Outrage Over Christian Prayer at PA State House During Muslim Rep Swear-In

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Route 45

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    92   0   0
    Dec 5, 2015
    14,884
    113
    Indy
    Capture.jpg



    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/mar/26/movita-johnson-harrell-muslim-pennsylvania-democra/

    "Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf said Tuesday he was “horrified” by Borowicz’s invocation and apologized to Johnson-Harrell on behalf of all Pennsylvanians."

    Thankfully, everyone applauded the next day when another Muslim rep read a passage from the Quran.
     

    Hawkeye7br

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jul 9, 2015
    1,361
    67
    Terre Haute
    Did I read that right? A Muslim, proclaiming we should be tolerant of diverse religions, objected to an invocation by someone not praying from the Muslim Koran? And she wants all of us to be as tolerant as she is?
     

    fullmetaljesus

    Probably smoking a cigar.
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Jan 12, 2012
    5,849
    149
    Indy
    I'm sure I'm in the minority on this site.
    But I'm one of those folks who think the 10 commandments and Nativity scenes have no place in/on gov property.

    Religion has it's place but that place is not in the gov.
     

    Herr Vogel

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 10, 2018
    180
    18
    Rossburg
    That's not what 'separation of church and state' means.
    It forbids the government from mandating a state religion, and it forbids it from banning the practice of any religion; Jefferson was trying to avoid another 'Church of England' debacle. Nothing more, nothing less.
    It does not forbid the government from holding, enshrining, or acting on Christian values, nor does it forbid them from displaying Christian iconography.
     

    Route 45

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    92   0   0
    Dec 5, 2015
    14,884
    113
    Indy
    That's not what 'separation of church and state' means.
    It forbids the government from mandating a state religion, and it forbids it from banning the practice of any religion; Jefferson was trying to avoid another 'Church of England' debacle. Nothing more, nothing less.
    It does not forbid the government from holding, enshrining, or acting on Christian values, nor does it forbid them from displaying Christian iconography.

    What about holding, enshrining or acting on Muslim values?
     

    Herr Vogel

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 10, 2018
    180
    18
    Rossburg
    What about holding, enshrining or acting on Muslim values?

    Well, one of the core values of Islam is the establishment, maintenance, and expansion of a theocratic state where the word of the prophet is the whole of the law.
    So at least in that instance I'm going to go with 'no'.
     

    Route 45

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    92   0   0
    Dec 5, 2015
    14,884
    113
    Indy
    Well, one of the core values of Islam is the establishment, maintenance, and expansion of a theocratic state where the word of the prophet is the whole of the law.
    So at least in that instance I'm going to go with 'no'.

    The logical end of this notion is that Muslims should not be allowed to serve in our government, as this belief is wholly incompatible with our Constitution. But how do you exclude one religion from practice during official government activities (ie: opening prayers, invocations, etc) and still pretend to have any respect for "freedom of religion?" Better to exclude all religion from official government activities than to call one religion legitimate over all others, which is indeed a defacto establishment of religion.
     

    Ark

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    25   0   0
    Feb 18, 2017
    6,735
    113
    Indy
    I want to know why any religious anything is being read or referenced in a gov building.

    This. No public official should be preaching this crap during official functions. I don't really care what religion it is, none of it has any place in government buildings or during government meetings. Wanna pray? Go to church.
     

    two70

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    19   0   0
    Feb 5, 2016
    3,724
    113
    Johnson
    Better to exclude all religion from official government activities than to call one religion legitimate over all others, which is indeed a defacto establishment of religion.

    Slight problem with that though, by excluding all religion you are "preventing the free practice thereof". Which, although often conveniently forgotten, is the second, coequally important clause of the First Amendment.
     

    chipbennett

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 18, 2014
    10,937
    113
    Avon
    I want to know why any religious anything is being read or referenced in a gov building.

    Because the free exercise of religion is a constitutionally protected right? Because the mere reading or referencing something religious within the confines of a government building does not constitute passing a law establishing a religion?
     

    chipbennett

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 18, 2014
    10,937
    113
    Avon
    That's not what 'separation of church and state' means.
    It forbids the government from mandating a state religion, and it forbids it from banning the practice of any religion; Jefferson was trying to avoid another 'Church of England' debacle. Nothing more, nothing less.
    It does not forbid the government from holding, enshrining, or acting on Christian values, nor does it forbid them from displaying Christian iconography.

    And beside that: Jefferson's personal letter to the Danbury Baptist Church does not constitute legislation.
     

    chipbennett

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 18, 2014
    10,937
    113
    Avon
    The logical end of this notion is that Muslims should not be allowed to serve in our government, as this belief is wholly incompatible with our Constitution. But how do you exclude one religion from practice during official government activities (ie: opening prayers, invocations, etc) and still pretend to have any respect for "freedom of religion?" Better to exclude all religion from official government activities than to call one religion legitimate over all others, which is indeed a defacto establishment of religion.

    That is an odd comment to make, considering that the invocation given as a Christian prayer one day was followed by an invocation given as a reading from the Qaran the next day.
     

    chipbennett

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 18, 2014
    10,937
    113
    Avon
    This. No public official should be preaching this crap during official functions. I don't really care what religion it is, none of it has any place in government buildings or during government meetings. Wanna pray? Go to church.

    Wanna enforce that? Amend the constitution. Until then, religious people enjoy constitutional protection of exercise of religious belief anywhere, at any time.
     
    Top Bottom