I agree with the atheists here. A national day of prayer can be observed by religious folks without the government passing laws about it. Even if it doesn’t mandate participation, it still goes to far in establishing a religious practice.

They should have filed the sit a couple of years ago. Given the Coriolus Effect of the Nation these days (as in, swirling down the drain), I think every day is becoming a National Day of Prayer. Of course, this is still courtesy of the Dobson cronies, but not for the reason they intended. It seems the Scarecro-W and Tinman-C have pushed the silver handle and we are in the Whirlpool of Despair.
Actually, I side with the atheists too. I do not need some external secular organization directing my attention one way or t’other. They have their gig, I have mine – we do not need to share on this project.

This makes 3 that are siding with the atheists. This country shouldn’t have a National Day of Prayer…as that is most certainly IMO mixing “church and state”. Obviously we aren’t required to “pray” on that day, but it’s the whole idea that the federal government has made a day just to Pray! That is one area they need to butt out of!
As you said, jestrfyl, right now everyday is a day of prayer…what a total economic mess…love watching my little bit of money tank! (

That’s funny, I also am siding with the atheists! Maybe if there were evidence all that official prayer did any good it would be harder to oppose but the highly Christian Bush Administration has gotten us into an immense mess. And some people seem to think the highly Christian but highly unprepared Sarah Palin would help!??

Since when did the phrase “Freedom of Religion” turn into Freedom from Religion” it is these subtle misinformation’s that some subversives use to misdirect American people. Smart tactics but totally underhanded and full of lies.

cknuck, why should the government sanction a “day of prayer” when this country is of many diverse religions as well as those who don’t follow a religion? Freedom from religion being sanctioned by the fed’s works for me.

ck asked, “Since when did the phrase “Freedom of Religion” turn into Freedom from Religion”?
Actually it is both. If religion is truly free, then folks who have no interest have no reason to support, condone, or even acknowledge it. Why try to mandate or even suggest such a thing. At this point we are all working whatever prayer, mojo, or power of positive thinking as hard as we can.
I am praying all the time for our folks who are out of work, whose pensions have shrunk to nothing or been lost, and who are wondering if they will have enough money to continue living on their own (oddly enough, this financial pinch may be a “family values” issue – families are haivng to move in together to share expenses!).

National day of prayer is like National day of Broccoli. Only those who think they can use it for political gain actually care about it. I doubt even 10% of America even knows when it is.
The risk for the atheists is a backlash by christians who see these long standing practices as innocuous and maybe even comforting instead see it as an attack on them.
Give evidence the National Day of Prayer is detrimental to America the whole or just suck it up buttercup.

Separation of Church and State as stated by the founding fathers does not mean no religion in the open, but rather that there be no Religion of State. There isn’t one, people. So there is no violation of separation of Church and State with the national day of prayer. It is just another desperate attempt by atheists for attention as well as to abolish all religion.

A National Day of Prayer has been around for a long time; one of those small markings on everybody’s calendars that you either observe or forget, like Grandparents Day. Yes, we are a nation of diverse beliefs, and NDofP just emphasizes this. The Atheists should have a Natl. “No Day of Prayer” so we can all be equal. This fighting to have NDofP removed is just as extreme as some of the extreme Christians, like Dobson, Palin, and etc. Seperation of Church and State is quite different than this nitpicking.

jest; it’s not both, please read the document it’s “Freedom of Religion” and of course it does cover freedom to not observe any religious preferences. I think National Day of Prayer is perfect as it is, and if atheist really want to observe it as a day of non-prayer then they can just keep doing what they are doing, – not praying. But to moan about something that this nation is established so firmly on is ridiculous; there has always been prayer in the White House, in Congress, and the House of Reps.
The movement if named correctly is the “movement to deny Americans of the right of public prayer,” something by the way we’ve always, always had the right to do, something that is already established in the history, tradition and fabric of this country.

The movement should be called “The Movement to Pray the Way Jesus Instructed” that is, in private, out of public view, without ostentation. Only hypocrites (as Jesus called them) pray in public where they can be seen by men. If one is sincere in one’s prayer life, a National Day of Prayer is devoid of meaning.

sin: that is taking scripture out of context to serve your purpose Jesus had plenty to say about that. The way the hypocrite prayed that Jesus was describing is totally different than how we pray at National Day of Prayer events.
Was the day of Pentecost all hypocrites? No it is a positive example of public prayer. It is something how people with cruel intentions use scripture and even Jesus to justify their hatred of Christians.

cknuck,
This is an old argument betewwen us. You have claimed in the past that ANYTHING that Jesus or his apostles said in public is “prayer.” Which would include Peter’s denial of Jesus on Good Friday (“I know not that man”). This is, of course, ridiculous. BTW, I don’t hate Christians. I come from a long line of Christian men and women who taught me what true Christianity is. I count a handful of Catholic saints as personal heros (Joan of Arc, Martin de Porres, Louise de Marillac, Titus Brandsma, etc.) What I dislike in Christians ignorant of Scripture; Christians who try to impose their beliefs on others, Christians who want their view of Christianity to become our state religion. Christians who are intolerant of others and who use scripture to justify their own bigotry. Christians who seek to remove the splinter in my eye while they have a beam in their’s. Chistian who bare false witness against their neighbor; as in: “It is something how people with cruel intentions use scripture and even Jesus to justify their hatred of Christians.”

sin “This is an old argument betewwen us. You have claimed in the past that ANYTHING that Jesus or his apostles said in public is “prayer.” Which would include Peter’s denial of Jesus on Good Friday (“I know not that man”). This is, of course, ridiculous.”
Not only do you take scripture out of context you also lie about my statements I never made such a claim, I am honest about what I report, especially about scripture. I’ve noted over the years desperation makes people lie. I’ve never tried to impose my beliefs on others but I do have beliefs and will voice then as long as I live in America and enjoy the freedoms I fought for.

By the way Jesus was not at the day of Pentecost.

ck,
Now read the Pentecost story again. It was not public prayer. The Gifts of the Spirit happened in the Upper Room, away from the public for the most part. What was public was Peter’s proclamation in the Temple Court – which at the time was sort of like London’s Hyde park – a place for public proclamations and speeches.
The phrase Freedom OF Religion means both freedom FOR and freedom FROM. Having a state mandated day of prayer steps too far over the line. Not only that, but top/down mandates are hollow and senseless. This whole thing would make more sense of it was an ecumenical, church initiated event. Otherwise the state would have to reach into the businesses and schools and begin making allowances for all the ways people pray. One the surface it seems, at is most, a benign event. In actuality it could lead to all manner of complications and difficulties, more than any government would want to get into.
At no time has there been an attempt to prevent prayer. It is simply an effort to prevent the government mandate for prayer. If it really does not mean a government mandate, then it means nothing. If it means nothing then why make the proclamation anyway? If the proclamation was made to pander to a particular group of religious people then the point, Freedom FROM religion is well made. Either way, it is at best silly and at its worst, an infraction against the Bill of Rights.

Great play on word jest I guess hence the your tag, jestrfyl, but if you took time to read my post you will not I already said it means one if free not to be religious so your admonishment here is simply repeating what I already stated. My point is the language use in the document is “freedom of religion” that is the quote: to suggest anything else is an attempt of manipulation.
My argument of Pentecost is that it was public enough the people out in the streets heard exactly what was said, unlike most Day of Prayer events. Also Jesus didn’t always pray in seclusion his disciples heard enough to ask Him how to pray and He prayed over the sick and afflicted.
I don’t see a government “mandate” for prayer jest just the recognition of the day a president set aside to recognize as a national day of prayer. Pray to you own god if you’d like; as for me and my house…

jest the last sentence of my previous post was not directed to anyone in particular

Religious tolerance is very important in our nation and it is its key virtue. But that doesn’t mean that the government should tolerate irreligion. Atheism and Agnosticism should not be protected by the government or supported by the government. That doesn’t mean the government should actively seek out atheists and agnostics to persecute but it does mean that if these groups choose to espouse nontheism that it is a private affair and that complaints against religion do not belong in politics or public life. We can complain about particular religions but not about religion itself which is a virtue.

adamlsp
A lack of religion is as important as a relgion. Failure to defend people who choose to have no religion and recognize no god is as bad asf ailure to defend people with a religion different than your own. When you wrote, “Atheism and Agnosticism should not be protected by the government or supported by the government.” that is the very thing that Jefferson had in mind. Government is here to protect and defend all people – without any regard for their religious persuassion.
ck
You wrote, “Also Jesus didn’t always pray in seclusion his disciples heard enough to ask Him how to pray and He prayed over the sick and afflicted.” Wow is that true. there were even times when Jesus prayed in public just so people would be sure to see him pray. But that was not to compel others to join him – it was to work on his own disciples and encourage them. Also, he was most definitely not the government.I know we differ on this point, and probably will for a very long time. I simply don;t want the gov. messing with religion – it manages to make its own messes well enough.

“I don’t want the gov. messing with religion-it manages to make its own messes well enough.” jestrfly
Well said and so true!

jest quote “I simply don;t want the gov. messing with religion.”
Way too late on that one jest, Everyone in the gov. that founded this country was religious and they worshiped in gov. halls including Jefferson. People are gov. not some mysterious entity and people are religious. We are moving in a direction that respects religions that are new to this country, well not so new but becoming more popular and that is good but the attempts to put down Christianity because of it’s popularity is often propelled by misinformation and evil.

Sorry I was in a hurry to make a meeting, I meant to sign the last post