Via Religion Clause, a group of 29 state Attorneys General from around the country filed an amicus brief with the 7th Circuit in support of the federal government's appeal over the National Day of Prayer. Earlier, a district court in Wisconsin ruled unconstitutional the congressional mandate for a day of prayer proclamation. In its brief, the state lawyers emphasize the prayer is voluntary:
Statutes and proclamations providing for a day of prayer…are entirely constitutional for one simple reason: Such laws do not require any citizen to engage in any religious activity of any kind. Nor do such laws require any governmental body to engage in any such activity. Such laws merely acknowledge the role that prayer has played in our Nation's religious heritage-and permit those citizens who wish to do so to pray.
Of course, we don't need laws to "permit" us to pray – that certainly seems an odd way of putting it. The Constitution guarantees that right. The question here is, what is government doing getting involved in the decision to pray or not, with urging, encouraging, nudging, or whatever subtle push? Whether constitutional or not, the government's involvement in people's daily prayer is a step too far: overreaching its true authority, and diminishing the act of free will which should be behind any religious decision.
I have to ask a side question, just out of curiosity: Is there a person in America who would want to admit to praying just because the federal government asked them to?
