Written by Don Byrd
The Minnesota Senate today sensibly defeated a measure that would have explicitly allowed sectarian prayer by guest clergy to open each legislative day. As the debate over legislative prayer continues to heat up, it’s important to remember that there is more than the free speech of the clergy member at stake.
“As a member of a minority religion, the question of prayer as expressed by an individual chaplain, that does so in a way that excludes others, those of the minority religions, is one that is inappropriate for the Senate floor,” said DFL Sen. Dick Cohen, of St. Paul. Cohen, who is Jewish. It is not, he said, “a question or liberty or freedom of speech.”
The Senate voted 36-25 not to adopt [Sen.Dan] Hall’s proposed change.
At the heart of controversies like this one is a deep rift between those on one side who see distinctly Christian prayers at the official opening of a government meeting to be improper religious endorsements, and those on the other who find any restriction on invocations to be an improper regulation of free speech. Kudos to the Minnesota legislators who voted together against the government’s use of such exclusive prayer.
I have to add, though: there are other sides to this debate that, sadly, don’t get enough attention. One is the important argument that using a government venue to promote prayer actually undermines the true freedom of faith. Sectarian government prayer does Christianity no favors. It’s not just offensive to those like Senator Cohen, who belong to a different faith. It’s equally offensive to those of us who believe Christ’s message should not be associated with, nor given a boost, by any government.
Given the government’s microphone to pray, should you use it?
