Two Activists Assaulted At Hawaii State Capitol

Submitted by: AtheistAlien 6 years ago in

All because they objected to unconstitutional Christian pray used to begin each session of the Hawaii State Legislature.
There are 222 comments:
Male 17
Good on you guys!
0
Reply
Male 1,834
damn that is just wrong
0
Reply
Male 219
"separation of church and state"
0
Reply
Male 1,364
hm. why is session of law makers opened by a christian prayer? thats wrong.
0
Reply
Male 2,402
It comes across that your asserting your Nationalistic ideals upon me and my countrymen as I see so many from other countries do often. I got news for you that is what pisses off an American more. Just like you we prefer to be asked and not told.
0
Reply
Male 2,402
However as I stated in my very first post on this subject. The matter has been challenged before. By our systems of checks and balances been through Hawaii Supreme Court and ruled okay for Hawaii Congress. It was challenged on Federal scale and okay`d by the US Supreme Court. it has gone it;s full route of process. There is nothing that any one who asserts such can do about it. Once the highest court rules ballgame over. Soo all this hot air of whether it`s wrong or not is irrelevant. Final authority has ruled and too bad so sad for those and the rest of the world if they don`t like it. sometimes the poo hits the face.

Now what sets me off is whane outsiders like to tell Americans what their rights should be. I don`t mind an opinon offered but not dictated terms to which you and several from Europe seem to do. Your using Global perspevtive.
0
Reply
Male 2,402
@Musuko42

Sorry not to get back sooner. Busy today. Nice to know you recognize the evils of countries.

Your trying to micro manage a Legislative process. Fact that federal congress has many times gone several days non-stop. There is no time-limit, Many states are like that as well. In Texas where I originally come from the Governor can actually lock the members of both houses into assembly until they come to a resolution on a bill. I do mean physically lock and key them inside the chamber. Crazy huh? In Hawaii The House meets for sessions in the morning and afternoons for several weeks then dismisses for the year to fly to their homes as some have outer islands. They also have no set time. It`s agreed upon by motion. It will cost no more money to have an Invocation or speaker. Sometimes you need to understand that it`s due to courtesy as a member of such will ask for a speaker. It is up to motion and discretion on that legislative body. A few may get bent out of shap
0
Reply
Male 2,850
Notably, when does that protester get his few minutes on that podium?

The preacher is not an elected official. He is simply a member of public. So if he`s getting a few minutes to speak on that podium, then that right must also be extended to every single other member of public in that state.

Otherwise, you have to explain why that preacher gets this special right and others do not. And if it`s because he`s a representative of a religion...bingo, there you have a government providing a platform for a church, and supporting it.

Remember as I said before; lighting, heating/cooling, and staff wages. By providing that preacher the podium, they`re providing him a free "church" and a captive audience.

Come to the land of the free, where in order to participate in your democracy you MUST sit through a religious service!
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@handys003

"I don`t tell a Brit or Canadian how to live by their laws."

That`s your choice not to. But you have the right to tell us how to live if you wanted to. Free speech and all that.

I`d still have the right to ignore you, and you`d have no right to actually enforce your opinion. But you have every right to express it.

And I have every right to express mine.

"Also I wouldn`t have a problem if the KKK came in or Black Panthers or the Sons of Hawaii spoke to Congress. They are taxpayers and have that right."

In that case, shouldn`t podium time be allowed to any and all people that wanted it? Wouldn`t that end up taking a very large amount of that government`s time? After all, what if a million people all wanted the same amount of speaking time as that preacher got? It would be unfair to deny them.

So tell me; why does the preacher get to speak, but Joe Schmoe does not?
0
Reply
Male 2,850
"In regards to taxpayer footing the bill. It doesn`t cost anything to open with a prayer or Hawaiian Chant etc.. it`s still meeting in session prayer or not."

The way I see it, the meeting could have been a few minutes shorter without the prayer. That`s a few minutes that can be spent doing something more productive...something that is, you know, actually to do with GOVERNMENT.

Using the time for prayer is a waste of government resources.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@handys003

"Oh and BTW I could go into a diatribe about European Colonialism and it`s aserrtion of politics and wars both present and past troughout the world. It`s just not the USA alone. Don`t even get me started."

I didn`t say anything about my own country being innocent of it, did I? I just countered handys003s assertion:

"I don`t go telling subjects of the realm of Great Britain how to determine their laws or other countries the same."

Being clearly false, as that`s exactly what his country DOES do. I didn`t say my country does not do that.

If anything, Britain was as far greater offender, and still is (with reach only limited by ability, not desire, most likely).
0
Reply
Male 2,402
@Musuko42
Oh and BTW I could go into a diatribe about European Colonialism and it`s aserrtion of politics and wars both present and past troughout the world. It`s just not the USA alone. Don`t even get me started.
0
Reply
Male 2,402
@Musuko42
In regards to taxpayer footing the bill. It doesn`t cost anything to open with a prayer or Hawaiian Chant etc.. it`s still meeting in session prayer or not.

Second I agree with you on casting stones regarding my country. However I`m talking in retrospect toward individuals telling me how my rights should be interpreted in my country. I don`t tell a Brit or Canadian how to live by their laws. Personally speaking I think the USA should butt out of other countries as well. Clearer now for you? Also I wouldn`t have a problem if the KKK came in or Black Panthers or the Sons of Hawaii spoke to Congress. They are taxpayers and have that right.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@HalfPintRoo

"I don`t understand why everyone has to make a big deal out of things. Just don`t participate in the prayer. Why make a scene? Let the Christians have their fun and then move on with the serious."

Again, it`s a big deal because they`re being made to pay for it: the lighting, heating/cooling, and staff wages for the duration of the prayer were all effectively being spent to provide a religious service.

It`s a small amount each time, but over the year it adds up. And this is during a recession, with major government budget shortfalls.

So yes, it is a big deal to have a government body engaging in non-government duties on the taxpayer`s dime.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@handys003

"#1 Where is the US Congress is supporting stat-run religion? You ever heard it`s just being courteous to include such as prayer?"

Why should the taxpayer foot the bill for a pointless courtesy that doesn`t even include everyone present?

If the prayer was, instead, a KKK speech about white power, what then? All still okay?

"I don`t go telling subjects of the realm of Great Britain how to determine their laws or other countries the same."

Ahem. Iraq? Afghanistan? Korea? Vietnam? Chile? Cuba?

You`re right. You don`t just tell other countries how to run themselves. You tell them and you invade them (and recently, to my lingering shame, you`ve been bringing my country along for the ride).

So be careful casting those stones, mister. When it comes to trying to interfere with the running of other countries, yours has one of the dirtiest records of the modern age.
0
Reply
Male 2,402
@Nerd
Yes I totally believe in separation of c and s.

Second that was a mild diatribe compared to what I can release.
0
Reply
Male 425
@ handys003

Separation of church and state much? and that rant was totally unnecessary.
0
Reply
Male 2,402
Ditto to Locke357 as well
0
Reply
Male 2,402
@Musuko42

#1 Where is the US Congress is supporting stat-run religion? You ever heard it`s just being courteous to include such as prayer?

#2 Who gave you authority to determine from Europe what my right is as a US citizen. Such presumption! It`s also what we fought a revolution for to begin with on self-determination. We as Americans in the USA may dissent among ourselves, but Europeans have no say in determining what is our constitutional rights. Render your opinion, but don`t dictate what is right to us. Got it brah!?

I don`t go telling subjects of the realm of Great Britain how to determine their laws or other countries the same. I expect the same respect from others.
0
Reply
Female 2,761
I don`t understand why everyone has to make a big deal out of things. Just don`t participate in the prayer. Why make a scene? Let the Christians have their fun and then move on with the serious.
0
Reply
Male 29
Mixing church and state tends to lend to bad things (war, death, bias or pissing off the neighborhood terrorist). I see the point the "morons" were trying to get across, "active objection", but I disagree with the circumstance it is employed. You should only put your foot down and break the law when something important is at risk. Important, meaning your life and freedom or that of your child. Just shut the drat up and raise the matter in a civil way. If it makes you feel better, don`t bow your head and give the speaker a snearing glare.
As for the guy with the camera, I have no idea. Maybe police officers instinctively don`t like camera filming them as much as we would (or do).
0
Reply
Male 128
I don`t give a poo about what the US constitution says, state-endorsed religion is effing close to being like Islamic countries
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@NoArms5534

It`s not a matter of being constitutional. It`s a matter of being right.

It`s not right to have state-sponsered religion (it cost money to provide that platform: all the costs involved in lighting, heating/cooling, security and staff wages for the duration of the prayer), regardless of what the Constitution says about it.
0
Reply
Male 39,929
@ NoArms5534 - Those guys are all dead now. See where it got them!
0
Reply
Male 196
Geniuses of IAB, please note that the very first meetings of the Federal Congress (you know, the one where the folks who were involved with writing the Constitution were involved) we also opened with prayer. If the guys who wrote the Constitution believe that it was okay to open Federal meetings with prayer, how could it be unconstitutional?
0
Reply
Male 759
Musuko42, You`re right. I didn`t check Hawaii State Laws before posting. It`s not a specific crime in Hawaii. The law does state, paraphrased, anyone who disrupts a public meeting may be ejected from the meeting. I don`t have a Hawaii law book with me and the internet is hit or miss when it comes to statute, or I`d be more specific.

As for your assumption that there is a basis for a seperation between church and state. Look at the comments of the US members of this website, there`s a very healthy debate on the issue. I wouldn`t call that a "basis".
0
Reply
Male 94
I thought opening prayers were a standard thing but they could include inviting anybody...like Congress with the Hindu prayer, though people objected. If you use the words of the Constitution it certainly does not break that. Some other ruling, it may break that, but certainly not the constitution. Meh either way though, its not something to really care about as it is not particularly disruptive in and of itself. They could have an opening breaking of wind, but it matters little.
However, those people did what they did expecting to get thrown out by acting disruptively then they had to be forcibly removed. It is one thing to place a formal objection, a whole other to just start yelling in the middle of proceedings. If one is ignored, it is hardly proper to continue howling, but you must file a complaint. It is not an anarchy or some classroom, it is a government meeting and thus the proper channels must be used.
0
Reply
Male 39,929
I love our "tolerant" society and it`s motto "ZERO Tolerance".

You`re allowed to pray, it`s not unconstitutional.
Hell, you could cast spells or invoke Wikan authority over the wind if you wanted to. Probably be just as affective as prayer.
0
Reply
Male 174
First of all a prayer in the beginning of a public meeting like that technically is unconstitutional and they had every right to object. Secondly I hope every person that touched them gets fired and whoever is in charge of that institution is sued.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
Anyway, at the base of this whole issue is the thing I`ve repeatedly pointed out; that prayer COST TAXPAYER MONEY: for the duration of the prayer, all the costs involved in lighting, heating/cooling, security and staff wages were being used to provide a venue for the prayer.

So tell me, in an era of MASSIVE economic crisis and major government and private sector debt, how was using even a small part of the limited time, manpower, and money resources of this government facility for a prayer the best use of the taxpayer`s money?

The time could better have been spent engaged in the actual business of GOVERNMENT!

What would you say if instead of a prayer, they had a quick game of Ping Pong at the front there before each session? Would you be happy to see time and money wasted on that?

At the end of the day, this is about non-government business being performed in a government venue, on government time, with public money. That`s not on.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@CrakrJak

"Prayer at an opening session of any legislative body is not unconstitutional."

I agree.

But your Constitution is not the be all and end all document for running your country.

If the Constitution doesn`t proscribe it, that doesn`t automatically make it acceptable.

Regardless of what the Constitution says, there`s a strong basis of seperation of church and state in your country, and things like this fly square in the face of that ethos.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@number43

"The point of this whole video is that the first guy disrupted a public meeting, which is illegal"

I doubt it`s illegal. Refusing to leave the property when asked is, but it`s hard to tell if he was asked and refused to leave voluntarily, or if the staff went straight to the physical ejection.

Incidentally, I couldn`t tell: were the people dragging them out police officers?
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@TheWaffle

Here, let me correct your statement for you:

"I don`t agree at all with what those morons in there did. I can understand not agreeing with AN OPPRESSIVE IMPERIAL GOVERNMENT, but c`mon, why disrupt everyone else with your disagreement?"

That whole "War of Independence" thing was a pretty big disruption over a disagreement. Can I take it, then, that you support rejoining the British Empire?
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@CrakrJak

"Your country still has the Queen of England, Head of the Church of England, And "Dei Gratia" Latin for "By the grace of God" on it`s coinage."

Ah, so that`s how America works? You don`t strive for greatness. You just excuse your failings by pointing out the failings of others.

Gotcha.
0
Reply
Male 1,360
this is so wrong.
USA! USA!
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]Mahalo ala nui! Too bad the mods think I`m not nice.[/quote]
That`s not true. I`m sure everyone here is a nice person who I would probably get on very well with if I ever met them IRL.
Except davymid.
0
Reply
Male 985
my jaw is on teh ground
0
Reply
Male 2,402
@5Cats replied:
@CrakrJak I`m thinking it`s a typo or abbreviation, lolz! @handys003 seems like a nice fellow :)

handys003 responded:
Mahalo ala nui! Too bad the mods think I`m not nice.
0
Reply
Male 2,402
@number43

Actually they were both acquitted. It was ruled by a state judge that they were innocent of not doing anything illegal. Go figure
0
Reply
Male 2,402
@CrakrJak

continued.... Think of it like a temporary purgatory from the kapuu`s broken (forbidden rules) or an enemy escaping the Ali`i`s wrath and getting salvation from death for a time period to which you are paroled after a year. Kaloko is an NP that is remnants of an ancient Hawaiian village pre-Marquesas invasion dating to 700AD with an ancient wall built to act as a fish pond. None of these is designed for endangered species.

The only thing I can think of that might have you confused is the Northern Hawaiian islands National Marine Reserve designed to protect the marine life in and on islands north of Niihau. That was enacted by GWB several years ago.

0
Reply
Male 2,402
@CrakrJak replied:
handys003: Much of the interior of the Hawaiian Islands are national parks, Mainly to protect endangered species. There are also national parks in the continental US where American Indians have tribal ceremonies as well, I don`t know if they are charged or not.

handys003 responded:
Actually it`s the State parks that are known for such not National. The NP has no parks in the interior unless you want to say Halemaumau and Haleakal are interior. However both those Volcanos sit next to the ocean. Pu`ukohola national site sits right next to Kawaihae harbor where I just came from discussing the Makali`i (Hawaiian voyaging canoe) coming fundraiser. It is a religious temple where Kamehameha slayed his rival Ali`i from the south and sacrificed him to Ku as directed by a prophecy by a Kahuna. It also has an underwater temple next to it dedicated to the Amakuas. Pu`uhonua -Honaunau is a NP dedicated toward the Hawaiian heritage of known as City of Refuge.
0
Reply
Male 759
There is no constitutional separation between church and state. That is a myth. The bill of rights guarantees you the right to freely hold your own beliefs, that`s all. It doesn`t guarantee that yours, or lack there of, is the only one allowed to be recognized.

The point of this whole video is that the first guy disrupted a public meeting, which is illegal. If he wanted to debate the issue then he should have raised it when he was recognized to do so. That`s against the law, and therefore he`s arrested. It looks like, from the video, that he then tried to break free from the police and got tackled for it. Looks right to me. I don`t know what`s going on with the camera man though. They should have left him alone, but who knows who those guys in the suits were. They could be congressmen or average citizens.

Bottom line. It`s annoying when people blatantly break the law and then scream "POLICE STATE" when they are arrested for it.

LtFurpie, the guy yel
0
Reply
Male 2,402
@CrakrJak replied:
Tuesday, December 07, 2010 8:26:37 PM
handy003: "@CarJack" I`m hoping that`s just a misspelling and not a troll attempt.

handys003 responded:


OOPS! My bad. It was not intentional to mispell your handle. You know us locals are lolo at times. I did not respond sooner. I had a meeting with my with a voyaging society group and just saw this.
0
Reply
Male 2,690
Idiots.
0
Reply
Male 139
no debate needed. first guy should have been taken out of the room, and the second guy shouldn`t have been assaulted.
0
Reply
Male 551
These hippies should get a bath, with all that filthiness
on their ears they can`t listen to the word of God...

Can I get an Amen!?
0
Reply
Male 40,764
@kougaiji - don`t let reality interfere with that lib-tard fantasy of yours, eh?
@adlinbaby - Lolz! I`m liking your style! and your... glasses!
0
Reply
Male 40,764
I totally agree @piperfawn, every country in the USA "sphere of influence" has been harmed by them, including Canada, eh? But specifically, Kissenger was "caught red handed" (sorry for the pun) by some of the Nixon tapes as he knowingly supported murder and torture in Chile. Sickening! He`s a war criminal who should be in prison for life. Nixon too, except he`s already dead.

@CrakrJak I`m thinking it`s a typo or abbreviation, lolz! @handys003 seems like a nice fellow :)
Sorry @inaria, Crakr`s got you there! We Canadains have NO "seperation" eh? Just look at our TWO national anthems! God save our land, m-kay? And how about "Carry high the Cross" which is specifically Catholic? French-Catholic no less...
0
Reply
Female 404
dratin losers, they need to find better things to do like go on the internet xDD
0
Reply
Female 1,008
Crakrjak:"inaria: Your country still has the Queen of England, Head of the Church of England, And "Dei Gratia" Latin for "By the grace of God" on it`s coinage.

So please don`t be hypocritical."

How is being opposed to this hypocritical? I suppose you would have her apologize for being Canadian? Or perhaps move to France?

0
Reply
Male 589
Amen?
0
Reply
Male 117
@CrakrJak- good call with the Canada stuff.

I don`t agree at all with what those morons in there did. I can understand not agreeing with a religion, but c`mon, why disrupt everyone else with your disagreement? The Founding Fathers started their meetings with prayer and mentioned `God` or `Creator` numerous times in their documents. I don`t agree that any religion should ever be pushed onto someone, but let`s have some civility when expressing ourselves here.
That said, I also disagree with the way they were treated by the suits and guards/cops (don`t know). That was completely uncalled for and I hope they press charges against them.
In closing, I hate working and going to school. I wish I would just win the lottery.

Thank you,
TheWaffle
0
Reply
Male 56
Lol.
Christians fail so hard.
0
Reply
Male 604
HOW ABOUT THE FACT THEY THEY WERE ARRESTED, ASSAULTED, AND ATTACKED FOR SPEAKING OUT OF TURN AT A PUBLIC MEETING
0
Reply
Male 17,511
inaria: Your country still has the Queen of England, Head of the Church of England, And "Dei Gratia" Latin for "By the grace of God" on it`s coinage.

So please don`t be hypocritical.
0
Reply
Female 1,515
No government body should begin a session with prayer. I don`t know if it`s actually unconstitutional, but in a country that`s supposed to separate church and state, it`s very hypocritical.
0
Reply
Male 2,148
The argument here isn`t even about religion anymore. It`s all about geography. You go, IAB.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
handy003: "@CarJack" I`m hoping that`s just a misspelling and not a troll attempt.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
handys003: Much of the interior of the Hawaiian Islands are national parks, Mainly to protect endangered species. There are also national parks in the continental US where American Indians have tribal ceremonies as well, I don`t know if they are charged or not.
0
Reply
Male 2,402
@CarJack
I should clarify better as Pu`ukohol is a Natioal site. Not park but is supported by NP Rangers and Fed Tax Money. it is Federally operated. Volcano NP is 80 miles away. Now you can go view the lava flow for free as it`s spread to county land and you can get to it another way without paying but the main crater is in the NP.
0
Reply
Male 2,402
@Carjack

Pu`ukohola Heiau is free. However I`m referring to it`s designation as an national park and gets federal tax money supported by National Parks rangers. Where I was implying on getting in free on religious grounds is Halemaumau Crater aka Volcano Nat`l Park. It`s $10.00 per car load. However if you look Hawaiian and inform the ranger at the booth you are going in on religious ceremonial rite they let you in free. This is a local known fact.
0
Reply
Male 5,167
5Cats kissinger is just one, but if you want to look further you will see that evry region in south and central america was touched by the same attention by U.S. A brief history of . You can say what you want on China and Russia but mine was an answer to your specific point. In any case to stayng on topic is not the case to fall on old discussion between left and right or between east and west, here we are discussing if is acceptaple that in a secular pubblic istitution ,that must represent the whole population, there will be any kind of religious intervention.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
handys003: Found at your link,

FREE ADMISSION

Educational Programs (elementary-college) must be scheduled in advance.

(Non-educational guided tours are available for groups of 10 or more at $2.00 per person.)

For more information or to schedule your group, contact the Park Visitor Center at (808) 882-7218 Ext. 1011.

It seems only guided tours are charged $2 per person, Otherwise admission is free for everyone.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Prayer at an opening session of any legislative body is not unconstitutional. It is not the state establishing a religion, or making a law to that effect.

Obama took his oath of office on Lincoln`s bible and The Supreme Court has Moses and the Ten commandments in it`s architecture.

The fact still remains, No one is forced to pray and the US Government has not established any particular religion.
0
Reply
Male 2,402
Here I`m going to throw a curve to all you separate religion from government supporters out there. I personally do not care, but for all the soapbox spouters here you go.

Do you think the Feds with your tax dollars should support this national park?

http://www.nps.gov/puhe/index.htm

It`s a Hawaiian religious temple

Do you also think that when Hawaiians drive up to the toll window of Volcano`s National Park. They should be free to enter when they cite religious ceremony at Halemaumau crater? Even though tourists are charged.

0
Reply
Male 1,013
"Believe as I do or else..." I hate effing religion! Legally the activists were in fact disrupting the proceedings, but the other fat hawaii-ites over reacted too. Bottom line was that religion was still the instigating factor.
0
Reply
Male 40,764
@iceblack - No worries! It was "due process" you were thinking of, right?

@piperfawn - Yes, I`m well aware thanks. Henry Kissenger IS a war criminal for his role in Chile, eh?
And the Former Soviet Union has 10X as much blood on their hands, and China has 100X. Doesn`t make it right; Nixon and Kissenger were still criminals; I`m just saying I`m well aware of many nations and their vile histories...
0
Reply
Male 8,547
almightybob1 -“But nothing was offered for anyone of any religious belief other than Christianity”

You’re basing this on that one filmclip. A little research and you will find that other religions and other concepts have been used to open the Hawaiian Legislature, including Buddhist and even Hula song of Aloha.

Kougaiji-“ everyone told those who disagreed to not participate or leave”

They were told neither of these things. I’ve stood respectively by while others expressed their faith in prayer. Doesn’t bother me at all.

strangersdk-‘ before high school football games (public schools, not private) has been banned by the Supreme Court”

Yes, but this video did not take place at a high-school football game. Supreme Court decisions to date concerning prayer at the beginning of government meetings (such as in the video) state that it is constitutional. That may change, but for now THAT is
0
Reply
Male 2,402
@almightybob1

continued...

will tell you. No religious prayer is mandated. it is courtesy by local custom and allowed by local law.

Let me explain it once again for all the haoles. Whether you like it or not many Hawaiians consider it courtesy and rude to exclude such ceremonies whther you outsiders maybe unacconstemd. Fact is the only ones that make trouble are the f- haoles that come to Hawaii with visions of Polynesian syndrome of the Movie Blue Hawaii. Fact is they come here then don`t like what they see and want to change it to their European colonialistic ways. Which flat out pisses off the locals, and they want to basically not just beat you, but kill you. Get it? This island is very close to being 2 seperate nations soon. Hawaiian Kingdom and US state. It`s political dynamics that basically none of the haloes understand.
0
Reply
Male 33
MeGrendel, troll drating harder.

Even if it WAS just one time, it doesn`t matter.
It also doesn`t matter if it was `offered` as you say. Praying before high school football games (public schools, not private) has been banned by the Supreme Court - and those prayers were simply offered, not mandated.
The Supreme Court does not have a history of siding with religion. Do some research.
Favoring one religion is unconstitutional.
The protesters reacted in a different way than I would have, yes, but the prayer was unconstitutional. Throwing them out because they were being unruly is justified, though.
0
Reply
Male 2,402
@almightybob1

I did not read your past threads. However every legislation opening has always had one religious leader coming in and offering a local prayer. Be it Hawaiian Kahuna, Buddhist monk. Muslim Cleric or Christian official etc. They rotate out of courtesy. It`s a historical fact, and has been challenged before. In fact by Hawaiian sovereign activists who felt their religion was being excluded back in when sovereignty was a major issue before the creation of OHA.

The lawyer claims the two men are right about separation of church and state. However this has been challenged as well back in past decades. It has failed and backed allowed by the State Supreme Court. It was challenged in Federal and failed because it`s a states rights issue that is allowed in the State Constitution. It`s not going to change. Hawaiians are more religious than you may think. They believe in everyones rights to happiness. If you don`t like it leave the islands. That`s what locals will t
0
Reply
Male 3,431
Seabass called it.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]The prayer was not `mandated`. No one was commanded to participate. It was offered. [/quote]
But nothing was offered for anyone of any religious belief other than Christianity. Therefore, they are putting those believers above others. How you cannot understand this is beyond me.

Use your imagination and substitute the preacher for an imam telling you there is no God but Allah and Mohammed is his prophet. Or Richard Dawkins telling you there is no God, every time the government meets.
0
Reply
Male 604
so if a catholic sermon was offered throughout the entire congress and everyone told those who disagreed to not participate or leave, would you still feel that it`s not "mandated"? A government shouldn`t use public facilities to preach religion. And yes, by choosing a religion, a prayer, and personally tell it to the masses on a note unrelated to the agenda at hand, you are preaching.
0
Reply
Male 8,547
yanging-"When governments allow religion to intermingle with their affairs, it violates the constitution."

Sorry, but the Supreme Court does not agree with you. They have continually found that opening government sessions with a prayer to be constitutional. Reversing several lower courts who said otherwise.

PSURyan-"By choosing one religion to open every session, you are Establishing that that religion with the states power."

This video is not what researchers would consider a `representative sample`. We only know that THIS session was opened with a pastor of THIS religion. The day before it may have been a Buddhist (after all, many Hawaiians are Buddhist).

PSURyan-"What is not alright is that the STATE mandates that the session be opened with a prayer or observance of any religion."

The prayer was not `mandated`. No one was commanded to participate. It was offered. Participation was voluntary. Other than
0
Reply
Male 4,290
CJ, try reading the rest of his letter to Waterhouse. He does indeed state his own personal belief in God. But far more importantly, he says this:

"I rejoice that in this blessed country of free inquiry and belief, which has surrendered its creed and conscience to neither kings nor priests, the genuine doctrine of one only God is reviving, and I trust that there is not a _young man_ now living in the United States who will not die an Unitarian."

See that bit? Surrendered its creed and conscience to neither kings nor priests. And yet you`re claiming that he didn`t intend the USA and its constitution to be secular? He may have been a believer himself, and is clearly optimistic that more people will convert, but emphatically did NOT want priests involved in the creed or conscience of the government.
0
Reply
Male 478
These "protesters" are just hecklers trying to get in trouble so they can fvk with the police on tape.
0
Reply
Male 478
Resisting arrest is a no-no.
0
Reply
Male 928
Wow for once the guys filming were actually correct. I would imagine some people are going to be in serious trouble after all of this considering you have a right to object and that is all that the one person did. I also think that separation of church and state comes into play here as well.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]That`s correct. They do not do this when other religions are doing their prayers. Only when it`s a Christian.[/quote]
Which other religions have had their preachers up praying at the podium during an official government event, handys? I`ve said at least 3 times now in this thread, if it were a Muslim it would be just as unconstitutional. Or even if it was an atheist, starting off the event by telling everyone there that there probably is no God.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]And if they had a reading from the Koran, and someone did this, they`d be racist. LOL @ double-standards.[/quote]
If you did it in a mosque, yeah, you`d be being a dick. If it was as part of a government function, then that would be unconstitutional too and you would be correct to protest it, not racist. I have already said, Muslims or Jews or Vikings should not be leading prayers either.

[quote]The constitution says "Freedom of religion" NOT "Freedom from religion", The phrase "Separation of church and state" does not appear in the US Constitution at all. [/quote]
I`m not sure how many times I can quote the Justice Souter line in this thread in general, or at you in particular CJ. You know the one I mean, the one that ends "or prefer religion to irreligion". I`ve told you it enough times.

I wonder how often they let an atheist get up and NOT pray to kick off the Congress session?
0
Reply
Male 21
@blckhawk1235
I think anyone should be able to pray in a public building, but yelling out in the middle of someone else`s prayer is a real d*ck move. Protest it some other way instead of going all revolutionary.
0
Reply
Male 5,167
5Cats you forget to say that the large part of dictator in South America was putting on charge by U.S.A. Is to easy to wash dirty clothes on the neighbourood states and showing to the rest of the world that we have clean hands.In any case this is not question of left and right is just question of free gouvernement or gouvernement mixed with religion.
0
Reply
Male 551
@5cats
Just realized I wrote the wrong name, that post was for "paco664"

Sorry lol
0
Reply
Male 40,764
[quote]@5Cats - Did you know that the words "Fair trial" don`t appear on the constitution either?[/quote]
Um, Me? @iceblack I think you`ve got the wrong cat! lolz!

The term you`re looking for is "due process" and was quite revolutionary back in the day, eh? France especially, and all Europeans were locking political prisoners up until they died with no tirals, evidence or whatnot. Giving someone "due process" is a great idea!
Most South American countries have had brutal dictatorships which frequently tortured thousands+ to death, I`m sure glad my Yank neighbors have a better legal system than that!

To me these two sissies show what`s wrong with "the left" and why the left is `yesterday`s news`.
0
Reply
Male 518
"I wouldn`t call these people activists... they`re more like atheists trying to push their ideals on the Christians in the room. All they have to do is sit there and ignore a prayer for 20 seconds..."

rofl and what is a prayer in a secular government? Pushing of ideals.
0
Reply
Male 1,625
Separation of church and state much?
0
Reply
Male 2,402
@nettech98
LOL! Yeah in that way.
0
Reply
Male 2,402
For the record this incident happened in April 2010. The charges were dropped on both. They were planning to sue. No lawsuit has not been filed as to this date. Like I said freaking haoles making trouble wanting to change everything.
0
Reply
Male 1,073
@handys: Of course there`s five-o. Not just in Hawaii, but it generically refers to all cops. Urban dictionary
0
Reply
Male 2,402
@Heilsquay

That`s correct. They do not do this when other religions are doing their prayers. Only when it`s a Christian.
0
Reply
Male 172
"I wouldn`t call these people activists... they`re more like atheists trying to push their ideals on the Christians in the room. All they have to do is sit there and ignore a prayer for 20 seconds..."

I`ll bite. Yes and no. There is no `agenda` in term of religious belief here. Go worship Jesus and whatnot. But simply keep it out of government. Easy.
0
Reply
Male 21
I wouldn`t call these people activists... they`re more like atheists trying to push their ideals on the Christians in the room. All they have to do is sit there and ignore a prayer for 20 seconds...
0
Reply
Male 2,402
@Fu*ckMe484
You don`t know anything about Hawaiians and their attitudes. STFU
0
Reply
Male 2,402
@pocketmoron

So your saying the citizens of Hawaii have no right of self-determination then?
0
Reply
Male 10,440
disgusting... I would have expected this from Kansas or Texas or some such craphole, but not Hawaii! It looks like there are very few sane places in the US left.
0
Reply
Male 191
Hmmmm... interesting... I hope he actually sues. I know that for the Georgia state senate that people are allowed to sit in a balcony (not on the actual floor) and are strictly warned against being loud or distracting. They also have a Christian opening prayer every morning (and, I think, a short sermon thingy) by leaders from different Christian denominations. (many senators and the governor also prayed on the steps to the capitol building that it would rain, during a drought a few years ago. There was a protest the same day, however)
So, no they really shouldn`t have yelled, and being escorted out was the proper response, but neither should they have been assaulted and their camera broken/attempted to be taken away. Sometimes, though, change calls for somewhat vocal and obtrusive measures. I do hope we can move past this soon. Religion really doesn`t have anything to do with congress.
0
Reply
Male 2,033
"unconstitutional Christian pray"

Grammar am IAB use good.
0
Reply
Male 551
@Pooptart19

My thoughts exactly.
Some people confuse "literal words" to "comprehension", just
because the Constitution doesn`t have THOSE EXACT words it
doesn`t mean that it`s not clear what it actually means

Just for the fun of it...
@5Cats - Did you know that the words "Fair trial" don`t
appear on the constitution either? It doesn`t say that you
have the "Right to a fair trial", but guess what... What it
actually says (Which I can remember now) gives you that right
because that`s what it proposes, means, declares, what ever
you want to call it
0
Reply
Male 2,402
The other thing is why was he calling for the police. it was the Sheriffs dept that was arresting him. HPD has no jurisdiction on Capital grounds. Also contrary to belief there is no Five-O
0
Reply
Male 5
The First Amendment to the US constitution reads

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

To pick out the relevent parts here, we have the Establishment Clause. This is what is violated here. By choosing one religion to open every session, you are Establishing that that religion with the states power.

The second partis the Free Exercise Clause. The man is welcome to pray, even pray on that floor at the podium. What is not alright is that the STATE mandates that the session be opened with a prayer or observance of any religion.

a note on Jefferson, in th Danbury Letter, he is outlining his own view, and in doing so, shows that he was far more worried about the government staying out of religion than religi
0
Reply
Male 2,402
Regarding the State of Hawaii many of you are talking about something you know nothing about except as a tourist spot. Any Invocation is already allowed by Hawaii State Constitution and ruled as constitutional by it`s State Supreme Court already. End of discussion as it`s a states right already ruled and issue declared by US Supreme Court and no longer a Fed matter.

This poo goes on almost everyday. The state legislation opens each session with a prayer be it, Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, Hindu, Hawaiian etc... by invitation and rotates.

It never ceases to amaze me. As one of my best friends who is pure Hawaiian and an sovereign activist stated. The haloes always want to live like it was in old Hawaii, but they want to come and change it to their way of thinking of how it should be the haole way. Go figure.
0
Reply
Male 2,440
[quote]actually the term "separation of church and state" does not appear in the constitution.... try reading it sometimes...[/quote]
*facepalm*
0
Reply
Male 17,511
madest: Jefferson was an anti-Calvinist, That doesn`t mean he was an atheist. He didn`t believe in the ritualized pomp of many Christian denominations of the time, But it`s clear he believed in God.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
jak22: "Arms" means more than just `firearms` and is certainly not restricted to the technology of the time. I`m not saying it`s legal or a right for someone to make pipe bombs or owning hand grenades, But there was nothing in the constitution that is `frozen in time`.
0
Reply
Male 40,764
Whiners and crybabies! They should come to Winnipeg where our Pigs will show them a REAL cop-beat-down! Then drop you in an alley when it`s -40...

(I hate Winnipeg`s Pigs, and police brutality in all it`s forms, but these two weenies are crying about THAT? Grow a pair between you boys...)
0
Reply
Male 7,378
CJ, There are equally as many Thomas Jefferson writings doubting God. I won`t quote him but he was clear about hating organized religion. You would know that if you actually read any of his writings.
Don`t forget Thomas Paine was a forefather. He was an atheist. None of the forefathers were reverends or tied to any church other than occasional attendees.
0
Reply
Male 159
actually the term "separation of church and state" does not appear in the constitution.... try reading it sometimes... that term appears in the federalist papers.......

and these 2 asshats deserved the poo kicked out of them for disturbing others.....

0
Reply
Male 154
thats what pisses me off about the right AND the far left. you dont Fking look at the whole issue. just your side and you only look for things to confirm your beliefs.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Kougaiji: Actually he (Thomas Jefferson) wasn`t secularist at all.

Jefferson to Dr. Benjamin Waterhouse, June 26, 1822
"1. That there is one only God, and he all perfect.
2. That there is a future state of rewards and punishments.
3. That to love God with all thy heart and thy neighbor as thyself, is the sum of religion. "

Inside the Jefferson Memorial

"God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever. Commerce between master and slave is despotism. Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than these people are to be free. Establish the law for educating the common people. This it is the business of the state to effect and on a general plan."
— Thomas Jefferson
0
Reply
Male 154
okay crakr jack, if the seperation of church and state just meant no state religion, as our forefathers intended it to according to you, even though it says separation of church and state, than it is unconstitutional and un-american to own a modern gun. because when they wrote the right to bear arms, and the only things they thought of were muskets, not AR`s and semi auto handguns.
0
Reply
Male 172
"There is no law regarding prayer to open a session of congress or state legislatures. The government has not established any religion as a `state religion`. That phrase was put there because King George of England was not only the `Head of state` he was the `Head of the church of England` (Anglican/Episcopal Church).

When Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptists using the phrase "Separation of church and state" It pertained to the Church of England, Because the Danbury Baptists were worried that America would adopt that church as a `state religion` and thus be beholden religiously to the King of England again."

If you wish to uphold the position that the constitution is neutral on this topic then so be it. I would ask now that we talk about how we can address the issue of government endorsing religion on official platforms. It would be heinous to say that allowing public prayer for governmental events is antyhing otherwise.
0
Reply
Male 1,222
Shouldnt they have like ukuleles?
0
Reply
Male 604
Crakr spin it any way you want but thomas jefferson was as secularist as they get
0
Reply
Male 604
YES O HOW I MISSED FEEDING THE TROLLS WITH REASON
PS this is photoshopped
I can tell from the pixels and from having seen many photoshops in my time.

Srsly guys we`ve all explained the establishment clause over and over again, and these people will ignore that. Even if it were not there, any reasonable, moral, fair man should have the choice to be free from a religion or any institution. One needn`t a law to understand human rights and common decency.
0
Reply
Male 542
Idk why they felt obligated to act out anyway. Tolerance should go both ways?
0
Reply
Male 7,378
[quote]The phrase "Separation of church and state" does not appear in the US Constitution at all.[/quote]
---------------
You and Christine O`Donnell. There`s somebody to emulate.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
yanging: You are wrongly emphasizing the "..respecting the establishment thereof" part and overlooking the "Shall make no law.." part.

There is no law regarding prayer to open a session of congress or state legislatures. The government has not established any religion as a `state religion`. That phrase was put there because King George of England was not only the `Head of state` he was the `Head of the church of England` (Anglican/Episcopal Church).

When Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptists using the phrase "Separation of church and state" It pertained to the Church of England, Because the Danbury Baptists were worried that America would adopt that church as a `state religion` and thus be beholden religiously to the King of England again.
0
Reply
Male 172
"Yes, but it is not your ONLY law. Saying that the Constitution doesn`t prohibit it doesn`t mean that other parts of your law doesn`t either.

The Constitution speaks not a word regarding copyright law, for example."

I understand this. But the first article of our Bill of Rights directly delegates how matters of religion and government should be dealt with. It would be silly (and fruitless) to look to a lesser authority for a solution.
0
Reply
Male 172
"The US Congress has prayer to open it`s session every morning with many denominations and religions on a rotating basis.

The constitution says "Freedom of religion" NOT "Freedom from religion", The phrase "Separation of church and state" does not appear in the US Constitution at all.

I`m afraid way to many people have been brainwashed with secularism so thoroughly, That they have no idea what is and isn`t `constitutional` anymore. "

Congress shall make no law preventing the practice of religion or respecting the establishment thereof.

Having a religion pray at a government function is, most assuredly, respecting an establishment of that religion. Religion does not have a place a government: it has no place in the Hawaiian Senate, and surely no place in our Congress.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@yangying.

"The constitution is our binding law which we all must uphold"

Yes, but it is not your ONLY law. Saying that the Constitution doesn`t prohibit it doesn`t mean that other parts of your law doesn`t either.

The Constitution speaks not a word regarding copyright law, for example.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@yanging

"Even then, we could not possibly accommodate all religions."

EXACTLY.

So with that conclusion, the only fair option is to accomodate none of them.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
The US Congress has prayer to open it`s session every morning with many denominations and religions on a rotating basis.

The constitution says "Freedom of religion" NOT "Freedom from religion", The phrase "Separation of church and state" does not appear in the US Constitution at all.

I`m afraid way to many people have been brainwashed with secularism so thoroughly, That they have no idea what is and isn`t `constitutional` anymore.
0
Reply
Male 2,796
This sounds like a job for,
0
Reply
Male 172
"By the by...

...everyone, on both sides of the argument, could you PLEASE stop arguing about whether this is constitutional or not, as if the US Constitution is the ONLY law document in your country, or the ONLY guide of what is right that you have?"

The constitution is our binding law which we all must uphold. More than that, it is the supreme law; if one can rule by the constitution, there should be no further argument.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@helix25

"it`s part of his speech and I don`t think it`s costing a drating load of money"

Heating/air conditioning, lighting, security, and the wages of every single staff member involved in the meeting for the duration of the prayer.

Not a huge cost, but if this is a regular occurance, you`re talking about a lot of resources (time and money) over the year.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
By the by...

...everyone, on both sides of the argument, could you PLEASE stop arguing about whether this is constitutional or not, as if the US Constitution is the ONLY law document in your country, or the ONLY guide of what is right that you have?
0
Reply
Male 172
"Was everyone else present given the same opportunity to step up to that mike and lead their own prayer service, one at a time?"

Even then, we could not possibly accommodate all religions.
0
Reply
Male 506
Well said PSURyan. Very well said.

0
Reply
Male 2,850
@helix25

"In this case the government is not endorsing religion, the man is simply praying."

You left out "upon a platform provided to him at public expense."

Was everyone else present given the same opportunity to step up to that mike and lead their own prayer service, one at a time?
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@rastaspoon

"Nope, didn`t think so. If they want to pray, you shouldn`t give a crap, it`s your choice. If you want to change it, then V-O-T-E, become an activist or politician and CHANGE it."

Do please note the location stated under my name.

I don`t need to become an activist or vote, because my country doesn`t have this ridiculous problem.

You need to be ashamed. I don`t.
0
Reply
Female 3,001
@TruTenrMan

true dat.
0
Reply
Male 5
People are allowed and should be allowed to pray when and where they want. That is not the issue here.

The issue is the state endoresement of a religion, as in this case. Here, the state unjustly given more power or rights to a specific religion. Though it is the majority religion, it does not mean they get the exclusive right in government.

Prayer or any other religios expression does not have a place on the floors of our government. If a group of legislators wants to pray outside before each session, they have every right to it, but not one organized by the state itself, ie, a prayer designated or required by the state itself.
0
Reply
Male 172
"-Was the Baptist Reverend paid? (it`s very possible he was a volunteer).
-Is only Baptist Preachers allowed to give the prayer? (It`s very possible that on other days, a Methodist may give a prayer, or a Buddhist or even a Muslim).
-That anyone was forced to participate in the prayer? (his words were, “WOULD you bow with me in prayer?” This is known as a request. He did not say “You WILL pray with me!”. And it would seem that the vast majority of those assembled appreciated the prayer."

This is all irrelevant to the fact that he was using a government forum as a medium for his religion (a prayer).

When governments allow religion to intermingle with their affairs, it violates the constitution.
0
Reply
Male 130
Iceblack, I was going to post, but it would have looked like I had copied and pasted from yours.

There is a difference between exercising a right to freedom of religion and abusing said right.
0
Reply
Male 2,552
And if they had a reading from the Koran, and someone did this, they`d be racist. LOL @ double-standards.
0
Reply
Male 15,510
So silly
0
Reply
Male 8
please tell me these people pressed charges...
0
Reply
Male 551
... Times change and
a law interpretation from 20 years ago can in fact be biased and
would, like it would seem in this case, be reinterpreted
0
Reply
Male 551
One of my favorite quotes:
"Prayers are like masturbation. It only makes YOU feel
good and it`s something you should do in private, in your
house. At least go to the bathroom"

And I agree... It doesn`t matter what non-logical ghost
daddy you believe in, the government can`t be on the side
of ANY of those religions, because that would denigrate all
of the other religions

As much as I`d like to see every religion disappear, I want
even more to live in a society where everybody has the same
rights. Starting with a prayer in any government-related issue
clearly gives that religion, christians in this case, a
status of privilege, thus discriminating other religions

Btw... Judges can even disagree with the law (Which they rarely
do) and that`s why precedent`s, even when they have to be taken
seriously, aren`t always the right way to go... Times change and
a law interpretation from 20 years ago can in fac
0
Reply
Male 5,167
To pray is not inconstitutional obviously but to pray in a governemnet place is against the equality that must be granted to each kind of religion in constitution, and is against the separtation between government and religion. Every governmet that want to call himself free must take apart any form of religion or is not so different from "fanatics religion states " that America pretend to fight all over the world. You want to pray just do it...everywhere but not in MY government places. And this have nothing to do with freedom of speech, this is just a form of respect for each kind of races ,religion or non religion that are at the base of government. So if you urge to pray do it in silence ,in your mind, when you are in a place builded with money of whole population.
0
Reply
Male 39,929
AnImbroglio - "Freedom of speech dictates that I can pray whenever I want, in any forum I want, period."

That`s the worst interpretation I`ve ever read. Whenever and Whereever? Puh-leez!

Whenever: Try having a loud, long prayer in the middle of a chemistry exam at school and see how far you get.

Wherever: You can`t pick any forum you want like a spoiled kid throwing a tantrum. If you want to pray in the middle of the airport runway you don`t have the right to do so. Nor on other peoples private property.

A lot of people have the misconception that they have a RIGHT to do whatever they damn well please whenever it damn well pleases them to do it.

Wrong

Wrong

Wrong
0
Reply
Male 2,309
American protects minorities. It doesn`t project majority rule onto everyone. That`s why democracies fail for the most part. If you want our democracy to fail, then let the majority rule.
0
Reply
Male 8,547
almightybob1-“ I would say that that ruling was itself overturned by the more recent Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687 (1994)”

This was a case of the government basically setting up a school district for only one religion. Not even remotely related to prayer before a meeting.

Things you will not find evidence of in the video:
-Was the Baptist Reverend paid? (it`s very possible he was a volunteer).
-Is only Baptist Preachers allowed to give the prayer? (It`s very possible that on other days, a Methodist may give a prayer, or a Buddhist or even a Muslim).
-That anyone was forced to participate in the prayer? (his words were, “WOULD you bow with me in prayer?” This is known as a request. He did not say “You WILL pray with me!”. And it would seem that the vast majority of those assembled appreciated the prayer.)
0
Reply
Male 8,547
almightybob1-“ I will pass on to Judge Leslie Hayashi the information”

Please do so. Inform her that until she specifically rules that it was unconstitutional, and has that upheld by the United State Supreme Court, it will remain that prayers before government meetings do not violate the constitution. The only restriction of this is that there must not be an imposition of an improper restriction on the type of prayer that can be made to open the session.

The only serious ruling that effects Marsh v. Chambers was Simpson v. Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors. U.S. District Courts ruled that a particular religion could not be excluded. The Fourth Circuit Court reversed the District Court (April 7, 2005) holding that Chesterfield’s policy was constitutional. The U.S Supreme Court declined to hear the case.

So, as it stands, it is constitutional to open a government meeting with a prayer. Feel free to inform Judge Hayashi of that.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]almightybob1: I hadn`t seen that particular case before; thank you.[/quote]
No problem :) I`m surprised you haven`t heard of it though - you seem to know what you`re talking about, and that quote from Judge Souter is one I thought was pretty well-known. Anyway, glad to help.

[quote]I read into it further and I think the two cases are too dissimilar to allow for a valid comparison.[/quote]
Possibly. It didn`t specifically overturn Marsh v. Chambers so you might be right. Although it then seems to me that the two rulings contradict each other. I`m not a lawyer though.

[quote](on a related note; was the individual who prayed paid by the state or with public funds?)[/quote]
I don`t know. I`m trying to catch his name, but I can`t quite get it from the video. Reverend Doctor David something... Hapley?
0
Reply
Male 721
Religion is stupid anyways, causes nothing but hate, separation between the human race and ultimately war.
0
Reply
Male 2,796
People, PEOPLE!!! Everyone calm down!!

Before we start this debate and flame war...

LET US PRAY.

"Dear little, tiny infant Jesus..."
0
Reply
Male 868
If you walk out in front of a bus because you have the right of way and get run over, being right doesn`t make you less stupid...
0
Reply
Male 165
Preacher? he is just praying, for himself or not, it`s part of his speech and I don`t think it`s costing a drating load of money, I`d say $0. Again be it in a court or not, someone has a right to pray. The first amendment prevents one from ruling in favor or a religion, that is all.
0
Reply
Male 8,547
The prayer was perfectly constitutional (people who disagree need to read the bill of rights & a little history).

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..." Well, they were not making a law concerning it. It amazes me how progressives like to take the `Freedom of religion` and change it to `Freedom from religion.`

These idiots became belligerent while they were (rightfully) being escorted out of a forum they had interrupted. Yes, they have the right to be offended. So what?

SPrinkZ-"So if it was a tradition to worship in a Muslim prayer, you`d all be okay with this?"

If it were tradition, or even if it was not and some people just wanted to do it, I would be okay with it. I would stand in respective silence but would not participate. I would expect the same respect in return.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote](people who disagree need to read the bill of rights & a little history)[/quote]
I will pass on to Judge Leslie Hayashi the information that MeGrendel says she needs to go learn the law. I`m sure she will be pleased you let her know.
0
Reply
Male 2,309
I read the bill of rights. Where does it say that you can use public funds to pay a preacher to give a Christian prayer?

Why do any of you think this is right? Can`t you accept that your prayers should be kept to yourselves, or better yet, in your churches and other religious institutions? No one has a problem with that. In fact, those same activists would probably fight for your right to pray in the places you are allowed to if ANYONE infringed on it, but stop infringing on my government with this neotheocracy crap.
0
Reply
Male 8
almightybob1: I hadn`t seen that particular case before; thank you. I read into it further and I think the two cases are too dissimilar to allow for a valid comparison. The judge ruled on the basis of religion where that was clearly not the crux of the matter. (on a related note; was the individual who prayed paid by the state or with public funds?)
0
Reply
Male 24
@MeGrendel

according to NotaSpy you are a religious conservative.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]almightybob1 is looking more and more like another typical butthurt European. [/quote]
Lol. Butthurt about what? I`m right. The judge agrees with me. Butthurt is when you lose, or are wrong.
0
Reply
Male 881
The best part of these videos is watching conservatives wrap themselves up in knots in the comments. They love the Constitution, except when their religion is on the line. They hate those activists, except when they name their political movement after this country`s most famous activist event. Logic and reason aren`t their strong points, but that is obvious by the fact that they have a religion.
0
Reply
Male 24
almightybob1 is looking more and more like another typical butthurt European.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
sataide: I would say that that ruling was itself overturned by the more recent Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687 (1994) where the Supreme Court ruled that "government should not prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion". Which is clearly happening in this case.
0
Reply
Male 165
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Is this person making a law in favor to Christianity? no. Are we preventing his freedom of speech and exercise of religion? Yes. Is he preventing others`s freedom of religion? No.
0
Reply
Male 25,416
I think he needs a better camera!
0
Reply
Male 2,309
I don`t care about Marsh Vs Whateversauce. The judges clearly were smoking some crack pipe while deliberating. Tradition doesn`t mean that something is constitutional. It may be the tradition to put in god we trust on our money (an extremely recent tradition at that), but it sure as hell isn`t right.
0
Reply
Male 24
ah so we get to the butthurt.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
[quote]@madest you have to admit both partys were at least incredibly annoying.[/quote]
-------------
I don`t admit any such thing. The activists in this case were the heros of America. Anybody standing up for the rights of all Americans should be commended. You lilly livered spineless weaklings who would have sat there in silence disgust me.
0
Reply
Female 128
"atheism strips most of the ability to act like a civil person i don`t mind if you object just don`t be a annoying F*CKTARD when doing so"

Funny, what about segregation? Do you think they were annoying f*cktards for voicing an opinion that was wrong back when? I don`t think you mind voicing your annoying f*ucktard opinions. Atheism strips nothing, stupid people who don`t follow laws strip civility.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
Helix`s post is wrong. Judge Leslie Hayashi ruled that it was unconstitutional.
The protesters are right, Hawaii state officials, yourself and Helix are wrong.
0
Reply
Male 8
I normally avoid this kind of thing, but in order for this to be termed "unconstitutional"; it would have to overturn a previous Supreme Court ruling. Take a look at MARSH v. CHAMBERS, 463 U.S. 783 (1983)
0
Reply
Male 2,309
So if it was a tradition to worship in a Muslim prayer, you`d all be okay with this? I`m seriously doubting that this is constitutional at all, and if any judge in the past saying this was constitutional obviously doesn`t understand the constitution. We shouldn`t have to use our public funds to pay for a Christian sermon in our government buildings. I don`t even understand how that is justifiable. Respect all, or none. It`s very simple. Not everyone is a Christian.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]atheism strips most of the ability to act like a civil person i dont mind if you object just dont be a annoying F*CKTARD when doing so [/quote]
How would you propose they object, if not by voicing their objection? If they do complain about the assault, you just call it "whining".
0
Reply
Female 66
@Blaklesby
We are not against Christians but all for Muslims. We are for tolerance.
0
Reply
Male 24
nope, do I have to explain our country`s law to you? I don`t even have to. read helix25`s post.
0
Reply
Male 1,610
"atheism strips most of the ability to act like a civil person i dont mind if you object just dont be a annoying F*CKTARD when doing so"

activist =/= atheist
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]if Muslims had their prayer with everyone facing mecca then people would say that it`s their rights[/quote]

They can pray facing Mecca in a mosque. Christians can pray to God in church. Hell, they can both pray out in public on the street if they want. But neither should be praying from a government podium. I am clearly, right now, saying that is not their right, because it violates the First Amendment.
I don`t even live in America, do I really have to explain your country`s laws to you?
0
Reply
Female 382
wow... just wow....`s intense
0
Reply
Male 24
sorry, I didn`t complete my sentence. Did you hear about to judge barring the votes against sharia law in courts?
0
Reply
Male 165
In this case the government is not endorsing religion, the man is simply praying. If it were a muslim, he could do it too. The first amemdment of the constitution forbids to proritize a religion, that does not mean one cannot pray before giving his speech.

They had the right to film and no one had the right to keep them from doing so. But they interrupted the court which is supposed to stay in order.

Wrong on both sides.
0
Reply
Male 271
atheism strips most of the ability to act like a civil person i dont mind if you object just dont be a annoying F*CKTARD when doing so

those titty baby hippies only won because they whined enough i wouldve kicked their ass myself for being so annoying and odds are one of them envoked the officer otherwise they wouldve pounced on the two in the building and they shouldnt have won do to this ruling by the supreme court

@madest you have to admit both partys were at least incredibly annoying and wouldnt each of their actions be covered under freedom of speech because neither albeit annoyingly but still were not forcing their views on one another
0
Reply
Male 21
They didn`t have to take part in the prayer...
0
Reply
Male 24
Doubt it. if Muslims had their prayer with everyone facing mecca then people would say that it`s their rights. Did you hear about the judge barring the votes on sharia law?
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]why are everyone against Christians but all for Muslims? [/quote]
We`re not. A call to prayer with everyone facing Mecca would have been just as unconstitutional.
0
Reply
Male 24
why are everyone against Christians but all for Muslims?
0
Reply
Male 10,338
Oops. Missed the Jesus at the end. Sorry guys.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]I did not hear him say God or Jesus. What religion was he representing?[/quote]
0:29 "Father, we thank you for this day..."
0:36 "We pray, Lord, that as you lead us this morning..."
0:44 "Today, Lord, we thank you for the people..."
0:57 "Help them, Lord, to have success..."
1:09 "Lord, give us a good day today..."
1:14 "in the name of your son, Jesus Christ"


What the hell video were you watching AJ?
0
Reply
Male 2,309
If anyone is wondering if it is a Christian religion...listen to the Amen.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
Look IseeingI2I, With a resounding gavel beating, the people here were directed to bow their heads and pray by the state government. If it were just one person who felt the need to pray you would be right. This was a directive issued by state government and is unconstitutional. Read this.
0
Reply
Male 2,309
No one seems to understand that we live in America. Not Christian Land. This is not a Christian nation any more than it is a White nation, a Black nation, an Indian nation, a Muslim nation, a Jewish nation, etc. etc.

It is a nation of freedom of personal belief, and of multiple creeds, races, etc.

Respecting any one religion is wrong. Because all are equally invalid in my eyes, but at least they should all be respected if you are going to respect Christianity. Why not Satanism, or LaVeyism, or Luciferianism, or Hinduism, or Buddhism, or Shintoism?

respect em all, or none. Simple. Seems easier to do the latter though.
0
Reply
Male 3,060
my favorite part was when the cameraman yelled "POLICE" while the police tackled him.
0
Reply
Male 10,338
"1st amendment to the constitution denies the government the right to endorse any religion."

I did not hear him say God or Jesus. What religion was he representing?
0
Reply
Male 2,309
There is no reason for prayer or anything non-secular to be involved in our politics. Politics is for the world we live in, not the one some hope to go to. It`s just that simple. You want to pray? Go to church, go home, or wherever else you want. Just don`t bring it to government institutions. That is for real human life. Not the imaginary soul, or anything else like that. Keep that poo elsewhere. I live on this planet, and I have to share it with you. The least others can do is respect my right to not believe what they believe.
0
Reply
Male 27
auburnjunky - he said "in jesus name, amen"
0
Reply
Male 5,167
Guys ther is something strange in your comments and is the word "atheist". You all are assuming theat this two guys are atheist cause they are against this pray. Maybe they are just from another religion that is not christian and this don`t mean to be atheist ( the word atheist become from ancient greek and is composed by A and Theos and just mean without god) maybe they belive in a different religion and i think they have all right to protest against a monopolistic way to introduce religion in a "PUBBLIC" place that is supposed to serve all population despite their faith. Maybe the way they have chosed is not so politically correct but the substance of message still stand.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
Any prayer is an endorsement of religion AJ. But you know that, you`re just rabble rousing. And the activists were right. If they weren`t they wouldn`t have won in court.
0
Reply
Male 27
why didn`t they say a muslim prayer? or a jewish prayer? why jesus?
0
Reply
Male 10,338
"1st amendment to the constitution denies the government the right to endorse any religion."

I did not hear him say God or Jesus. What religion was he representing?
0
Reply
Male 10,338
Activists are sometimes good, and sometimes bad.

This time, they did it wrong.

It is a constitutional right to pray whenever we choose. If someone in the room did not agree, they have the right to abstain.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
[quote]If you want to change it, then V-O-T-E, become an activist or politician and CHANGE it.[/quote]
---------
They don`t need to vote dummy. 1st amendment to the constitution denies the government the right to endorse any religion. You live in this country. You should read the constitution some time.
0
Reply
Male 53
The only people trying to forcefully impose their views on others are the hippie protesters! Hypocrites!! If you are an atheist then prayers mean literally nothing to you because you don`t believe in it, so why is it an issue at all? Nobody is forcing you to do anything. It is all of these retards running around in their ignorance shouting about the constitution like it is a magical document to force their viewpoints on others far more than any religion does.
0
Reply
Male 145
Religion is responsible for many of the problems we have in Hawaii today. Of course, many people would have mixed feelings about that, because there is a very large number of Christians in the state.

Queen Ka`ahumanu was convinced by the missionaries that Christianity was the true religion. She immediately ordered that everything related to their old belief system be forgotten and destroyed. For that reason, there are many things that we will never know about ancient Hawai`ian culture.

It`s sad to see how the missionaries infect cultures around the world like a bad case of herpies.
0
Reply
Male 29
BTW, I`m an atheist and think this isn`t the place for prayer, but I`m certainly not going to be outraged when someone acts like a jackass and gets thumped.
0
Reply
Male 29
Musuko`s a tard.

Do YOU know the specific circumstances of what happened here? Nope, didn`t think so. If they want to pray, you shouldn`t give a crap, it`s your choice. If you want to change it, then V-O-T-E, become an activist or politician and CHANGE it. Shouting during something like this is only going to get a deserved boot up your butt.

0
Reply
Male 5,194
More religious a-holes. Like suicide bombers or natives throwing a girl in a volcano, they always use violence to enforce their fairytales and myths. Hypocrites pretending they`re the "good guys" when they`re beating someone up or killing them.
0
Reply
Male 5,167
I`m with the two "activists". I really think that religion must stay off from every public place( except any kind of church obviously) or places that have an istitutional function. In my country (Italy) we have the same issue, the conservative governement now want that in all pubblic school there must be a holy christian cross despite to personal faith. This is unfair and go against our constitution that grant freedom of faith. Seem that this new millenium have bring us to cloudy era of Middle Ages.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
[quote]Atheism clearly strips its adherents of their capacity of to be civil or function in society.[/quote]
---------
Religion strips logic out of everything. Play with your dumb club friends in church or at home. Leave rational people out of it.
0
Reply
Male 1,054
madest`s post is hate speech.
0
Reply
Male 1,054
So Holly is rude, they incited the reaction they caught in order to have something to complain about.

Atheism clearly strips its adherents of their capacity of to be civil or function in society.
0
Reply
Female 1,589
"And the prayer is unconstitutional... how, exactly?"
Separation of Church and State. Wow, I`m not even American and I know that.

I think these activists were being rude. If you object, then don`t pray! They are not forcing you to. If you have strong feelings for it to not be included, then write a letter, or call speak to someone in charge in person or on the phone.
0
Reply
Male 838
First... Freedom of speech dictates that I can pray whenever I want, in any forum I want, period. If I`m given mike time by those in charge, then I can pray there, too. On TV, radio, you name it. Second. The protesters have every right to protest it at the same time I`m praying. Unless it`s not a public venue, then they`ll be arrested. But if it is, hey, protest away. And lastly, this has absolutely nothing to do with religion, but freedom of speech. The protesters got that wrong, and apparently, a lot of you on this board are getting it wrong as well. Keep banning public speech that you don`t like, and see where you end up. Religious or otherwise.
0
Reply
Male 85
They got thrown out because they were disrespectfully yelling while someone else was speaking into the microphone. For religion reasons or not, speaking out of order in legislature will and should get you kicked out. Wait your turn to the microphone and speak your opinion when you get there. otherwise shut it.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
Does it even matter if it`s "constitutional" or not? It`s still wrong to have a government providing a floor for a religious service, which is exactly what this is.

How about we take this down to the nuts and bolts; taxpayer money was directly spent on providing that prayer: the cost of the heating, lighting, employment, etc...everything to do with maintaining that building and the staff within it during that prayer.

So either that taxpayer money must be spent fairly; meaning proportional time is given to worship for each and every religion and non-religion of the public present, or no time should be given at all.

I`m flabbergasted that a so-called modern, 21st century, developed nation such as the United States does this sort of thing.

It seems so...Iranian. Or 14th century.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
Activists found not guilty. Now the tax payers will be forced to fork over a huge settlement all because of these religious fanatics stupid fairy tale. A church on every corner is not enough apparently.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
Huh.

So that`s what a "Christian nation" looks like.
0
Reply
Male 330
And the prayer is unconstitutional... how, exactly?
0
Reply
Male 880
That`s assault brother.
0
Reply
Male 44
I approve the objection
0
Reply
Male 130
Words just don`t do it.
0
Reply
Male 182
Kill all Christians better yet anyone with a religion should be dragged out of the holes they crawl out of and killed burn down any and all religious buildings and public executions for religious leaders.
0
Reply
Male 1,929
No, it`s because they were dicks.
0
Reply
Male 4,680
Aaaand here come the internet anarchists.

ROW ROW FIGHT THE POWAH
0
Reply
Male 15,832
When the 1st Amendment was adopted, this sort of activity was accepted and commonplace. The interpretation that the 1st Amendment bans all forms of religious expression in any public venue is quite recent and not in agreement with the the original intent of the amendment. I`m just sayin`...
0
Reply
Male 39,929
It is not unconstitutional to have a prayer before a legislative session. It is unconstitutional to require participation.

That said, the protestor wanted a reason for a law suit, now he`s got several good reasons.
0
Reply
Male 795
Can`t we just start the revolution already?
0
Reply
Male 809
Link: Two Activists Assaulted At Hawaii State Capitol [Rate Link] - All because they objected to unconstitutional Christian pray used to begin each session of the Hawaii State Legislature.
0
Reply