The US Supreme Court. Now as loony as the rest of them.

[Hermit]

Even so, it's a religious ritual. Wtf is wrong with their minds?

The judges did not deny that prayer is a religious ritual. They just did not think it does not constitute the government's establishing an official religion. In the absence of a clause in the constitution that prohibits prayer in conjunction with gubernatorial functions they were correct. The result of this legalistic determination may be reprehensible to many (it is to me), but the sole proper role of judges is to make determinations in relation to existing laws. If they did anything else, they'd be acting in an extrajudicial manner by definition. Nothing is wrong with their minds, at least as far as this case is concerned. Something may be wrong with the laws as they stand, though, but that's quite a different issue.

If the prayers are overwhelmingly christian (which I bet they would be), then at least the prayers could be seen as favouring a particular religion, which surely goes against the intent of the constitution...

Yes, and I fear that a similar result will obtain if the issue of carved in stone citations of common versions of the biblical ten commandments reappear next to the doorsteps of US courts. The judges are obviously more concerned with the narrow, literary wording of constitutional clauses rather than intent, the interpretation of which could then be stretched beyond the legalistic and into the sociological and ideological realms. Although I resent the outcome of the case, I am ok with the approach the judges adopted on the issue, and I remain of the opinion that they did no wrong and that it is the law that needs to be changed.

Also, please keep in mind that while the separation between church and state in the US is not as strict and comprehensive than we might desire, our constitution here in Australia is miles behind in that regard. The decision to mint coinage with the motto "In God we trust" might be abominable, but it pales into insignificance with our National School Chaplaincy Programme, a scheme that was expanded to the tune of $220 million by our erstwhile atheist Prime Minister, FFS. It's noteworthy that the constitutional challenge was not based on secular-religious grounds but entirely on the conflict between federal and state powers. The one and only mention of religion (in section 116) was entirely useless for the purpose.

[JimC]

Agree that the chaplaincy program is an abomination. I have a feeling it is going to slowly fade; many schools in Melbourne are quietly choosing to let it go...

[Svartalf]

What's that? school chaplains, whatever they do, are state paid? I suspect that they are so here too, though I wouldn't know where to look to check.

[mistermack]

Of course they wrote their ''reasons''. But their reasons only make sense to people who have an imaginary friend.
I don't personally give a fuck if Jews have to listen to Christian prayers, or Muslims wailing. They all have an imaginary friend, so fuck em.
But the constitution was written to try to eliminate the situation where the dominant religion can force their crap down the throats of others, who don't want it because they have their own particular crap.

This decision goes DIRECTLY against that intention, and their reasoning is that one religion IS dominant, so it's ok.
Prayer might be part of the current fabric of US society, but that ought to be on a voluntary basis. If you have an imaginary friend, talk to him in private, or in company with other loonies, not at public meetings.
The judges are liars in their reasoning, they know exactly what they are doing.

In any case, it's those who DON'T have an imaginary friend, of any description, who are most affected by this. Now they have to keep quiet, and not laugh, when the loonies start talking to something that isn't there. Or they can leave the room, which some voters might take as an insult, rather than exercising ones rights.

People should have the right to religious privacy.

I am looking forward though, to when this reaches it's natural conclusion, and some ghetto starts holding Islamic prayers before town council meetings. Should be fun.

[FBM]

Even so, it's a religious ritual. Wtf is wrong with their minds?

being right wing conservatives?

I think that's a symptom, not the original problem.

[Hermit]

What's that? school chaplains, whatever they do, are state paid?

In Australia the federal government pays $220 million dollars over a period of three years to fundie chaplains with no qualifications in education to proselytise and evangelise to children in government schools. For a quick rundown check this post out.

[JimC]

What's that? school chaplains, whatever they do, are state paid?

In Australia the federal government pays $220 million dollars over a period of three years to fundie chaplains with no qualifications in education to proselytise and evangelise to children in government schools. For a quick rundown check this post out.

In Victoria, at least, there is a humanist group (whose name I've forgotten) that is making a bid to take over some of the spots...

[klr]

HuffPo's take on it is interesting: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/0 ... 66930.html

...
Kagan was joined by Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor. Of the four, three are Jewish and Sotomayor is Catholic.

...
The case is Greece v. Galloway, 12-696.

Actually, there are 6 Catholics* in the current Supreme Court, so it means that all 5 who voted in favour of prayers were Catholic as well.

*Yup. 6 Catholics + 3 Jews = No protestants. This is the first time that's ever happened.

[mistermack]

What's that? school chaplains, whatever they do, are state paid?

In Australia the federal government pays $220 million dollars over a period of three years to fundie chaplains with no qualifications in education to proselytise and evangelise to children in government schools. For a quick rundown check this post out.

That is pretty scandalous. That money could have done a lot for education in aboriginal areas.
Or is education so good there, that it's not an issue?

[JimC]

What's that? school chaplains, whatever they do, are state paid?

In Australia the federal government pays $220 million dollars over a period of three years to fundie chaplains with no qualifications in education to proselytise and evangelise to children in government schools. For a quick rundown check this post out.

That is pretty scandalous. That money could have done a lot for education in aboriginal areas.
Or is education so good there, that it's not an issue?

Too many religious arseholes in our government.

As well as all the non-religious arseholes...

[Hermit]

Too many religious arseholes in our government.

As well as all the non-religious arseholes...

Nicely covering both the devoutly Christian Prime Minister who initiated the program and the self-professed atheist one who increased funding for it almost tenfold.