the gods of every religion. The inherent problems would be:

1) Picking which of the multitude non-Abrahamic deities to pray to for a meeting where the prayer is to a non-Abrahamic god as there are quite literally millions to choose from.
2) The attitude of those who are undoubtedly pressing for this to be a thing which will be 'my god is supreme so we must pray to him, but I will not pray to anyone else's.
3) The ensuing legal drama which will unfold as a result of other religions demanding equal treatment for prayers.

To avoid all this it's best to treat all religions equally by keeping them all out of it. Put one up on a pedestal and its adherents will construe any attempt to level the playing field as persecution - regardless of what is actually fair. Religion & politics are a most toxic mix. If we as a species haven't learned this by now then we never shall.

 

[leibowde84]

All sessions of the houses of parliament and the lords start with prayers.
not only by the C ofE chaplain but also other churches and Rabbi. Those with no faith need not attend, indeed no one must attend.

It's fine that you don't feel bad excluding people from their own government ... that is your prerogative. I feel that every government should do everything they can to make sure that this doesn't happen. Getting rid of opening prayers in general seems to be the least they can do.

 

[jonathan180iq]

I still live in a culture that publicly prays before every meal, hands out bibles at schools (after hours, meaning 2:31 instead of 2:30) and even when they are required to have "moments of silence" instead of prayer there is a smug reference to how "we all know this is time to thank god..."

I long for the day when that kind of crap is removed from the public sphere. Pray all you want, silently, and to yourself, just like every other person has had to keep their dissenting ideas to themselves for the last however long it's been.

 

[Quintessence]

I don't want government involved with any manner of religious services. The government should be utterly indifferent & just generally ignore matters of faith. The thicker the wall between Church(es) & State, the better both will inherently be.

It's not a religious service, though. Invocations before sessions of legislative bodies are maybe a minute. It really is not, and should not, be a big deal. The invocation doesn't even have to be what people would consider "religious" at all. It can be a few words recited to get people in a good frame of mind for doing the work.

Theoretically that is a great idea, but in practice it will cause nothing but chaos. Think of how many lawsuits will be brought up when certain religious groups are not permitted to share their prayer. There is no way that the council can accommodate every religion.

In practice, chaos is inevitable no matter what we do in our lives. It's a poor and unacceptable excuse for someone like me who is more than willing to support and advocate pluralism. The point isn't to accommodate every religion or irreligion; it's to embrace the value of pluralism!

 

[metis]

Having such prayers can lead to so much hypocrisy. In the city where I live, they decided to keep the opening prayers, but when an imam was scheduled to say the prayer some of the city council members and congregation waited for him to finish before they entered the room.

In the city where my synagogue is, both my synagogue and a nearby Hindu temple were not allowed to participate because the Christians in the city council said that it made them uncomfortable. The following year, when they were told that we were going to file a lawsuit, suddenly they decided that maybe inclusion wouldn't be such a bad idea after all.

And not too far from my place in the U.P., the board of education in the nearby town wouldn't allow the Ojibwe there to have after-school drumming, and yet they allowed after-school Christian gatherings. The township council told the board that either they had to include both or exclude both, and the board decided on the former.

 

[leibowde84]

It's not a religious service, though. Invocations before sessions of legislative bodies are maybe a minute. It really is not, and should not, be a big deal. The invocation doesn't even have to be what people would consider "religious" at all. It can be a few words recited to get people in a good frame of mind for doing the work.



In practice, chaos is inevitable no matter what we do in our lives. It's a poor and unacceptable excuse for someone like me who is more than willing to support and advocate pluralism. The point isn't to accommodate every religion or irreligion; it's to embrace the value of pluralism!

I agree that it is always good to "embrace pluralism". I just don't think this is a realistic way of doing it.

 

[Mycroft]

As an atheist, why should I be made to endure prayer when attending any sort of meeting that isn't at a church or religious event?

 

[Nietzsche]

It's not a religious service, though. Invocations before sessions of legislative bodies are maybe a minute. It really is not, and should not, be a big deal. The invocation doesn't even have to be what people would consider "religious" at all. It can be a few words recited to get people in a good frame of mind for doing the work.

So why invoke a deity or any manner of spirituality when, as you just stated, one can accomplish the same without any religious overtones?

 

[Nietzsche]

As an atheist, why should I be made to endure prayer when attending any sort of meeting that isn't at a church or religious event?

I am not an atheist, and I agree 110%%. There's no reason to do it.