Try digitalPLUS for 10 days for only $0.99

Readers Respond

News Opinion Readers Respond

Court should rule public prayer constitutional

The U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Town of Greece, New York v. Susan Galloway is to consider whether Christian prayers at town board meetings are constitutional ("Justices to hear prayer case," Nov. 4). The U.S. Court of Appeals based in New York held that such prayers violate the Constitution because they represent "an endorsement of a particular religious viewpoint."

The First Amendment provides that, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof[.]" That amendment prohibits the Congress — that is, the federal government — from establishing a national religion as did King Henry VIII who broke with the Catholic Church and established the Church of England in the 16th century. Note that the First Amendment refers to "an," rather than "the," establishment of religion. By its use of "an," the First Amendment prohibits the federal government from passing legislation to establish something not previously recognized in America; that is, a national religion. Moreover, regarding religion, what provision of the Constitution mandates that "the free exercise thereof" is restricted to the confines of a church, synagogue, temple, mosque, etc.? Religious people live their religion on a daily basis; their religion is not something that is limited only to religious observances on Fridays, Saturdays or Sundays at their places of worship.

How is it that the First Amendment, which prohibits Congress from regulating religion, has been construed by the federal courts, based on various Supreme Court rulings, to prohibit high school football players from praying prior to a game for the safety of the players, invocations at public school events, a Christmas creche on public property, display of the Ten Commandments in courtrooms, prayers at the beginning of town or county board meetings? None of those activities has anything to do with Congress or establishing a religion. It seems to me that the chief effect of such activities on atheists and non-Christians is annoyance or the sense of being slighted, just as many are annoyed by "In God We Trust" on our currency and "one nation under God" in our Pledge of Allegiance.

However, the Constitution does not guarantee anyone freedom from annoyance or from a sense of being slighted. Those perceptions, real as they may be to some individuals, do not trump the First Amendment. Regarding religion in America, the fact is that Christian churches outnumber all others by approximately 200 to one. Government (federal, state or local) endorsement of the Christian religion, or acknowledgment of a divine being, is not synonymous with "an establishment" of religion.

For those who are irritated by the Christian religion, or religion in general, try "live and let live." You are not being forced to participate in any religion or religious activity. You are merely in a situation where you have to listen to something you do not want to hear. Welcome to the club. You are not being harmed in any real sense. As to the Supreme Court, hopefully, it will overturn the ruling of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals and render moot those prior rulings on church and state, the reasoning of which have no legitimate connection to the actual wording of the First Amendment.

David R. Holstein, Parkville

-
To respond to this letter, send an email to talkback@baltimoresun.com.

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • Prayer case reflects intolerance

    Prayer case reflects intolerance

    The recent article about the two woman taking a case to the Supreme Court because they did not like the Christian prayers at town board meetings in Greece, New York perhaps epitomizes the ills of American society ("Supreme Court to hear case on separating church and state," Nov. 2). At a time when...

  • Let them breathe smog

    Let them breathe smog

    Over the last few months, Marylanders yearning for cleaner air — in a state where air quality is reckoned to be the worst on the East Coast — have had their hopes dashed not once but twice.

  • Put Jackson-Lee statue in context

    Put Jackson-Lee statue in context

    Our community is having a heated discussion about Confederate flags, monuments, white supremacy and "the past." I want to zero in on the Jackson-Lee statue in Homewood that sits along Art Museum Drive near the beautiful Wyman Dell and across from the Baltimore Museum of Art ("Status of Confederate...

  • Hogan sees Baltimore as the enemy

    Hogan sees Baltimore as the enemy

    Regarding Baltimore's transit problems, one of the best local investigative reports ever was submitted in the form of a letter to the editor by Alex Lopata of Crownsville ("O's fans mistreated by MTA," June 30).

  • The Red Line is wrong for Baltimore

    The Red Line is wrong for Baltimore

    Now that Gov. Larry Hogan has nixed the Red Line, the predictable wailing and gnashing of teeth has begun ("Hogan goes off the tracks," June 25).

  • An alternative track for the Red Line

    An alternative track for the Red Line

    There is another path to developing the Red Line that is much better than what the city and the MTA have been recommending ("City leaders remain dedicated to fighting for Red Line," July 1).

  • Edmonson Village still needs a Red Line

    Edmonson Village still needs a Red Line

    After decades of work and $288 million spent on design and planning, Gov. Larry Hogan's decision to abandon the Red Line is a devastating blow to West Baltimore ("City leaders remain dedicated to fighting for Red Line," July 1).

  • Spare the Lee-Jackson monument

    Spare the Lee-Jackson monument

    I grew up in Baltimore, studied and taught there, but it wasn't until after a year's study in Paris and a French friend's subsequent visit to my hometown that I became aware of the Lee-Jackson monument ("Status of Confederate statues to be reviewed in Baltimore," June 30). Jean-Claude had thoroughly...

Comments
Loading

75°