Video: County commissioner violates federal judge’s order, mentions Jesus at meeting

posted at 10:01 am on March 28, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

Can a public official mention Jesus at an official meeting? According to a federal judge in Maryland, the answer is no. According to Carroll County commissioner Robin Frazier, it’s yes — and she’s willing to go to jail to defend what she sees is her right to free speech and religious expression:

“Out of respect for my colleagues — I’m not sure how strongly they feel about it. I’m willing to go to jail over it,” Frazier said during the meeting, referring to Jesus Christ twice despite the ruling.

“(Let) the Lord Jesus Christ to admit me to render these deserved thanks and praises for thy manifold mercies extended toward me. Let thy blessings guide this day, and forever, through Jesus Christ and his blessed form of prayer, I conclude my weak petitions,” she said during the meeting.

After receiving complaints, some Carroll County residents and a group called American Humanist Association issued a warning to the board about “sectarian prayer” during meetings in 2012 and then followed up with a lawsuit in April 2013.

“After the judge has already agreed with us that that’s what’s going on, I think it’s particularly troubling that one of the council members saw fit to violate not only the Constitution but the judge’s very specifically ruling that they can’t be doing this,” said Monica Miller, an attorney for the American Humanist Association.

This fellow seemed to have the best take on the situation:

“My concern is, really, who cares? If they say Jesus, I mean, does it really offend anybody?” questioned resident Brian Resch.

The question is really this: do people have a right to be free from offense at board meetings? After all, Carroll County isn’t establishing a “county religion” by having one of its members pray openly. No one else’s rights to faith or lack thereof have been infringed; the local government isn’t taking roll at the local church to make sure everyone attends. The imposition of silence on religious expression by the judiciary, fueled by those who simply cannot abide the expression of faith, causes more egregious damage toward liberty than a prayer at a board meeting or school graduation does.

There is no doubt that Frazier’s act is deliberately provocative, and one can debate whether that’s an effective witness to faith or not in terms of charity and goodwill. However, isn’t the remedy at hand the next election, rather than a gag order from the federal government?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 7

such pronouncements do motivate people to push back to ensure that the boundaries are defined and not exceeded.

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 10:50 AM

What are the boundaries of free exercise, I wonder.

Ronnie on March 28, 2014 at 10:56 AM

So many idiots……. have never read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. These anti religious groups are nothing but liberal, bed-wetting, whiners, who intentionally lie about the Constitution to further their own goals. And pitifully, millions of low-information voters believe their drivel.

ultracon on March 28, 2014 at 10:57 AM

Just don’t whine when you get pushback from the rest of the society. Good Lt on March 28, 2014 at 10:54 AM

“The rest”? You mean the 2% who are atheists?

Akzed on March 28, 2014 at 10:57 AM

Just don’t whine when you get pushback from the rest of the society.

Good Lt on March 28, 2014 at 10:54 AM

Who’s whining, lightweight?

troyriser_gopftw on March 28, 2014 at 10:57 AM

Going beyond what she and others are permitted to do I think that this is a good illustration for why Christianity is so resented in our public lives by so many. People who are not Christians just don’t want to be preached to. Throughout my lifetime and well before the majority has subjected all of us to their religious inclinations.

It is no wonder that a strong backlash has developed to keep religion in its place. While in this instance no laws were violated, IMHO, such pronouncements do motivate people to push back to ensure that the boundaries are defined and not exceeded.

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 10:50 AM

Pal, you are pained by your guilt…sorry, that’s what it is.

You are bombarded by more Sears ads, more ads for beer, coupons and ads by your local paper, every week, pages of “propaganda” to buy products, tv every few minutes ads for you to buy, bill boards, but you only see the periodic mention of a church or Jesus.

Those “religious inclinations” pale by comparison to what you are really bombarded with each day. Notice each time you post, the ad on the right side of the page to Townhall?

Every time you post, you have to look at the HotAir logo, yet all you worry about is once a month, maybe, more like once a year, someone actually confronts you about religion.

It is telling about your life and your focus, and the guilt you carry for not living up to a standard you think is beyond your reach.

My friend, reach out and embrace it…your arrogance and exaggeration of the problem will not hold back what your heart desires…

right2bright on March 28, 2014 at 10:57 AM

If the SCOTUS had sh*tforbrains, they would clarify their earlier travesty on this subject made years ago.

ultracon on March 28, 2014 at 10:59 AM

Just don’t whine when you get pushback from the rest of the society. Good Lt on March 28, 2014 at 10:54 AM

Playing the “whine card” when someone pushes you back?

My, how weak the faux Lt is…the irony of your post just tickles me…

right2bright on March 28, 2014 at 11:00 AM

Go for it.

Just don’t whine when you get pushback from the rest of the society.

Good Lt on March 28, 2014 at 10:54 AM

Tell that to homosexuals and their constant whining.

sentinelrules on March 28, 2014 at 11:00 AM

I am talking civility and not “letter of the law”. We all say things from time to time that offend others and when that happens to me I look first; at intent of the speaker and second; the words chosen by the speaker. I see no ill intent or provocation to offend from the speaker and am fine with her mentioning Jesus Christ. I do this on a case by case basis and am only directly addressing her use of Jesus Christ in this specific incident.

HonestLib on March 28, 2014 at 10:54 AM

Gee, thanks. that’s just swell of you to be so magnanimous in allowing us our 1st Amendment Rights. As you entered Hot Air the same time I did, I have watched with interest, your posts. I have found you to be quite reasonable. For a self-described liberal. This time you missed the mark. The intent of the speaker when invoking the name of Jesus Christ is totally irrelevant to the issue.

bimmcorp on March 28, 2014 at 11:01 AM

but I get called a bigot and a Islamophobe for expressing this view.

bimmcorp on March 28, 2014 at 10:55 AM

Not by me. And my point is that Christians have assumed not just a presence, but ownership of the public square for a long, long time. Pushback is only to be expected.

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 11:01 AM

you have no idea how many people would have no objections to a devout Muslim referencing his God.

You’re right! I didn’t specify a number, and didn’t claim to “know” anything would happen. I merely said “I suspect.”

Judging by the response this one little comment has generated, sounds like I hit a nerve.

Good Lt on March 28, 2014 at 11:01 AM

Constitution of Maryland, 1776: “We, the people of the state of Maryland, grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberty…”

Akzed on March 28, 2014 at 11:01 AM

My apologies Ed … I didn’t read all the way to the bottom, before those first two comments.
.

There is no doubt that Frazier’s act is deliberately provocative, …

Ed Morrissey on March 28, 2014 at 10:01 PM

.
I can’t agree with you on that.
.

… and one can debate whether that’s an effective witness to faith or not in terms of charity and goodwill.

Ed Morrissey on March 28, 2014 at 10:01 PM

.
Can, and do agree with you on that.

listens2glenn on March 28, 2014 at 11:01 AM

All fifty states mention God in their constitutions, by the way.

Akzed on March 28, 2014 at 11:02 AM

Tell that to homosexuals and their constant whining.

sentinelrules on March 28, 2014 at 11:00 AM

?

Homosexuals are the only people in America that whine?

Good Lt on March 28, 2014 at 11:02 AM

I suspect the reaction here would be somewhat different if you replaced “Jesus” with “Allah.”

Good Lt on March 28, 2014 at 10:14 AM

It would be somewhat different, somewhat, not much, but somewhat…

Since we are a Christian nation, a nation built and defined by the Christian religion…duhhhhh!!

right2bright on March 28, 2014 at 11:03 AM

What are the boundaries of free exercise, I wonder.

Ronnie on March 28, 2014 at 10:56 AM

Let’s start with not putting up religions graffiti in courthouses, public schools and other places.

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 11:03 AM

Why people are so hell bent on bashing Christians/religion, silencing them, etc is beyond me. And ever notice how many of the things people complain about can be countered with “So, how does it impact you?”:

-Nativity scenes
-Saying Merry Christmas at stores
-Prayers before football games/meetings
-God written on money
-Cross on public land (ie grave markers)
-Pledge of Allegiance having God in it

Which of those things actually impact anyone and make a difference in how their day goes? It doesn’t, they just hate Christians and right now it’s socially acceptable to HATE religion (mostly Christianity).

nextgen_repub on March 28, 2014 at 11:03 AM

The new movie Noah doesn’t mention God, or the Lord.

WARNING: GRUESOME

It considers “the Creator” a universal god, however, including in Indonesia, where obama ate this.

Schadenfreude on March 28, 2014 at 11:04 AM

Homosexuals are the only people in America that whine?

Good Lt on March 28, 2014 at 11:02 AM

Aren’t they constantly whining about something and upset when society pushes back against them?

sentinelrules on March 28, 2014 at 11:04 AM

… and one can debate whether that’s an effective witness to faith or not in terms of charity and goodwill.

Ed Morrissey on March 28, 2014 at 10:01 PM

Like a black woman not moving from her bus seat…sometimes “in your face” is what is needed.

I would bet that someone, of great faith and humility, would even go so far as turning over tables in anger if it meant to make a point…

right2bright on March 28, 2014 at 11:05 AM

Thank you … thank you . . . . . we take our “persecution” with great pride … : )

listens2glenn on March 28, 2014 at 10:36 AM

Yes, especially since we were told to expect it. (John 15:18-19)

Flora Duh on March 28, 2014 at 11:05 AM

?

Homosexuals are the only people in America that whine?

Good Lt on March 28, 2014 at 11:02 AM

No, but they’re always in the championship game.

Fenris on March 28, 2014 at 11:06 AM

She’s entitled to speak about Jesus.

She’s not entitled to speak about Jesus or pray out loud in her role as county commissioner at an official meeting.

She can openly pray to Jesus during the other 160-odd hours of the week. If she finds that she can’t avoid praying or sharing her religious beliefs during meetings, she can resign her office.

aunursa on March 28, 2014 at 11:06 AM

such pronouncements do motivate people to push back to ensure that the boundaries are defined and not exceeded.

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 10:50 AM

And such boundaries do motivate people to push back to ensure that their rights under the First Amendment are not diminished.

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2014 at 11:06 AM

Thanks to Ed & Hot Air for the blog about this. I am obligated to provide support if/when this blog reports stories regarding religious freedom. It’s an important matter.

22044 on March 28, 2014 at 11:07 AM

You Christian’s are so persecuted!

beverlyfreaks on March 28, 2014 at 10:34 AM

Well, I have to agree, being told what you can and cannot say by the court is not quite as bad as not being able to go into any bakery and get a wedding cake from a private citizen!

Axeman on March 28, 2014 at 11:08 AM

Not by me. And my point is that Christians have assumed not just a presence, but ownership of the public square for a long, long time. Pushback is only to be expected.

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 11:01 AM

What an idiotic comment, MJ. Seriously. What sort of ‘ownership’ are we claiming? Care to elaborate? Christians have no issue with anyone and everyone expressing their views in the ‘public square’. Please point out to me where we have done otherwise. Y’all have been ‘pushing back’ since the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ, my friend. And I fully expect it to get worse. Much worse, in fact, as the Bible has prophesied that it will during these end times that we are living in..

bimmcorp on March 28, 2014 at 11:08 AM

The new movie Noah doesn’t mention God, or the Lord.

WARNING: GRUESOME

It considers “the Creator” a universal god, however, including in Indonesia, where obama ate this.

Schadenfreude on March 28, 2014 at 11:04 AM

It’s ok, do you really believe God is smiling at the shameless theft of one of His stories for profit by heathens?

I’m content to believe that we will both get to enjoy some of your nickname when the final judgement comes for those people.

nullrouted on March 28, 2014 at 11:08 AM

There is no doubt that Frazier’s act is deliberately provocative, and one can debate whether that’s an effective witness to faith or not in terms of charity and goodwill.

As a relatively conservative (in a non-political sense) Christian, my only concern is when a Muslim board member somewhere, someday, decides to do the same. How will we feel then? Will we be defending their religious liberties?

Tater Salad on March 28, 2014 at 11:09 AM

She’s not entitled to speak about Jesus or pray out loud in her role as county commissioner at an official meeting.

She can openly pray to Jesus during the other 160-odd hours of the week. If she finds that she can’t avoid praying or sharing her religious beliefs during meetings, she can resign her office.

aunursa on March 28, 2014 at 11:06 AM

That, of course, gets to the core of whether a person has a right to live their religion, or only worship at certain set hours on certain set days.

And if a person’s religion includes public witness to their faith, under what conditions may the Government curtail their free exercise?

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2014 at 11:10 AM

She’s entitled to speak about Jesus.

She’s not entitled to speak about Jesus or pray out loud in her role as county commissioner at an official meeting.

She can openly pray to Jesus during the other 160-odd hours of the week. If she finds that she can’t avoid praying or sharing her religious beliefs during meetings, she can resign her office.

aunursa on March 28, 2014 at 11:06 AM

Wrong.

nullrouted on March 28, 2014 at 11:10 AM

And such boundaries do motivate people to push back to ensure that their rights under the First Amendment are not diminished.

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2014 at 11:06 AM

Yeppers. That is why people are fighting. And in a fight, both sides tend to overstep their bounds. This judge is an example of that.

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 11:10 AM

I’m content to believe that we will both get to enjoy some of your nickname when the final judgement comes for those people.

nullrouted on March 28, 2014 at 11:08 AM

The muzzies will cut their heads off, first.

Schadenfreude on March 28, 2014 at 11:10 AM

Going beyond what she and others are permitted to do I think that this is a good illustration for why Christianity atheist philosophy is so resented in our public lives by so many. People who are not Christians atheists just don’t want to be preached to. Throughout my lifetime and well before the majority has atheists have subjected all of us to their anti-religious inclinations.

It is no wonder that a strong backlash has developed to keep religion atheism in its place.

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 10:50 AM

…just as an example of how you can apply this type of errant thinking to anything.

Ricard on March 28, 2014 at 11:12 AM

She’s entitled to speak about Jesus.

She’s not entitled to speak about Jesus or pray out loud in her role as county commissioner at an official meeting.

She can openly pray to Jesus during the other 160-odd hours of the week. If she finds that she can’t avoid praying or sharing her religious beliefs during meetings, she can resign her office.

aunursa on March 28, 2014 at 11:06 AM

I am having a hard time finding that clause in the Constitution. Care to point it out for us?? Thanks. I’ll wait..

bimmcorp on March 28, 2014 at 11:12 AM

There is no doubt that Frazier’s act is deliberately provocative, and one can debate whether that’s an effective witness to faith or not in terms of charity and goodwill.

As a relatively conservative (in a non-political sense) Christian, my only concern is when a Muslim board member somewhere, someday, decides to do the same. How will we feel then? Will we be defending their religious liberties?

Tater Salad on March 28, 2014 at 11:09 AM

When Muslims are persecuted the way Christians are today, sure.

nullrouted on March 28, 2014 at 11:12 AM

She ultimately answers to the voters, not the capricious and fascist whims of a judge.

NotCoach on March 28, 2014 at 10:18 AM

I agree. Here’s something that has bothered me for a long time: Most of us look at the Pelosis, Kerrys and Kennedys of the world as hypocritical Catholics who claim to be personally opposed to abortion, but in their political life having to follow their constituency’s desires on that issue. Bill O’Reilly talked about this a bit last night in his bit on the Pope. I look at someone like Rick Santorum as a politician who walks the walk as he brings his Catholic creds into a battle for a decision making political position. IIRC, this same concern surfaced during JFK’s presidential run. I’m not sure how it was ever resolved. How does one govern a constituency who may not have the same religious beliefs when those beliefs are part of your governing process and decision making?

butch on March 28, 2014 at 11:12 AM

What sort of ‘ownership’ are we claiming? Care to elaborate?

bimmcorp on March 28, 2014 at 11:08 AM

Sure. Start with removing the religious junk from our courthouse lobbies and other public buildings.

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 11:13 AM

As a relatively conservative (in a non-political sense) Christian, my only concern is when a Muslim board member somewhere, someday, decides to do the same. How will we feel then? Will we be defending their religious liberties?

Tater Salad on March 28, 2014 at 11:09 AM

I will have no problem defending their religious liberty, unless said person advocates violence upon my person or others whom I hold dear.

But Muslims already have accommodation. No employer can curtail the five prayers per day.

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2014 at 11:13 AM

Let’s start with not putting up religions graffiti in courthouses, public schools and other places. MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 11:03 AM

Like all fifty state constitutions?

Like the Washington Monument? “Laus Deo,” Latin for “Praise God,” is inscribed on the eastern face of the apex of the Washington Monument in Washington, D.C., so placed as to be the first thing illuminated at sunrise in our nation’s capitol.

“Holiness unto the Lord,” Exodus 28:36. “Suffer the little children to come unto me and forbid them not; for such is the Kingdom of God,” St. Luke 18:16. “Search the Scriptures,” St. John 5:39. -Inscribed on the starircase walls inside the Washington Monument, Washington, D.C.

“Proclaim Liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof,” Leviticus 25:10, inscribed on the Liberty Bell.

“In God we Trust” is the official motto of the United States. It is found on the wall in the well of the U.S. Congress behind the seat of the Speaker of the House. It is also found in your wallet.

“God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that his justice cannot sleep forever. Commerce between master and slave is despotism. Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than that these people are to be free. Establish a law for educating the common people. This it is the business of the state and on a general plan.” -The Jefferson Memorial, Washington, D.C.

“What doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, love mercy and walk humbly with thy God,” Micah 6:8. “The heavens declare the glory of God and the firmament showeth His handywork,” Psalm 19:1. “The light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehendeth it not,” St. John 1:5. “Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and withall thy getting, get understanding,” Proverbs 4:7. -On the walls of the Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.

“What doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, love mercy and walk humbly with thy God,” Micah 6:8. “The heavens declare the glory of God and the firmament showeth His handywork,” Psalm 19:1. “The light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehendeth it not,” St. John 1:5. “Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and withall thy getting, get understanding,” Proverbs 4:7. -On the walls of the Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.

“One God, one Law, one element, and faroff Divine event to which the whole creation moves.” -Alfred Lord Tennyson, in the rotunda of the Library of Congress.

“The husbandman that laboureth must be first partaker of the fruits,” 2 St. Timothy 2:6. -Inscribed on the front of the Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.

There’s more.

There sure is a lot of God graffiti on government property for a secular nation.

Akzed on March 28, 2014 at 11:13 AM

Will we be defending their religious liberties?

Tater Salad on March 28, 2014 at 11:09 AM

That Muslim idiot, Keith Ellison, was sworn in using the hateful Koran.

I didn’t see many conservatives advocating for him to be jailed.

sentinelrules on March 28, 2014 at 11:13 AM

As a relatively conservative (in a non-political sense) Christian, my only concern is when a Muslim board member somewhere, someday, decides to do the same. How will we feel then? Will we be defending their religious liberties?

Tater Salad on March 28, 2014 at 11:09 AM

I’d probably be mildly annoyed by that, but in the interest of consistency, I think a Muslim official may be permitted to pray to Allah as well.

22044 on March 28, 2014 at 11:13 AM

She’s not entitled to speak about Jesus or pray out loud in her role as county commissioner at an official meeting.

aunursa on March 28, 2014 at 11:06 AM

Wrong. Freedom of speech and exercise of religion does not magically stop at any particular door.

NotCoach on March 28, 2014 at 11:14 AM

That judge can take his unconstitutional order and stick it up his a$$.

earlgrey on March 28, 2014 at 11:15 AM

Sure. Start with removing the religious junk from our courthouse lobbies and other public buildings.

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 11:13 AM

What religious junk? My local courtroom has no religious junk at all. But of course, our laws are filled with religious junk such as not murdering, not stealing, not harming your neighbor…

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2014 at 11:15 AM

such pronouncements do motivate people to push back to ensure that the boundaries are defined and not exceeded.

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 10:50 AM

What ‘boundaries’ are you referring to? I see no boundaries at all in the 1st Amendment to the Constitution.

bimmcorp on March 28, 2014 at 11:15 AM

How does one govern a constituency who may not have the same religious beliefs when those beliefs are part of your governing process and decision making?

butch on March 28, 2014 at 11:12 AM

Gee, that is a puzzler. Hmm. Let’s think about that one. How does one govern a society of pluralistic beliefs? I wonder what our founders would have said.

Eureka! Sha-Zzzzz-am! Voila!

How about a law that outlaws the establishment of ANY religion?

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 11:15 AM

…But we are not supposed to concede to keeping our Christianity “to ourselves.”

listens2glenn on March 28, 2014 at 10:27 AM

.
Yep.

Fenris on March 28, 2014 at 10:55 AM

.
I should have included this in my original comment:

[Acts 4:1-22]
.
Verse 18-20, from that portion:

18 And they (Jewish rulers) called them, and commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus. 19 But Peter and John answered and said unto them, Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye. 20 For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.

listens2glenn on March 28, 2014 at 11:16 AM

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2014 at 11:15 AM

Judeo-Christians are constantly cluttering up public spaces with their 10 commandments.

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 11:16 AM

I’d probably be mildly annoyed by that, but in the interest of consistency, I think a Muslim official may be permitted to pray to Allah as well.

22044 on March 28, 2014 at 11:13 AM

In the interest of knowing what he actually thinks, I think a Muslim should have unrestricted free speech just like anyone else. The elected officials are only the symptom, the electorate are the cause.

Fenris on March 28, 2014 at 11:17 AM

What religious junk? My local courtroom has no religious junk at all. But of course, our laws are filled with religious junk such as not murdering, not stealing, not harming your neighbor…

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2014 at 11:15 AM

I wonder what MJBrutus would use as the basis for any law then? if not religious laws like the ones you’ve mentioned.

Libertarians like myself talk about ‘Natural Laws’ such as not initiating force against another, or fraud against another.

But even those sound awfully like another 10 laws I know…

nullrouted on March 28, 2014 at 11:18 AM

But of course, our laws are filled with religious junk such as not murdering, not stealing, not harming your neighbor…

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2014 at 11:15 AM

Things, of course, that liberals honor more in the breach than in the observance.

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2014 at 11:18 AM

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 11:15 AM

Yep.

butch on March 28, 2014 at 11:19 AM

Sure. Start with removing the religious junk from our courthouse lobbies and other public buildings.

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 11:13 AM

That ‘junk’ is not proof of ‘ownership’, pal. Quite the opposite. We donated it to y’all. Gave it away, as it were. You’re welcome, too. Bless your little heart.

bimmcorp on March 28, 2014 at 11:19 AM

Yet another exercise in the perversion of the first amendment right of free religious exercise to FDRs second freedom of worship. Statists can’t have competition.

nobar on March 28, 2014 at 11:19 AM

nullrouted on March 28, 2014 at 11:18 AM

Long discussion that I’ve already had several times.

Short answer: read John Locke.

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 11:19 AM

As a relatively conservative (in a non-political sense) Christian, my only concern is when a Muslim board member somewhere, someday, decides to do the same. How will we feel then? Will we be defending their religious liberties?

Tater Salad on March 28, 2014 at 11:09 AM

I’d probably be mildly annoyed by that, but in the interest of consistency, I think a Muslim official may be permitted to pray to Allah as well.

22044 on March 28, 2014 at 11:13 AM

My only issue is that I see this as more of a provocation by her to tweak the judge and political system than some overtly Christian sentiment. As a Christian, I am just concerned that we should spend more time getting people to church and less in making political statements.
That’s why I reference myself as a conservative Christian.

Tater Salad on March 28, 2014 at 11:20 AM

Of one’s Constitutional rights and protections, being protected from being offended isn’t there.

Not only does the 1st Amendment provide free speech protections, within some reasonable limitations regarding public safety (as it’s not an absolute), but it also provides protections for ‘no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;…

If this elected County official wants to use her speaking time to open with a prayer, she is, as far as I am concerned, within her rights to do so. If I am offended by her prayer, I am then within my rights to not vote for her re-election when she next runs.

Nor do see her personal prayer as a government endorsement of a particular religion. She is, apparently on speaking for herself and not demanding / asking that everyone in attendance accept and adopt her faith.

Athos on March 28, 2014 at 11:20 AM

Judeo-Christians are constantly cluttering up public spaces with their 10 commandments.

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 11:16 AM

Other than keeping the Sabbath Day Holy… do you suggest that we do away with the man-made laws that mirror the other 9?

Sure, Murder, Fraud, Theft… all legal! Can’t have those antiquated religious laws hanging around, now can we?

nullrouted on March 28, 2014 at 11:20 AM

Personally, what I am most offended about is the religion of
Obama.

Amjean on March 28, 2014 at 11:21 AM

How does one govern a constituency who may not have the same religious beliefs when those beliefs are part of your governing process and decision making?

butch on March 28, 2014 at 11:12 AM

In this country one is only allowed to govern at the constituency’s will. Unfortunately a majority of politicians are panderers, but if voters accept that they accept that. But there can be no prohibition of speech and exercise of religion in the public square. If a person wants to stand on a soap box and preach for a change in law that demands we all convert to space alien worship Scientology then so be it. We the people decide whether or not to accept it. Attempting to define what is allowed political speech destroys everything this country was founded on.

NotCoach on March 28, 2014 at 11:22 AM

Akzed on March 28, 2014 at 10:09 AM

There really isn’t anything new under the sun.

bluefox on March 28, 2014 at 11:22 AM

What part of, “Nor Limiting The Free Exercise Thereof” DON’T you Understand?

jaydee_007 on March 28, 2014 at 11:22 AM

How about a law that outlaws the establishment of ANY religion?

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 11:15 AM

No one here is attempting to establish a national religion, Sparky. We simply want to be able to express our beliefs whenever, wherever, and however we wish to. Just like the 1st Amendment to the Constitution guarantees us. Yet you have an issue with this? You are obtuse and ignorant, MJ.

bimmcorp on March 28, 2014 at 11:23 AM

How about a law that outlaws the establishment of ANY religion?

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 11:15 AM

How about understanding the Constitution for a change?

The states that created the union, told their representatives in no uncertain terms that the federal government was not to have any jurisdiction in religion. It was one of a number of fears that states had about a federal government, just read the Federalist papers, or about the inclusion of the 9th and 10th amendments, or the history of ratification, to familiarize yourself with the deep reservations that people had about a “Supreme Law of the Land”.

So they passed a law saying that “Congress can make no law”.

Boom, it’s that simple, and it’s right in the plain text of the amendment.

So powers were reserved to the states by the ninth and tenth amendments, and among them the jurisdiction on religion was specifically denied them by the first.

Axeman on March 28, 2014 at 11:23 AM

Who’s whining, lightweight?

troyriser_gopftw on March 28, 2014 at 10:57 AM

The usual suspects here, pretending that they’re being persecuted because they’re not allowed to turn public meetings and forums into prayer sessions without others responding.

Good Lt on March 28, 2014 at 11:24 AM

Wow. I feel special: my county made Hot Air. Neil Ridgely has been a pain in the ass for years. This is not about religion but about one man’s quest to foul up the commissioners every chance he gets.

I’ll admit I’m not the biggest fan of Frazier, though, but I think she’s a decent person. This whole issue is ridiculous.

Anna on March 28, 2014 at 11:24 AM

So brave. You Christian’s are so persecuted! It must be so hard being such a minority in this country.

beverlyfreaks on March 28, 2014 at 10:34 AM

Is your snarky disdain reserved just for American Christians, or does it extend to other countries too?

Christian’s Throats Slit In Pagan Slaughterhouse – Video Footage Reveals Systematic Execution of Victims

Flora Duh on March 28, 2014 at 11:25 AM

What part of, “Nor Limiting The Free Exercise Thereof” DON’T you Understand?

jaydee_007 on March 28, 2014 at 11:22 AM

That part is the hardest for these atheistic knuckleheads to wrap their feeble little minds around.

bimmcorp on March 28, 2014 at 11:25 AM

nullrouted on March 28, 2014 at 11:20 AM

Do we have laws in this country requiring us to hone our parents?
Do we have laws in this country requiring us to honor YOUR deity?
Do we have laws in this country requiring us to not commit adultery?
Do we have laws in this country requiring us to not take whathisname’s name in vain?
Do we have laws in this country requiring us to not covet our neighbor’s stuff?
Do we have laws in this country requiring us to not make graven images of anything we want?

Hmm, if I counted right, that makes 7 out of 10 that have no place in our legal code.

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 11:25 AM

How does one govern a constituency who may not have the same religious beliefs when those beliefs are part of your governing process and decision making?

butch on March 28, 2014 at 11:12 AM

Don’t lie about your positions, be consistent with your judgement and votes, and let the voters determine if you are the correct representative for them.

It’s not like there is only one person who can fill that representative/senator/governor/random official slot. Be honest and true and vote/govern according to what you campaigned on and your beliefs, and they can kick you out afterwards if they disagree with what you are doing.

cptacek on March 28, 2014 at 11:26 AM

The usual suspects here, pretending that they’re being persecuted because they’re not allowed to turn public meetings and forums into prayer sessions without others responding.

Good Lt on March 28, 2014 at 11:24 AM

The response is jail time, so that’s whining or something.

sentinelrules on March 28, 2014 at 11:26 AM

bimmcorp on March 28, 2014 at 11:23 AM

Yep. She has the right to be offensive and we do not have the right to not be offended. I think the judge’s order is over the top.

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 10:16 AM

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 11:26 AM

Dear Commissioner Frazier: “Hell hath no fury like a woman federal judge scorned.”

I once watched as a US District Court Judge found an eight month pregnant lady in contempt for ignoring several grand jury summons. In open court, he sentenced her to 30 days in jail.

Prepare thyself.

BigAlSouth on March 28, 2014 at 11:27 AM

The usual suspects here, pretending that they’re being persecuted because they’re not allowed to turn public meetings and forums into prayer sessions without others responding.

Good Lt on March 28, 2014 at 11:24 AM

So sayeth the cowardly atheist.

Oh so courageous one (whose soul many of us still pray for), will you answer the following, or continue to pretend the question wasn’t asked?

We pray for your salvation, but let’s try and stay on point. This isn’t about your hatred of God, but about freedom of speech and religion. Do you agree with the judges fascist order?

NotCoach on March 28, 2014 at 10:32 AM

NotCoach on March 28, 2014 at 11:28 AM

So brave. You Christian’s are so persecuted! It must be so hard being such a minority in this country.

beverlyfreaks on March 28, 2014 at 10:34 AM

(Sniff. Sniff.)

Smells like Open Reg Teen Spirit in here. Welcome to Hot Gas.

Oh, and F-

Del Dolemonte on March 28, 2014 at 11:28 AM

The usual suspects here, pretending that they’re being persecuted because they’re not allowed to turn public meetings and forums into prayer sessions without others responding.

Good Lt on March 28, 2014 at 11:24 AM

Jeepers…I must have missed that part where she wanted everyone to pray and respond. By the way, is it not persecution when a citizen is stripped of their 1st Amendment Right because they are of a particular faith? What would YOU call it, Hasbro??

bimmcorp on March 28, 2014 at 11:29 AM

The response is jail time, so that’s whining or something.

sentinelrules on March 28, 2014 at 11:26 AM

But it’s just jail time, not anybody not baking you a cake or anything.

Axeman on March 28, 2014 at 11:29 AM

So they passed a law saying that “Congress can make no law”.
Axeman on March 28, 2014 at 11:23 AM

That’s where they messed up. They should have said “Congress can make no law and judges can make no ruling…”

cptacek on March 28, 2014 at 11:30 AM

How about a law that outlaws the establishment of ANY religion?

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 11:15 AM

And how about a law that allows the free exercise of same — even for Government officials?

When I elect a politician and he or she states they are of a certain faith, then I expect them to follow, in their deliberations, the tenets of that faith.

Pop Quiz!!! Is the following sentiment, uttered by a President of the United States on an official occasion, a violation of the Constitution?

…from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion — that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Is this, stated by a spokesman for our current President?

When a person dies the devoutly religious often say God has called him back to heaven. So, if a doctor sends a fetus back to heaven who’s to say he isn’t doing God’s work? Look at all the suffering that is averted. An unwanted child is spared a lifetime of pain. A hard-pressed would-be mother is spared the encumbrance of two decades of imprisonment as an unwilling caregiver. Aren’t these objectives worthy of God’s appreciation? I think those taking the President to task on this are skating on thin ice.

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2014 at 11:30 AM

However, isn’t the remedy at hand the next election, rather than a gag order from the federal government?

Absolutely NOT!

You see, there are too many people out there who Will Not vote the right way. At least with a Judge we know it will be set right.

/sarc

jaydee_007 on March 28, 2014 at 11:30 AM

Christianity is primarily attacked by leftists because they see it as a threat to their goals.

NotCoach on March 28, 2014 at 10:54 AM

It’s simpler than that, I think.

Leftists hate Christianity because darkness hates the light.

Midas on March 28, 2014 at 11:30 AM

GOOD! There needs to be more defiance of the Feds like this.

WannabeAnglican on March 28, 2014 at 11:31 AM

There is no doubt that Frazier’s act is deliberately provocative, and one can debate whether that’s an effective witness to faith or not in terms of charity and goodwill. However, isn’t the remedy at hand the next election, rather than a gag order from the federal government?

And it’s good to see Morrissey’s faith is a deep as his political convictions, just skin. It’s all about some mythical “win”, not about Christ. Just as his politics is about elections and pragmatism and optics, etc., etc. Again the mythical “win”, instead of advancing an agenda that could possibly save this country from it’s government.

lowandslow on March 28, 2014 at 11:31 AM

This is an election year. I don’t think she’s running again anyway. Not totally sure, though, because I live in Westminster and she represents a different part of the county.

Anna on March 28, 2014 at 11:34 AM

Judeo-Christians are constantly cluttering up public spaces with their 10 commandments.

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 11:16 AM

Ah, you mean the document which forms the basis for all modern law? The one which says that it is a sin to curtail worship of the Lord, just as our Constitution says?

That one?

By all means, purge its physical presence from the grounds of the court. I have no problem with that. I have no problem with it being there either, because it IS there, even if honored more in the breach by liberals than in its observance.

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2014 at 11:34 AM

questionmark on March 28, 2014 at 11:34 AM

The usual suspects here, pretending that they’re being persecuted because they’re not allowed to turn public meetings and forums into prayer sessions without others responding.

Good Lt on March 28, 2014 at 11:24 AM

I’m sorry, but you are already well past your daily allowance of entries in the ‘Strawman of the Day’ contest. Please refrain from posting any further glaring strawman arguments again until tomorrow. Thanks!

Midas on March 28, 2014 at 11:34 AM

questionmark on March 28, 2014 at 11:34 AM

I agree. It is indeed much to do over nothing.

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2014 at 11:34 AM

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 11:26 AM

Thank you. I missed that post. Things are happening fast here today. This is just like a ‘Palin’ thread.

bimmcorp on March 28, 2014 at 11:35 AM

Is this, stated by a spokesman for our current President?

When a person dies the devoutly religious often say God has called him back to heaven. So, if a doctor sends a fetus back to heaven who’s to say he isn’t doing God’s work? Look at all the suffering that is averted. An unwanted child is spared a lifetime of pain. A hard-pressed would-be mother is spared the encumbrance of two decades of imprisonment as an unwilling caregiver. Aren’t these objectives worthy of God’s appreciation? I think those taking the President to task on this are skating on thin ice.

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2014 at 11:30 AM

Not a Constitutional violation, but pretty damn chilling.

Midas on March 28, 2014 at 11:35 AM

So brave. You Christian’s are so persecuted! It must be so hard being such a minority in this country.

beverlyfreaks on March 28, 2014 at 10:34 AM

That’s right, moron. The most persecuted religion in the world today. Ever thought about what it’s like to be a Christan and a conservative on a college campus? In America, the persecution is still social and stigmatizing, not yet violent. But that will come too. And here’s the real “bravery” — a secular Left that assails and slanders pacifist Christians but that remains cowed and silent before savage, misogynist, anti-Gay, theocratic, anti-secular and militantly anti-humanist Islam.

rrpjr on March 28, 2014 at 11:37 AM

Let’s start with not putting up religions graffiti in courthouses, public schools and other places.

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 11:03 AM

OK, you think you have enough support to amend the Constitution?

Ronnie on March 28, 2014 at 11:37 AM

And it’s good to see Morrissey’s faith is a deep as his political convictions, just skin. It’s all about some mythical “win”, not about Christ. Just as his politics is about elections and pragmatism and optics, etc., etc. Again the mythical “win”, instead of advancing an agenda that could possibly save this country from it’s government.

lowandslow on March 28, 2014 at 11:31 AM

He’s pointing out that if those who are opposed to her prayer want it stopped, they have the ballot box in the next election as their tool. Ditto for those who would support her free exercise of her religious faith.

The way you advance an agenda is first to vote for those who have the most ability to advance same.

The ballot is our secular nation’s most sacred object.

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2014 at 11:38 AM

I suspect the reaction here would be somewhat different if you replaced “Jesus” with “Allah.”

Good Lt on March 28, 2014 at 10:14 AM

Not only that, but the Judge would never issued his “ruling” if that were the word used. We can only offend and shut up Christian free speech.

bluefox on March 28, 2014 at 11:38 AM

Wiki

The American Humanist Association (AHA) is an educational organization in the United States that advances Humanism, a progressive philosophy of life that, without theism or other supernatural beliefs, affirms the ability and responsibility of human beings to lead personal lives of ethical fulfillment that aspire to the greater good of humanity.[1] The mission of the American Humanist Association is to be a clear, democratic voice for Humanism in the United States, to increase public awareness and acceptance of Humanism, to establish, protect and promote the position of humanists in American society, and to develop and advance humanist thought and action.[2]

Nope, no agenda at all.

Bmore on March 28, 2014 at 11:38 AM

How about a law that outlaws the establishment of ANY religion?

MJBrutus on March 28, 2014 at 11:15 AM

One more thing: I don’t think you know the meaning of the word “outlaw”.

Congress is an authority with discretionary power. The guidelines are NOT to use its discretionary power to certain purposes. If Congress outlawed brooms, no one would be able to use their discretion to choose to use a broom, whether or not they had the power to make the big decision. There is a difference between provisional prohibition and making something outside the law.

I’m not saying it’s a willful distortion of the 1st amendment, but it is troubling enough as a phrase. “Outlaw” is the way it is being treated now, but it’s hard to argue, with any historic understanding, that this was the founders “solution”.

Axeman on March 28, 2014 at 11:39 AM

The usual suspects here, pretending that they’re being persecuted because they’re not allowed to turn public meetings and forums into prayer sessions without others responding.

Good Lt on March 28, 2014 at 11:24 AM

I haven’t read any post advocating prayer-filled filibusters or anything of that sort. As I understand it, a federal judge has ordered it a criminal offense for council members to mention the name of Jesus during City Council proceedings.

In my view, the judge’s position is the extremist position here and in clear violation of the 1st Amendment. Constitutionality aside, I argue that Christians, when presented with such an authoritarian and unjust ruling, should engage in civil disobedience of the sort practiced by Ms. Frazier in this instance, as well as Henry David Thoreau, Martin Luther King, and thousands (millions) of others: break the law and peacefully submit to the legal consequences for doing so. As I understand it, that’s how it’s done as a matter of conscience and faith.

troyriser_gopftw on March 28, 2014 at 11:39 AM

These atheist groups have grown into monsters because cable TV keeps giving them credibility. I bet they are making money from contributions and grants now too.

They’re just cranks. How does mentioning Jesus or Yaweh or Allah establish one state religion?

PattyJ on March 28, 2014 at 11:39 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 7