from the SDUT…
CARLSBAD — A Carlsbad councilman’s ardent prayer sparked a public outburst and a 10-minute recess at the start of this week’s Carlsbad City Council meeting.
Councilman Mark Packard, a lay leader in the local Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, was asked at the last minute Tuesday to give the meeting invocation when the guest scheduled to do it didn’t appear.
Read it all here. But pray about it first.
Comments 8
I don’t know why anyone should be surprised.
Mrs Trujillo (the lady who made the spontaneous exclamation) is a member of the American Church of Latter Day Victims–she was simply offering it up to Our Lady of Perpetual Outrage
We still live in a pluralistic society. Yes? Opinions, prayer, beliefs that don’t reflect our own about man’s origin, meaning, morality and destiny are necessarily common.
Just what does Mrs. Trujillo desire? Only expressions of a belief that reinforce her own? What types of historic figures does this view bring to mind? Was force or coercion employed by the Carlsbad councilman?
As Voltaire responded to Helvetius. “I disapprove of what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
We really need to start defining what imposing values are. There is no credible way that this invocation forced the “victim” to believe or accept Jesus.
It clearly is not appropriate for him to state “OUR Lord and Savior Jesus Christ”. When he is saying “our” as a city council member, he is representing more than himself. At the VERY least, he should have said “my”.
My gut reaction is that many would be quite upset if the invocation ended with “in the name of Allah the Most Merciful”.
I’m not looking to get into the tired “founding fathers were Christians”, “separation of church and state” vs “separation of church from state” arguments.
It appears that the Supreme Court does not agree with me, but I don’t see how an invocation is appropriate in the first place.
I don’t care for such invocations, but in the great scheme of things, we have FAR bigger worries to deal with. Don’t get distracted.
Richard –
I agree that there are bigger issues in the world, but I don’t believe that we therefore should just say nothing when an issue like this presents itself. I believe we are (should be) capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time.
I also don’t think this specific issue is as small or as unimportant as some would make it out to be. I think it is symptomatic of something deeper.
Steve: Don’t get your nickers in a twist. “Symptomatic of something deeper?” Wow.
The Councilman on the spur of the moment was asked to open the meeting. He did it with a prayer just like it has been done for over 200 years in America. It was not premeditated to force you to become Christian.
He has the right to pray. Doesn’t the Constitution say freedom of religion? I think you want freedom from religion. Not going to happen on my watch.
Dan:
Your “nickers-in-a-twist”-type response was unfortunately expected. “Wow” if you must, but yes I do think it is symptomatic of something deeper.
Please re-read what I already wrote about freedom “of” vs freedom “from” religion. These are tired discussions for me.
I agree a Christian prayer does not force someone to become a Christian, but I understand why it would be considered offensive to non-Christians when it is spoken from a city council seat. Would you find it offensive if a satanic priest chanted some spell from a City Council seat? I suspect many would have a problem with that as well… myself included.
People are free to practice their religion in churches etc., etc., etc. I do not think it is appropriate at a City Council meeting. That’s the heart of my point.
Hey, both you and the Supreme Court apparently disagree with me so you have SCOTUS on your side. I just think they and you are wrong.
Point of clarification: I am not saying by “symptom of something deeper” , that the Council member in question had any “deeper” motive in praying. I suspect that he is a good man and that he simply said what came naturally to him.
I am referring to the issue of religion at public / government meetings in general. The “deeper” I am referring to is a limited respect for people of different beliefs. If you know someone to be Jewish, do you purposely greet that person with a “Merry Christmas”? I am hopeful that you do not. Out of respect for that person and her right to her own beliefs, you might say something else… Happy Hanukkah for example (or nothing at all).
Why would you not extend this same courtesy to the general public? Especially when that general public that you represent at a council meeting likely has a wide variety of beliefs?
I obviously care enough about this issue to respond again on this blog. That said, I really am not looking to have an ongoing back and forth on this site. Feel free to have the last word. I simply wanted to make some points that I did not think others would make on this site.