(10-10-2011, 04:27 AM)kandrathe Wrote: Any perceived trappings of religion could be seen to endorse... "Endorse" could be as simple as the President having a bible on his bookshelf, or happening to say God bless you!" when you sneeze. "Endorse" as used by you in this context is too vague. Public officials are also citizens with the right of free exercise, as long as that free exercise is personal without sanction by the institution. A clever person would just make the declaration for a "Day of Devotion and Service" -- one can be a devoted atheist after all.
Do you not see where that argument shifts abruptly from private to government? What the president reads, or says when someone sneezes, is irrelevant. He is entitled to express himself as he pleases, so long as there is no implication of government sanction. When the president declares a "Day of Something," that's government.
A "Day of Devotion and Service" would just be religion by cowardly prevarication. From Wiktionary:
Devotion:
1) The act or state of devoting or being devoted
2) Feelings of strong or fervent affection; dedication
3) Religious veneration, zeal, or piety
4) (ecclesiastical) A prayer (often found in the plural)
The whole point would be to invoke meanings three and four, while hiding behind one and two. (As if the American president has any reason to ask people to be abstractly devoted to nonspecific things?)
Quote:It clearly states in the Constitution, "establishment". "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion".
Having a moment of prayer at a public function is not the establishment of anything, as much as it might annoy those who think it's silly. There should be no preference shown, so these things are generally worded anyway. In some cases, I think the Lemon test's "secular purpose" constraint violates the free exercise clause as it is applied to individuals.
Prayer endorses religion. Endorsement without secular purpose violates Lemon. The courts have been crystal clear on this one. You want to pray yourself? Go ahead, it's a free country. You want to use your public role to lead people in prayer? Tough luck. Go become a priest if you want to preach.
The whole purpose of the constitution is to bind the actions of people in government. Individual rights do not supersede constitutional limitations! You can't use government to endorse religion (even religion in general) and then claim that's an extension of your private right to free worship, any more than bureaucrats can ignore FOIA requests because they have privacy rights.
-Jester