Re: US Government Sponsored Prayers and The Pledge of Allegiance

s****hawk <s****hawk@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> You are contriving to give primary im****tance to the Free Exercise
>> Clause when the Establishment Clause provides the appropriate
>> guidance, that is, to prevent official prayers in Congress.
>
>No one recites "official" prayers in Congress: there is no "official"
>prayer.  Congress has not and cannot designate an official prayer.
>But it does not follow that Congress as a body cannot authorize a
>minister to lead the Congress in a prayer.  Congress, just like all
>citizens of the United States, has the Constitutional right to the
>free exercise of religion.

Congress is not a citizen; it is a part of the Federal government.  

Congress has no Constitutional rights.  It has specific constitutional
powers enumerated in the Constitution.  None of those powers includes
authorizing a minister to lead the Congress in a prayer.

Individual Congressmen have Constitutional rights.  But the action of
Congress as a body is an action of the government, not of individuals
exercising their rights.  The actions of individuals while
participating as part of that body is still an action of the
government.

>> I don't know why Americans have put up with this bull****e for so
>> long, because official public prayers in Congress are clearly
>> unconstitutional.
>>
>> I am a pastafarian.  If Priests can waddle into Congress and pray,
>> then so can my pastafarian ministers.
>
>If Congress, as a body, grants authorization,

Congress has no power to grant authorization to one religion and not
another.  That would violate the no religious tests clause, as well as
not be an enumerated power of Congress.

lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
lojbab@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Lojban language www.lojban.org