I am in great danger of decking the very next person who asks me what I think of 'not being able to pray' anymore!
I think by pointing the bone at the Christian prayers the humanists have done the Christian cause an extremely good turn thanks to Mr Justice Ouseley's ruling that praying wasn't an infringement of another person's human rights but was misplaced within the terms of the Local Government Act (sect.111).
Leaving aside the people who are screaming about 'no longer being able to pray in this country' (and I've had more than enough emails calling me to act on those grounds) what we have is the situation whereby prayers can be said before a council meeting (and in fact, extrapolating this, any formal meeting) as long as it isn't made mandatory (i.e. which in the council setting was as it was the first item on the agenda.)
I have to laugh at the bleating humanists claiming they felt 'left out' or 'excluded' whilst people were saying prayers and felt 'marginalised and different' because some 'felt sorry for them' because they had no faith and how this meant their human rights were infringed!
I would defend the right of anyone to live dancing to their own tune and to die in the knowledge (and hope) that at its end what they'd had was all they were going to get. The problem is that those who hold those views would actively canvass to make sure that my right to pray and exercise my faith was denied me. To prevent me from being Christian in all that that means is surely an act against my human rights and yet this is secondary in the minds of some (no surprise there - chap on the this morning was only concerned with his 'humanist and secular' voice and 'his' rights against, over and above anyone (and everyone) else)!
So ladies and gentleman of faith, please make sure that no one you meet is in any doubt of:
a. the fact that you are a person of faith. This doesn't need to be a loud, in your face, proclamatory act that upsets those who strive so hard to have faith in no one and nothing, but you have no need to weaken, restrict or modify in any negative way what you believe - this is your human right (and more importantly, your calling).
b. the reality that we can pray when and where we like and, sensitivities of others noted and acted upon, those who wish not to be part can merely absent themselves.
c. we live in a world where, should the majority so decide, democracy is still supposed to be a virtue and a strength. As I understand it Bideford Council voted twice on the issue of prayers and decided to retain them but Mr Bone decided that his rights subverted the majority view. Civil liberties are at stake here but not in the way that some might like to promote them - seems many are more than just happy, but actually desire the presence and focus of God in their dealings!
Be proud, stand strong and remember that no one has stopped us praying in public places - after all we're not America are we? :-)
And their money says 'in God we trust' but it's against the law to pray in schools . . . . . (Larry Norman RIP)
1 comment:
In some ways, this is a molehill, made into a mountain, by the NSS taking up a poorly presented case.
It seems that Councillor Bone was concerned that he could never be Mayor, as he would have to attend Civic Services (part of the role) and participate. Not sure if this is the motive behind his action, but it smacks of sour grapes.
The bottom line is that Councils can continue having prayers, as long as they are not on the Agenda as official business and are not minutes and attendance recorded.
Post a Comment