The Virginian-Pilot
©
The city has revised its policy for invocations, four months after an association of atheists complained that opening prayers delivered at City Council meetings this year violated the separation of church and state.
The new policy states that the invocation should be nonsectarian and reminds religious leaders to refrain from making references that are specific to any particular religion or promote particular religious figures.
The June complaint by the Freedom From Religion Foundation, which bills itself as North America's largest association of atheists, stemmed from several council invocations that referenced Jesus Christ earlier this year.
The debate picked up steam in August when The Family Foundation of Virginia defended the prayers and the ACLU of Virginia called them unconstitutional.
City Attorney Ron Hallman confirmed on Thursday that the city had revised the policy to make it more like a Chesterfield County policy that was upheld in court.
"In an abundance of caution, we wanted to draw it very similar to Chesterfield's policy," he said. "We really felt OK with the old policy. This just made it a little clearer."
Since the controversy, Chesapeake has also upped its effort to invite a more diverse group of religious leaders. A Hindu priest gave the invocation in September, and a rabbi delivered the prayer two weeks later.
Hallman said the city did not specifically revise the policy because of the Freedom From Religion Foundation's complaints.
"We received letters from groups on both sides of the issue," Hallman said. "It wasn't one single group that caused us to revise it."
The Family Foundation of Virginia was disappointed to hear that the city made changes to its policy.
"It's unfortunate any time a local government gives in to these kind of bullying tactics," said Chris Freund, a spokesman for the Richmond-based advocacy group.
The Freedom From Religion Foundation, based in Madison, Wis., was hesitant to claim victory Thursday.
Annie Laurie Gaylor, the foundation co-president, said other localities have moved far more quickly to make policy changes than Chesapeake.
She is also unhappy with the wording of the new policy and would prefer that Chesapeake and other cities just drop the prayers altogether.
It's "egotistical," Gaylor said, for Chesapeake officials to think that any divine power cares about "their boring council meetings."
"It's a gesture toward diversity among religionists," Gaylor said of Chesapeake's policy revision. "From the point of view of atheists and agnostics, we're left out in the cold. We're still being prayed at."
Mike Saewitz, (757) 222-5207, mike.saewitz@pilotonline.com
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
OFFENDED
It does not amaze me at all that our city leaders are spineless and weak. And I'm sure it will not be long before it will be against the law to own and bible in you own home(YES, I SAID BIBLE)because one of these non-God beleivers might come to you house and repair something and then get offended when they see the Bible on your table. Yes, I'm a christian and it really brother me when the rights of other faiths are held about that of christians. They speak about being equal but I guess that only applies if you don't beleive in Jesus Christ. If other faiths received an invitation to pray thay can pray to whoever they want. The real question is will the city now never invite a christian back to pray, out of fear he might mention God, and someone might get offended.
I'M OFFENDED OVER THIS !!!!!!!
Offended
I am amazed at some people's thoughts on this simple matter. No one is taking away your religion. The minute religion becomes public, it is political. Invocations, apparently necessary for decisions on liquor licenses and sewer lines, must not offend people. How would a Jewish business owner feel if he had to sit through a bunch of Jesus praising prior to asking the city council for something. No religion or pray at government meetings. Keep it private, to yourself, in your house, preferably in your closet. Matthew 6:5-6
Well said Pablo
Hooray! We finally agree on something! :)
Here we go!
Okay, if you read the wording of the first amendment, then you know the government is not going against religion or prayer. You can pray, just not in a government building! Seperation of church and state is just that, seperate. There are churches in which to pray, pray at home, pray at non-government functions and that's your right to do so. Just because the government officials are doing just that, seperation of church and state, doesn't mean they are not religious and they are going to be condemned. I stood by and listened to prayers before Council meetings and School board meetings and knew they were not adhering to seperation of church and state and one day someone will step in and the religion outcasting would begin. Soooo predictable!!! Jesus loves all! God loves all!! Heck, I love all!!! Live your life to the fullest and love all!! Don't get caught up with this non-sense stuff that is so minor that you are going to be consumed with it.
What great press for our Christian leaders! Thanks Pilot!
I am pleased that the Chesapeake City Council (major majority) has been recognized as being guided by the will of Christ. I can assure you that our Christian leaders will still pray (in the name of Jesus) before every council meaning, whether silently or behind closed doors. I personally know 7 members of council and attest that 5 of the 7 (and have heard that the remaing 2 whom I do not know personally) stand firmly on their faith in Jesus Christ. Fear not, for Christ will continue to guide the council's decisions. Apostle Paul was imprisoned on more than one occasion for his beliefs and teachings, yet he was still able to lead and teach Christian principles even under confinement. The athiests might be able to change the manner in which the invocation is delivered, but we and "He" know to whom the prayers are offered! Unless you are truly walking with our Lord Jesus, you will never understand!
"walking with our Lord Jesus"
Judas also walked with Jesus.
Getting it straight
The FFRF was notified on behalf of tax paying, city council attending residents of Chesapeake in August. The FFRF can get involved and sue on behalf of any resident in any city. Based on the comments to this article, the residents are probably fearful of being burned at the stake. These meetings begin with a Jesus prayer and end with a Jesus prayer. Does anyone really think the council would respond to a complaint without the help of FFRF? Religion and prayers do not belong in any government meeting. Do not shove Jesus down my throat. Amen to keeping the city council meetings non-secular. Lord save us from your followers.....
Tolerance - don't leave home without it.
In this country, you are in free will zone. This means you can believe anything you want regardless. You can believe in Santa, the Eastern Bunny or the lint in your belly button. There should be separation of church and state. Unfortunately, this is Chesapeake and you better be a Christian and you better believe in the dictates of the Christian religion. You also better be a Republican, you better be pro-family, pro-life, etc. etc.,ad nauseum. We are fast approaching becoming a country that is intolerant of anyone that does think, act, believe or march to the popular beat. Get over it. Become unified & tolerant or down the drain the country doth go.
Just get on with the business of running a city and go home. There really is no other way.
Nonsectarian prayer more offensive than none at all
If we're going to make the enormous leap that saying a prayer to a specific diety at a city council meeting is equivalent to Congress making a law with respect to the establishment of religion (and yet somehow doesn't impact the free excercise of religion), then requiring an agnostic prayer is just as unconstitutional. It implies that the government's position is that all religions are the same and worship the same higher power, which is contrary to the beliefs of nearly every organized religion. As a person who belives in a specific and non-generic triune God, I find THAT offensive.
scotus ruling
A 1983 ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States, in Marsh v Chambers, said that "To invoke Divine guidance on a public body entrusted with making the laws is not, in these circumstances, an 'establishment' of religion or a step toward establishment; it is simply a tolerable acknowledgment of beliefs widely held among the people of this country."