Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

4 Bumps

Yet another quote as a S/O of the public prayer question

From this article:

“If you are a truck diver, a plumber, an electrician or a steel worker and you live in Alabama, you say, ‘Well, I think my religion is the way everybody ought to think,” Dr. Flynt said. But, “let that same guy move to Salt Lake City, Utah (where the majority is Mormon) or New Jersey or Connecticut (where the majority is Catholic) or Dearborn, Michigan, (where the majority is Muslim), and he won’t think so highly of the idea that the majority of people ought to impose their religious values on the minority.”

Answer Question

Asked by jsbenkert at 2:41 PM on Jun. 8, 2012 in Religious Debate

Level 37 (89,331 Credits)
Answers (23)
  • There is a difference between imposition and being exposed to something. Two computer programers get together and they are talking bits and bytes and codes. No one else is interested or can even really understand what they are saying. Should computer dicussions be banned except behind closed doors lol.
    Several muslim, mexican name a country that speaks something other than english They are jabberring away (enjoying themselves) in the middle of, pick a place and everyone can't help but hear them. Some feel annoyed, some ignore it. I don;t know they could be plotting the overthrow of the government or asp syaing a prayer or insulting/ making fun of me and I don;t know it. Should they have to stop speaking anything but english because some are offended or even frightened by it?

    If you are offended by the idea that these and other's freedoms should be curtailed simply on a group of people's discomfort then why

    Answer by Dardenella at 2:52 PM on Jun. 8, 2012

  • do you feel it is acceptable for you to step into religion and decide when and where and how prayer should be offered or spoken? (pertains to any religion's prayers or rituals) Why do you think your inconvenience outweighs someone else's freedoms?
    I am just curious to this line of thought.

    Is it just because YOU don't like it and therefore it should be banned?

    Answer by Dardenella at 2:56 PM on Jun. 8, 2012

  • Is it just because YOU don't like it and therefore it should be banned?

    No, because it's ILLEGAL, it should be banned. Nothing is stopping those men from meeting at the flagpole outside before the meeting. It's making it an official act as part of government business that's the issue.

    Answer by NotPanicking at 3:00 PM on Jun. 8, 2012

  • There's a difference between imposing and exposing.  Citizens who are having a private discussion in  a city street is different from a public official leading a specific prayer to a specific god of a specific religion at the start of a public meeting.  This isn't about censoring the general public in their daily affairs.  I wouldn't be offended to hear private citizens discussing the merits of a verse from the Bible, nor am I offended by hearing people speak in a different language.  When people defend government-sanctioned prayer at public meetings, though, on the basis that the majority of the people participating in the meeting are Christian, I have to wonder how they would feel if they found themselves to be in the minority, as given in the example provided by Dr. Flynt, who is a Baptist, for what that information adds to the context.


    Comment by jsbenkert (original poster) at 3:12 PM on Jun. 8, 2012

  • If I am at an event that is of another nationality, religion, or custom, I honor that custom. No one is stopping the guy from Alabama from practicing his religion. That was kind of a crappy analogy

    Answer by adnilm at 3:30 PM on Jun. 8, 2012

  • I grant you the meds are not leaving my brain very clear. Sorry.

    The guy in Alabama isn't stated as having a particular religion, in the above.

    Any one who moves is a fish out of water for a while.

    If you can not accept others as having the right to their faith then you will always be alone unless you are surrounded by like minded people. And even then you have no right to try to get someone else to adjust to your way of thinking. If you were already in the mode of accepting that each can practice their faith as they deem necessary, you will not have a conflict.

    In the above stated it sounds as though the man has no religion but ideas, that he shares with others (none is stated) He finds himself in other areas of the country and is surroundsed by the different thoughts and phillosophies. If he is unable to accept that others have that right, he is a fish out of water. If he does he fits in. Better?

    Answer by Dardenella at 4:04 PM on Jun. 8, 2012

  • I find your definition of "imposition" a bit disturbing. An imposition is an excessive or uncalled for requirement or burden (Merriam Webster). I honestly envy you if something like waiting 5 minutes for a prayer to stop is an excessive burden for you...


    Answer by momto2boys973 at 5:09 PM on Jun. 8, 2012

  • The nerve of some people, having the audacity to refer to a violation of the law and their civil rights as an impostion. Next thing you know, victims of credit card fraud and identity theft will have the nerve to suggest they're not pleased.

    Answer by NotPanicking at 10:56 PM on Jun. 8, 2012

  • Just because someone works for the government (at any level) in no way means they have to give up their religious freedoms or the right to practice their religion. Trying to force them to do so is illegal AND unconstitutional.

    There is no religious requirement to serve in an elected position, and NO requirement for any elected official to pretend they are not religious (or are, as the case may be) ~ even if they choose a religion that some of their constituents don't practice or outright detest.

    I will admit to being curious about the outcome if someone in Dearborn complained about a Muslim prayer opening a town meeting. Would the aclu sue the town to make it stop ... or do they only do that to Christians?

    Answer by Farmlady09 at 1:52 AM on Jun. 9, 2012

  • Again, we're dealing with different comparisons.

    If the guy from Alambama wants to climb on the check-out counter in the middle of Walmart and yell "Jesus is King!" good for him. IF he wants to insist on only his prayer to start off every meeting at town council that is different.

    Farmlady - no one is saying there is a litmus test for public office. The issue at hand is whether those holding public office can open pulbic meeting with consistantly with prayer in one religious vein at the exclusion of all others. You can worship Shrek openly and hold office. You cannot open the GOVERNMENT meeting with prayers to Shrek each and everytime and insist that all others join you in it without giving them the opportunity to offer prayer in their way as well.


    Answer by ldmrmom at 6:33 AM on Jun. 9, 2012

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.