|
After a while, one becomes jaded. We see the same old crowd, bound and determined to force their religion on the rest of us. What I continue to find extraordinary is that some people, including some who do not even subscribe to this religion, nonetheless try to excuse the pushiness by making broad sweeping free speech claims. There is, of course, an interest convergence here, between two or more strands of conservative or reactionary thought, each strand thinking that it can emerge strengthened and unscathed from the convergence. I am reminded of people who ride on the backs of tigers. It’s tough to get off. But I am happy to see that the ICLU is taking this matter on.
-----Original Message-----
The Indiana Civil Liberties Union has sued state lawmakers for exceeding the limits of Marsh by frequently offering prayers that are explicitly Christian. The prayers sometimes are offered by individual lawmakers and sometimes by volunteer clergy. The Speaker of the Indiana House has offered a free speech defense, claiming that prayers may be offered by persons of various faiths and that there are no content restrictions. I think this defense is a loser, but I'm wondering if others might disagree, at least to the extent that the prayers are offered by individual lawmakers--apparently on a rotating and volunteer basis. Dan Conkle
|
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
