Maryland’s War Against Prayer

An engineer friend of mine had a saying that “one point in time does not a trend make.” When it comes to one issue in the state of Maryland, however, I believe we have enough events, all within the span of a few weeks, to declare a trend; the act of prayer is officially under siege in Maryland.

I’ve previously recounted the hissy fit Senate President Mike Miller had on the state Senate floor when a Christian pastor uttered the name “Jesus” during the invocation, as well as the rejected attempt by the University of Maryland’s legislative body, the school senate, to permanently remove the invocation from their commencement ceremonies.

We now have a report out of Prince George’s County that the grossly misnamed American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which only seems to defend the most offensive speech while trying to suppress the rest, sent a letter to the school board “requesting” they refrain from praying at the beginning of their board meetings. The prayer is non-denominational, which as I’ve expressed in the past makes it essentially useless because you’re praying to a nameless God; you may as well be praying to thin air.

The lesson I want you to take away from these events, however, is how determined the liberals and their agents are to drive prayer and all other expressions of faith back behind the doors of the churches, mosques and synagogues.

Even there, our practices of faith may not be safe if pastors can be arrested for speaking out against homosexuality as a sin and accused of inciting hate. It has happened in Canada and Sweden, two supposedly democratic nations, so those who scoff at the notion are either naive or deliberately lulling Americans into a false sense of security.

As evidence, the U.S. Congress last week voted down amendments to expanded  hate crimes legislation that added protections for religious expression, claiming such expression was already protected under current law. Well, victims of violence regardless of how they identify themselves are also protected under current law, so why create a special class of protection for select identity groups? Liberal logic is an oxymoron.

If our representatives in Congress honor the oath they took to uphold the U.S. Constitution, including the First Amendment’s guarantees of free exercise of religion, what’s the problem with reinforcing our commitment to freedom of religion in this legislation?

Don’t take us for fools; you don’t believe in the free exercise of religion, and neither do the special interest puppet masters who pull your strings by financing your campaigns and ensuring you get to keep the power, perks and privileges of the office you hold.

It is the community of faith that sears your collective consciences and troubles your sponsors who want to reengineer society so man replaces God and feelings are glorified over reason. That makes us a threat.

Their answer to the obstacle the faithful place before them is to abuse the establishment clause of the First Amendment, and what is happening in the no-longer Free State is played out all across this nation. The ACLU and others  of their ilk know that public prayer isn’t the establishment of a state religion, nor is the the display of a Nativity scene during Christmas or the Ten Commandments, one of the cornerstones of the law, in a courtroom. None of these things are forcing anyone to adopt Christianity as a national religion. Frankly, Christianity itself is so segmented by denominations that no one church could ever declare prominence over the others and have itself established as a state religion. That argument is a smokescreen and a lie.

Are people’s egos so inflated yet tenuous at the same time, like a balloon filled to the bursting point, that a public expression of faith, even the pabulum of ecumenical faith, will cause them to explode? A Jewish friend of mine who, as a conservative, often finds himself at events where prayers to Christ are routinely given, says if a prayer invoking another faith’s deity greatly offends him, maybe he’s not secure in his own.

The irreligionists certainly aren’t secure in their plan to replace God with man, so they hunt and scan for public religious expression in order to attack it and drive it underground. How else do you explain the ACLU getting involved over a brief prayer to no God in particular in a county school board meeting that’s typically held only twice a month? Don’t the self-proclaimed defenders of the 1st Amendment have bigger fish to fry?

Apparently not, it seems. Even though I live in Maryland and could be offending someone’s fragile sense of self, I’ll pray for them.