DiscussMormonism.com

http://www.theofrak.com/2012/05/my-thoughts-on-national-day-of-prayer.html

Today is the National Day of Prayer. As a lawyer, I was surprised to learn that National Day of Prayer is codified into the United States Code (36 U.S.C. § 119):

The President shall issue each year a proclamation designating the first Thursday in May as a National Day of Prayer on which the people of the United States may turn to God in prayer and meditation at churches, in groups, and as individuals.

How the National Day of Prayer has survived so long in view of the Establishment Clause is beyond me. While it does not, on its face, favor a particular religion, its history clearly proclaims itself as a day of Christian prayer. Like "one nation under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, the National Day of Prayer is a creation of the 1950s. On April 17, 1952, President Truman signed a bill proclaiming a National Day of Prayer must be declared by each following president at an appropriate date of his choice. In 1982 a conservative evangelical Christian organization called the "National Prayer Committee" was formed to coordinate and implement a fixed annual day of prayer for the purpose of organizing evangelical Christian prayer events with local, state, and federal government entities. The National Prayer Committee is active to this day, advancing the cause of Jesus. Google "national prayer committee" and you will see its motto, "Centered on the Lord Jesus Christ."

Fortunately, this might be one of the last National Days of Prayer. The Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) sued to challenge the designation of a National Day of Prayer on October 3, 2008. On April 15, 2010, U.S. District Judge Barbara Crabb ruled that the statute establishing the National Day of Prayer was unconstitutional as it is "an inherently religious exercise that serves no secular function." Judge Crabb also stated in her opinion, "If the government were interested only in acknowledging the role of religion in America, it could have designated a 'National Day of Religious Freedom' rather than promote a particular religious practice." However, Crabb stayed her ruling pending the completion of appeals.

The U.S. Department of Justice filed a notice to appeal the ruling on April 22, 2010, and on April 14, 2011, a panel at the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously overruled Crabb's decision, stating that "a feeling of alienation cannot suffice as injury." They further stated that the President is free to make appeals to the public based on many kinds of grounds, including political and religious, and that such requests do not obligate citizens to comply and do not encroach on citizens' rights. The same day, the Freedom From Religion Foundation announced that it would seek an en banc review of the ruling by the full Seventh Circuit court.

Hopefully, the decision will be reversed by the full Seventh Circuit. If not, the case may go to the Supreme Court. As a secularist, I can only hope that the law is struck down as a clear violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

For those who are participating in the National Day of Prayer, I hope that they consider the study from 2006 concerning the efficacy of prayer. Link to NYTimes Article. Not only did prayers offered by strangers have no effect on the recovery of people who were undergoing heart surgery, patients who knew they were being prayed for had a higher rate of post-operative complications like abnormal heart rhythms. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/health/31pray.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

If that isn't convincing enough, consider the following statistics:



Also, think the contradiction of asking God to stop what he ostensibly set into motion or decided not to prevent in the first place:




Similarly, consider the futility of praying for something that is not already in the divine plan:



Next, ask yourself how you will know whether God actually answered your prayer:




Finally, ask yourself whether prayer increases or decreases your willingness to do something other than talk about what you wish would happen.

You know, I am living in a different timezone... ( UTC + 1 hour )

Detail of JS' Hypocephalus - - Reference no. 1 represents Kolob

Scriptures
- Pearl of Great Price
-- Abraham
--- Facsimile 2
wrote:Explanation:
1. Kolob, signifying the first creation, nearest to the celestial, or the residence of God.

Unfortunately, in the table of time zones Kolob can not be found.

Panopticon wrote:Hopefully, the decision will be reversed by the full Seventh Circuit. If not, the case may go to the Supreme Court. As a secularist, I can only hope that the law is struck down as a clear violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

Yeah, sure. I take it you have not seen this court in action? (As we call them, the SCROTUS - Supreme Court Rightwing Of The United States.)

Funny graphics, though.

I am not a lawyer, but if a law ever deserved to be struck down for complete vacuity of purpose, this one does, so far as one can judge from this quotation:



If it talked about a day on which "the people of the United States shall turn to God in prayer ...", and established penalties for not doing so, then it might have accomplished something, even if what it accomplished would have been a piece of religious oppression akin to the acts under Queen Elizabeth I of England that made attendance at an Anglican church compulsory (though in accordance with her reluctance to 'make windows into men's souls', she refrained from insisting that they had to pray when they got to church.)

But since all US citizens may already, if they wish, turn to any deity they prefer in any form of invocation they think appropriate, absolutely nothing is gained by proclaiming a day on which they may do so. The already may, any day of the year.

(Presumably no-one is going to tell us that the Abrahamic deity is more likely to pay attention if millions of people ask him for the same thing simultaneously? Pretty please?)

Happy Cinco de Mayo. I'm praying for more Corona.

Panopticon wrote:For those who are participating in the National Day of Prayer, I hope that they consider the study from 2006 concerning the efficacy of prayer. Link to NYTimes Article. Not only did prayers offered by strangers have no effect on the recovery of people who were undergoing heart surgery, patients who knew they were being prayed for had a higher rate of post-operative complications like abnormal heart rhythms.

I bow my head in reverence to your admirable objectivity, by presenting only one side of the debate. You, like so many others here, are so sure of your "truth". All you need is a link or two, and presto! God is dead. There are no miracles. Prayer is, in essence - BS.

But by all means, continue to lap up the empty praise of your fellow board participants here by linking what supports your preconceived notions.

This board is such a monumental joke. A monument to the bias and sheer stupidity of those blinded by the very same dogma they claim "caused" them to leave Mormonism. They leaped-frogged into alternative dogma faster than the blink of an eye.

My honest opinion? What a total dogmatic idiot you are, posturing as someone with "wisdom".

Nevertheless, I hope you and others here find rest and peace from your incessant anti-Mormon obsessions.

Have a good day, and smell the flowers. It may well cure you of the stink of anti-Mormonism that infects your nostrils.

It's clearly in violation of the establishment clause. This isn't the president in his role as citizen politician professing his personal recommendations. This is the president using the office of the presidency to encourage religious practice and belief - and a highly sectarian one at that. It's highly similar to having a teacher declare a time where people may pray in a public school. Anyone may pray anytime they want. The announcement is meant to encourage it. I remember the news of the 7th circuit ruling and being baffled by the logic, but I'd have to read it again to remember why it is supposed to square with precedents when it doesn't even seem to do that. Engle vs. Vitale makes it clear that he mere promotion of religion is sufficient to violate the establishment clause even if isn't coercive and forcing people to feel alienated if they do not voluntarily participate acts as a form of soft coercion.

EAllusion wrote:It's clearly in violation of the establishment clause.

Of the constitution of the former Soviet Union, yes, but nothing in the U.S. Constitution.

EAllusion wrote:Engle vs. Vitale makes it clear...

A ruling that rests on a foundation of sand.

Panopticon wrote:
How the National Day of Prayer has survived so long in view of the Establishment Clause is beyond me.

Well, I don't expect much from a pettifogger.

EAllusion wrote:It's clearly in violation of the establishment clause.

Not only that, it violates basic principles of ethics, fairness and equality.