howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#1
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#2
'Bone argued the saying of prayers was bad for local democracy. "It sends out a signal that local governments are for particular types of people and not for everyone," he said.'
Likewise banning them sends out a similar message. Another assault on liberty from an intolerant lunatic fringe group.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
#3
Yes thats right..this is a bit of a front against traditional British values I would say. Where will it end...could this signal the end for ceremonies such as those we see on Remembrance Sunday or on Merchant Navy Day and so on. Councillors attend these events and many are not religious at all as we know. But wouldnt it be fairly awful if these ceremonies lost the religious service aspect....wouldnt the whole concept be redundant.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#4
I completely agree. I am not in the least bit religious and quite frankly if anything an atheist. Why on earth that should be a problem I really do not know. I have sat through many a prayer in various roles I have had and there is no harm at all in being respectfully silent in that brief time even if the actual 'act of prayer' is meaningless to you.
#5
Agreed. Wow - a united DF!
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#6
not all the prayers at council meetings are christian ones but the fact remains we all go to churches at some time mainly for weddings, christenings and funerals.
probably the majority there are not religious but accept it as part of the occasion.
i am not sure why this particular councillor took such a serious view of it, if he was offended he could have left the chamber until the prayers were over,
#7
Exactly. And given that as employers we are obliged to allow paid time 5 times daily for some religions to take time out to pray it seems a bit OTT to try to prevent others from doing so.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#8
Interesting thread. I wonder which side of the fence Waldorf and Statler will cone down on (if they do).
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
#9
That made me laugh out loud - I may forward you the dry cleaning bill, as i was drinking tea at the time.....!!
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#10
reg may call for a unitary approach where two imams, a rabbi and a vicar get the boot and one priest covers their duties.
Sue Nicholas- Location: river
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 6,025
#11
For many years prayers have not been said before a Full Council Meeting at DDC
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
#12
From that Sue, means they were at one time - when did they stop and was there a reason ?
Roger
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#13
The forum is still united.
Howard maybe that councillor is a born troublemaker as you say he did not have to be there or even join in.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Watkins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 9 Nov 2011
- Posts: 2,226
#14
#9 Only tea!!
Takes some believing!!
Watty
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#15
A court order has been used to abolish the Christian Faith in town councils.
Lenin 1917. It lead to Stalin. Are we becoming a dictatorship?
If the Councils continued saying prayers, would a judge order them to be dragged out and sent to prison? Then we have a lot to fear for. Persecution of the Christian Faith in the year 2012.
#16
Ive just read sevral articles on this , the council can still hold prayers should they wish to , but they cannot summon councillors and insist they attend , no big problem to me
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#17
As I understood it, Sarah, the councilor who went to court was not obliged to take part in the prayers, and was allowed to enter the assembly after the prayers were said, which is when the actual meetings started.
So very much to be worried about here, it was a sheer act of hatred against other people saying Christian prayers and a court order to prevent them from doing so.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#18
to pray or not to pray that is the question,but who do you pray to in the first place.
#19
The prayers can still continue there is now no formal summoning to them thats the difference that I understand
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#20
all very confusing, i assumed that prayers would be beforehand meaning that someone could turn up after they had finished if they preferred.
i remember school assembly when the jewish kids stood at the back of the hall.
daftest idea ever, out of 630 kids only 4 were jewish.
they must have felt so different for no particular reason.