A Colorado appellate panel has handed down a major ruling that the state’s Day of Prayer is unconstitutional as a violation of religious liberty under the state’s constitution. The unanimous panel ruled in favor of a challenge from the Freedom From Religion Foundation — originally filed in 2008. Judge Steve Bernard (shown here), with Judges Alan Loeb and Nancy Lichtenstein overturned a lower court decision in ruling that the day favored believers over non-believers.
The question in the case is increasingly arising in both state and federal courts: the rights of atheists and agnostics who object to proclamations and demonstration of faith. Even while nondemoninational, such proclamations associate the government with faith and the belief in God.
The panel of the Colorado Court of Appeals ruled that “[a] reasonable observer would conclude that these proclamations send the message that those who pray are favored members of Colorado’s political community, and that those who do not pray do not enjoy that favored status.”
The practice, they ruled, ran afoul of the Preference Clause of the Religious Freedom section of Colorado’s Constitution” because such proclamations are “predominantly religious; they lack a secular context; and their effect is government endorsement of religion as preferred over nonreligion.”
The federal courts have rejected this type of argument under the federal constitution — upholding ceremonial prayers to open legislative bodies etc. However, the Court noted in Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U.S. 38, 53-54 (1985):
At one time it was thought that this right [to choose one’s religion] merely proscribed the preference of one Christian sect over another, but would not require equal respect for the conscience of the infidel, the atheist, or the adherent of a non-Christian faith such as Islam or Judaism. But when the underlying principle has been examined in the crucible of litigation, the [United States Supreme Court] has unambiguously concluded that the individual freedom of conscience protected by the First Amendment embraces the right to select any religious faith or none at all. This conclusion derives support not only from the interest in respecting the individual’s freedom of conscience, but also from the conviction that religious beliefs worthy of respect are the product of free and voluntary choice by the faithful, and from recognition of the fact that the political interest in forestalling intolerance extends beyond intolerance among Christian sects – or even intolerance among “religions” – to encompass intolerance of the disbeliever and the uncertain.
Despite such language, the Court has proven fairly hostile to claims of freedom “from” religion as opposed to freedom “of” religion. Some members of the Court have long held a narrow view that the religion clauses were meant primarily to protect against the establishment of a state religion as opposed to separation church and state entirely.
The Colorado panel noted that such practices “have the primary or principal effect of endorsing religious beliefs because they convey or attempt to convey a message that religion or a particular religious belief is favored or preferred.” The panel distinguished cases of allowing legislative prayers and the alike:
The proclamations serve a different purpose than legislative prayers. . . .Here, the proclamations are not designed to solemnize a public occasion, and they are not part of the “ceremonial deism” that does not violate the Establishment Clause. See Elk Grove Unified School Dist., 542 U.S. at 37-44 (O’Connor, J., concurring). They are not a small part of something larger that serves a secular purpose. Rather, they stand, individually and collectively, as a call to “actual worship or prayer” that “has as its purpose placing the speaker or listener in a penitent state of mind, or that is intended to create a spiritual communion or invoke divine aid.” Id. at 40.
The proclamations serve an exclusively religious purpose. They encourage people throughout Colorado to engage in the religious practice of prayer, even if such prayer is generally nondenominational.
Indeed, these Days of Prayer are often cited as an effort to reaffirm the commitment to God in the face of increasing secularism. National leaders have portrayed secularists as akin to terrorists as a threat to the nation (here and here and here and here).
Here is the full opinion which is worth the reading:
Rick Santorum is going to go postal.
Thank you, Colorado, from an atheist.
Good. I’m glad this issue is getting more confrontational. If the right wingers and fundies want to to dictate how a state, or a nation, must conforms in ‘spiritiual’ matters, they should be confronted. And the cowardly politicians who see no downside in supporting state sanctioned prayer, etc. ought to wake up. Just because the vocal opposition may be small is scant reason to go along with the Bible thumpers. Perhaps they haven’t noticed all the baggage that slides along that slippery slope. Or perhaps they have and they don’t care.
I have refused to participate in locally sponsored always early in the morning activities held on conjunction with the National Day of Prayer because of my own 1st amendment concerns. When chastised by some church members. I asked whether they are willing to meet me at the church early in the morning for prayers the other 364 days. No takers.
I think it is better for politicians if people are religious, whether the politicians themselves are or not. The religious are more easily controlled; by definition the defer to authority and unfounded assertion, by definition they are uncritical thinkers that accept almost any claim of their tribal (party) leaders, religious leaders, or some “authority” they quote as being inherently factual.
It is hard to imagine a politician that doesn’t want that kind of obedience, deference, and presumption of righteous integrity. It makes shearing the sheep so much easier.
I sort of like the idea of forced religion. Once it is firmly established it will be fun to watch each of the “right” religions demanding they get preference over all the apostate ones.
It will be a joy to watch the fundie Baptists and Methodists exclude the Mormons and again turn against the “Papist idolators”. Meanwhile the Catholics will be expressing their superiority over these new comers. Maybe the various branches of the Lutheran Church can devourer each other. Maybe we can have a Federal office of the Inquisition. Once down this path we can issue little yellow stars and red crescents for “those people”
Yes, that will be fun times.
This is encouraging. As an apathetic agnistic I have tried to live and let live but the (growing number of) attacks (see the prof’s links) are suggesting the other side does not share my view. My question is, do Blair, Newt, Mitch, et al really beieve this crap or are is it just part of a program to gain more control/power?
@Andy: Consider Newt’s abandonment of wives with cancer, his cheating, his hypocrisy and lying in office (he admits to cheating on his wife while leading the impeachment of Clinton).
Consider Mitt Romney’s outright lies and trickery to prospective companies and their employees while leading Bain Capital.
I think you will have your answer; their primary concern is themselves no matter who gets hurt or how much pain they cause, physically or financially or psychologically.
I am an atheist and while I will not be joining in the day of prayer, I think this ruling is silly. I read the Proclamation and all it does is to memorialize the day of prayer. They sign so many of these and it has NO government support in terms of days off, money, or any other form of governmental preference that this ruling is absurd.
It reminds me of what I tell folks who wish to pray for me when I am ill or otherwise in trouble. I thank them for their kind wishes, and that I know that prayers, unlike much of medicine will do no harm. If they feel it will do some good in their eyes, I am all for it.
I also think that if I were Guv of CO, I would have no problem signing that one either. It has no effect one way or the other on non-believers, and is like saying such and such a day is German American day. SO WHAT?
I wonder how a state “Humanitarianism Day” would be received?
DonS,
A Humanitarianism Day in lieu of a Prayer Day? Perish the thought, you godless infidel!
I don’t think that would raise any objection from even the religious. You might wish to make it humanist day or deist day and that might get a poor response from them, but I don’t think that would be any worse than the current prayer proclamation and would be just fine too.
Elaine M., Yeah, well, I’ll take a godless infidel humanitarian over a god fearing reactionary (nicest word I could think of) any day.
ArthurRandolphErb, I wish you were right, but my gut says you’re not.
LOL……
Go and READ the proclamation. It is about as harmless as one can be. They sign such things en masse damn near every week.
“Some members of the Court have long held a narrow view that the religion clauses were meant primarily to protect against the establishment of a state religion as opposed to separation church and state entirely.”
Therein lies the nub of the problem. If the clause were meant merely to mitigate against the establishment of a State religion, then it would be easily
neutralized by the political pressure that would make public professions of Christianity necessary to obtain public office. Laws wouldn’t be needed since community pressure and censure would do the enforcing. Oh wait, never mind, that’s already happening in many locales isn’t it?
“Humanist” instead of “Humanitarianism” — for the sake of the bumper stickers.
And suggestions? Anything with “cease and deist” in it?
Gene? Pete?
I’m waiting for the day that a Bible isn’t used in the oath of office for Pres. I have been told to put my hand on the Bible when taking an oath and I did not. After a moment of confusion that I dared refuse, we proceeded. I said an oath that I meant, but it wasn’t theirs. In my view, putting my hand on the Bible and swearing an oath to their God was hypocritical and meant nothing. Stating my own oath meant something, at least to me. I wonder what other non-Christians do.
“cease and deist”
LOVE IT! LOL!
These prayers cannot truly be called non-denominational. If one prays to Goddess in a public event, this would create quite a stir of offense. That is why I know that arguments advanced by the religious are disingenuous! Talk about taking your life into your own hands! Try that kind of prayer in this situation and see what happens! As governor, I will now mandate a day of prayer to the Goddess! Yeah, that will go down really well!!!
I thnk that if they make one for honoring Eid for Muslims, it will not be so out of place. My guess is that they probably have made such a proclamation for Muslims and possibly other religions as well. You can also apply to get one for atheists too. Whether or not it will be effective is another question.
There is NO harmless proclamation where any government at any level uses it’s legislative authority to promote religious beliefs and dilute our secular government. We’ve endured quite a lot of overt subversions of the US Constitution at the hands of religious fanatics (In God We Trust, “…under God…”, prayers before Congressional sessions–Muslims need not apply,Nativity scenes in public parks, etc.) that not one more offense should ever be tolerated.
“Good. I’m glad this issue is getting more confrontational.” (DonS)
I agree
“If the clause were meant merely to mitigate against the establishment of a State religion, then it would be easily
neutralized by the political pressure that would make public professions of Christianity necessary to obtain public office. ”
But that would violate Article VI Section 3.
Freedom of Religion or Freedom from Religion?
Exactly.
I’ll bet rcambell is offended at Mormons baptizing Einstein and others who are not of their faith. Talk about getting ones panties in a wad over stupid things! Think you have a right to sue somebody if they make the sign of the cross over you? JEEZ!
@Bettylath: tating my own oath meant something, at least to me. I wonder what other non-Christians do.
As an atheist, in court as a witness I was asked by the judge to “solemnly swear.” Which was okay by me.
Oh, professor, when are you going to start using a spell-checker?
“Even while nondemoninational,…”
Or maybe this is proof that you are ruled by Satan! Yes, that’s it! You want demons to rule our country!
@Arthur: I am an atheist. I want a “National Day of Atheism”, which is otherwise just as innocuous as the “National Day of Prayer.” Do you think anybody will object to that?
I think it is a pity that this is even an issue. I believe an action like this serves only to bolster the fictitious “war on religion” all the right wing holy rollers are always carrying on and on about. They will see it as oppression, not opposition, as an attack on religion rather then a defensive move made to protect individual freedoms. really anytime you react to the religious right. all they hear are rattling sabers, such is the mind set of the zealot. What end is served by denying them a “day of prayer” other than to incite anonymity and resentment. Let them have their day, Ignore it. The way to defeat this insanity is to offer no reaction to their madness and work to outshine it with applied reason and logic.
Tony C. Your oath would work for me. It’s pretty close to the one I used (can’t remember – too long ago) Nobody is interested in my oath any more, or maybe they don’t care whether or not I tell the truth.
What rcampbell said. Kudos to the Colorado Court of Appeals.
In America, anyone … anywhere … and any time … can pray to whatever God he (or she) chooses. (There may be a lot of silent praying that goes on before exams, for example.)
Why it is so-o important to SOME people that our civil government should involve itself with our private beliefs is beyond me. No one is keeping them from praying, and that’s not really what they’re concerned about here. What they really want is for everyone to conform to THEIR particular religious beliefs.
It never works out well when the government involves itself with our spiritual (or non-spiritual) lives.
Never.
The sad, long and violent history of savage wars over religion in this world should be a lesson easily learned by all but the most dense.
Oro Lee,
I’ve been very busy today, so this is the first chance I’ve had to look at the blog. Rather than try to top perfection, I’ll simply stipulate that you won the thread for merely suggesting “cease and deist”. Bravo, sir. Well played indeed.
How would you like this pastor to speak on National Prayer Day: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeFhA_sL38c&feature=player_embedded
Tony C sign me up for that day too. We have at least one atheist in Congress, and he can and probably will sponsor it. I don’t know if it will pass given this Congress.
Finally another person who has some common sense. Thanks D20.
Arthur Randolph Erb,
If animism does no good, then we don’t need the harm it causes. If it does no harm, then we don’t need yet another useless placebo — we have more than enough of those already.
Arthur Randolph Erb,
“No one ever does evil quite so cheerfully or completely as when he does it from religious conviction.” — Blaise Pascal
Only a fool would take an animist at his word that he really intends no coercion by the state, but only a little harmless suggesting.
Men invent “gawds” in their own image and then claim that these fantastical imaginings give some men power over other men — and over women, too. The Greeks had a myth that explains this phenomenon: Pygmalion’s Frenzy, about a sculptor who created a statue, fell in love with it, and then became despondent because the lifeless creation refused to love him in return. In America, we have Pygmalion politicians, or pygmies, for short.
How about if the states adopt a “Darwin’s Day,” once a month, celebrating the immortal discovery of Evolution by Natural Selection? Honored spokespersons could read the following excerpt from John Dewey’s book, The Influence of Darwin on Philosophy and Other Essays in Contemporary Thought (1910):
“Old ideas give way slowly; for they are more than abstract logical forms and categories. They are habits, predispositions, deeply ingrained attitudes of aversion and preference. Moreover, the conviction persists, though history shows it to be a hallucination, that all the questions that the human mind has asked are questions that can be answered in terms of the alternatives that the questions themselves present. But in fact intellectual progress usually occurs through sheer abandonment of questions together with both of the alternatives they assume, an abandonment that results from their decreasing vitality and a change of current interests. We do not solve them: we get over them [emphasis added]. Old questions are solved by disappearing, evaporating, while new questions corresponding to the changed attitude of endeavor and preference take their place. Doubtless the greatest dissolvent in contemporary thought of old questions, the greatest precipitant of new methods, new intentions, new problems, is the one effected by the scientific revolution that found its climax in the Origin of Species.”
Way past time to get over organized animism, especially at the state and national level. It leads nowhere but back to Plato’s Cave.
Having a Darwin Day would not be the same as having an Atheist Day since Darwin was a good believer in the Anglican Church and is buried in Westminster Abbey. it is absurd to think that a belief in evolution means atheism and that idea is as stupid as the idea that believing in evolution means you cannot be a Christian. Leave the ignoracne and stupidity on the other side, NOT on the atheist side please.
to Gene H and Oro Lee I suggest that we have an award named after Prof Turley for such a great riposte as Cease and Deist. Oro Lee should be the first recipient for embodiying Turley’s sense of clever humor.
Days of prayer absolutely convey a message of endorsing a religion. The non-denominational thing is just a wink and a nod. I mean, the proclamations from 2005-2009 contained Bible verses.
Arthur Randolph Erb,
One: Charles Darwin had better things to do with his time than worry about infantile animism, which he dismissively referred to as “the feelings of my female relatives.” Who buried him where after he died has no bearing upon his scientific — i.e., decidedly non-animist — work.
Two: If one subscribes to the fact of Evolution through Natural Selection, then one cannot, without a severe relapse into Orwellian doublethink simultaneously believe that an invisible, fickle, human-like “personality” created the world and orders its operations down to the molecule. Please make up your mind as to what you think you think and what you think you believe.
Three: Persons who live in the glass house of “belief” should not throw “stupid” stones at modern secular people who walk in the clear sunshine of fact and reason.
Four: since you do not seem to understand Darwin’s work or why animist “believers” continue viciously attacking him more than a century after he revolutionized scientific thought — and, as a byproduct made their primitive animism totally irrelevant — then you should quit trying to pose as a “sensible” “atheist,” since your comments demonstrate a failure to appreciate the complete lack of interest free thinkers have in anything related to “theism.”
America already has a designated “day of prayer,” every day, at local, state, and federal levels, in absolute contravention of the Constitution’s prohibition against government involvement in animism of any kind. I can remember when this “day of prayer” began back in the 1950s during the Eisenhower/McCarthy Reign of Error against free thinking of any kind whatsoever. In my own words, I call it:
“The Boobie Pledge of Subservience”
(from Fernando Po. U.S.A., America’s post-linguistic retreat to Plato’s Cave)
I offer my obedience
I pledge undying love
To any symbol formed to serve
The needs of those above
Who rightly feel that I deserve
The fist inside the glove
I stand and mumble publicly
With fear upon my brow
Lest some mistake my silence for
An insufficient vow
Let all who see and hear me know
How easily I cow
Authority need never fear
I swear I know my place
I pledge to take the gauntlet slapped
Across my beaten face
The Seizure Class knows I’ll accept
Chastisement with good grace
About such things as freedom, I
Have not the slightest clue
By birth and class it’s come to THEM
I know that it’s THEIR due
To hand me down instructions as
To just what I must do
And so I promise faithfully
To play my scripted part
Each day I’ll chant Two Minutes’ Hate
To finish, from the start
Until I love BIG BROTHER from
The bottom of my heart
I swear to do as I am told
I will not think too deep
I’ll huddle in conformity
Just like the other sheep
To take my whipping like a slave
And utter not a peep
I pledge to stand up every day
Within my schoolroom class
And mouth my mantras on demand
Without backtalk or sass
Until the program makes me a
Compliant, docile ass
I swear upon my loyalty
To stuff my head with fat
And place my nation “under” “GAWD!”
Supinely prone and flat
With me then going “down” “beneath”
And “lower” “under” that
I swear to go to Sunday School
Upon the public dime
Each morning in my homeroom class
I’ll mouth my dreary rhyme
And if I leave out words
THEY can Indict me for my crime
I pledge and vow and promise that
I’ll swear from dusk to dawn
And never fail to chant or moan;
To never blink or yawn
And with each cry of “GAWD IZ GRATE!”
My own soul I will pawn
The Papal bulls and fatwas tell
Me all I need to know
Which isn’t much because I see
I’ve nowhere left to go
I swear to never set my sails
Against the winds that blow
The Popes, Imams, and Rabbis tell
Me what and where and how
The master’s overseer tells
Me which row I must plow;
To toady, genuflect, and crawl;
To grovel, scrape and bow
I’ll train to “hurry up and wait”
And do the Bulgar drills
To stand at rapt attention dressed
In military frills
Just point me and I’ll drop the bomb
No matter whom it kills
I pledge and promise on my word
To do the things I ought
To work for lower wages
So my labor comes to naught
I swear to vote Republicrat
To prove I can be bought
The Party keeps us all at war
Which makes us quake with fear
And so we give up all those rights
Our ancestors held dear
Which saves our enemies the need
To take them from us here
But I won’t think of bygone days
The past I’ll just rewrite
I’ll call my history “old news”
To make it pat and trite
Which sleight of mind will help me keep
Its lessons out of sight
With this capitulation I
Agree to sell my pride
Before I even own it or
It grows too big to slide
Into the shabby, craven cave
Wherein I must reside
Michael Murry, “The Misfortune Teller,” Copyright 2005
America already has a local, state, and national “prayer day,” every day. That one has done enough harm already. America doesn’t need any more subservience than it already has.
This is an intelligent, thorough and well-reasoned opinion. It was also correct.
@ Tony C: “I am an atheist. I want a “National Day of Atheism”, which is otherwise just as innocuous as the “National Day of Prayer.” Do you think anybody will object to that?”
Tony C, Someone actually WILL object to that. And YOU will get struck by LIGHTENING and the EARTH will open up and swallow you. OK?
So wise up: Don’t even think about it.
@Malisha: I know they would, that was tongue in cheek. Although I doubt they can arrange lightning, or Earth swallowing. Unless those are just euphemisms for electrocution and burying me alive; I can believe people would do that and call it God’s work.
I much prefer knowing that the buck stops with humans and there is no grand plan. The evils of the world come down to dumb, mechanistic nature that can be controlled and manipulated, or the individual greedy choices and designs of individual persons that can be thwarted and restrained.
Believing God has anything to do with it at all interferes strongly with both processes, the science necessary to control and subdue nature, and the government and law enforcement necessary to prevent evil persons from harming the rest of us. Because it falsely attributes effects to impenetrable supernatural causes, and that falsehood blocks further investigation, for scientists, for government, and for law enforcement. It lets the real culprit (whether human or not) go on to create more harm.
Religion is one of the true evils in the world; a fraud perpetrated for money and power that gets in the way of (and often actively interferes with) the progress and justice that would really help people.
Tony C: Oh what a relief! I’m with you, man. I wish you’d set up a religion with all that in mind; I’d join! Then we could get tax-free status and all!