Religion can alienate as well as unite. When government officials have prayer at public meetings, they can estrange some of the very people they’ve been elected to serve, says Hamlin resident Dan Courtney.
The Town of Greece began opening its monthly Town Board meetings with a prayer given by an invited member of the local religious community in 1999. All but a handful of those prayers have been given by Christians, Courtney says, and the prayers often reference tenets of Christianity.
It’s safe to say that the Town Board’s next meeting will be a little bit different. Courtney, an atheist, will give the invocation at the Greece Town Board meeting at 6 p.m. on Tuesday, July 15.
“I want to make it clear to the non-Christian community, the minority faiths, and nonbelievers in the Town of Greece,” he says. “I want them to know that they can participate in the process.”
If Courtney’s reasoning sounds familiar, it’s because the same argument was at the center of a recent US Supreme Court case involving the Town of Greece. Several years ago, Greece residents Susan Galloway and Linda Stephens sued in an attempt to get the town to permit prayers that reference God in a general sense only.
The case reached the Supreme Court, which ruled in the town’s favor.
The decision is nuanced, though. The majority opinion says that the town hasn’t endorsed or discriminated against any religion. The town pulls from churches in the community; it just so happens that most of the churches in Greece are Christian. And the court says that Christian prayer can continue, as long as the town doesn’t discriminate against representatives of other religious groups.
Courtney, an engineer for a manufacturing company and member of the Atheist Community of Rochester, says that the decision provides an opportunity for different religious groups to appear before the Greece Town Board. And people, including nonbelievers, need to take advantage of that opportunity, he says.
Of course, when you throw open the doors, you never know who’s going to walk through. Greece Supervisor Bill Reilich told a 13 WHAM reporter recently that he’s rejected a couple of “wacky” requests to give the invocation. One came from a member of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster — a satirical religion that rejects dogma, he said. And the other came from someone named Lucifer who said he wanted to perform an animal sacrifice, Reilich said.
Courtney says that in those distinctions, the town is determining what’s legitimate and what isn’t.
“I imagine at some point there’s going to have to be a process, a decision process that’s coming out of this,” he says. “And I wonder how the Town of Greece is going to handle that.”
In a recent interview, Courtney talked about his upcoming invocation as well as some of the religious freedom issues tied up in public prayer. The following is an edited version of that discussion.
CITY: A lot of people probably wonder what sort of invocation an atheist would deliver. Describe yours.
Courtney: The theme of the invocation and the theme of the press conference afterward is inclusion. What I’m focusing on is that we need to look to all the citizens in governing the locality — governing anything for that matter. We need to look to what we have in common. Not what divides us but what brings us together. I’ll do that in a respectful way that’s not derogatory of any other faith position.
Justice [Antonin] Scalia asked a rhetorical question: What would an atheist pray to? When I heard that in the oral arguments, that kind of raised alarm bells. Here’s a justice of the Supreme Court ruling on law for the whole country and it’s beyond the scope of his imagination that a nonbeliever could even provide an invocation, which I thought was a little scary.
How did you approach the town about giving the invocation? Did you experience any resistance?
I happened to have figured out beforehand who the proper contact person is and I sent her an e-mail the very evening, actually, of the [Supreme Court] decision. I said, “Hey, I’m an atheist, we’ve been underrepresented in this invocation process. I would like to please get on the schedule and provide the invocation.” And she came back with a date and here we are.
I wouldn’t say they’ve given me resistance. They’ve been cordial, but I wouldn’t say friendly. It was essentially “I’m going to do this because I have to but I’m not going to like doing it.” That’s definitely the impression that I got.
Is the Galloway v. Town of Greece decision all bad? The way some legal experts read it, local governments can’t exclude minority religious groups from giving invocations.
From an atheist activist’s position, I think this is a good thing. It may, in the long term, end up being the best outcome because they cannot exclude minority faiths.
Now that the Supreme Court has ruled and said that sectarian prayer is perfectly legal, all we’re doing is excluding ourselves. So I think it’s important that we now stand up and say “We need to be included in this process.”
It’s not our preferred outcome. We’d rather have there be no invocation at all, or if there is, just referring to what we have in common, our human principles or constitutional principles, whatever, and use that to bring us together instead of divide us.
How does opening a meeting with prayer alienate people?
Justice [Elena] Kagan in the oral arguments said it best and I’ll paraphrase her. She basically said that when we come to the government, we don’t come as Christians, Buddhists, Muslims, or nonbelievers for that matter. We come as Americans.
The way she expressed it was, at the very beginning of this meeting, you’re asked to identify yourself by either not standing or not bowing your head or whatever; you’re asked to identify yourself as either being a member of the team or not a member of the team.
So right off the bat, you’re made to feel excluded from the process.
Is there a scenario where opening a meeting with prayer would be acceptable?
There have been a number of solutions that have been offered and one of them actually is to have the invocation before the meeting is even opened. So nobody’s saying that the council members can’t pray; nobody’s saying that they can’t bring a pastor in to pray for the council itself.
As long as the council members agree, I don’t have any issue with that whatsoever. The problem is that they open the meeting and then the first item on the agenda is the invocation.
I don’t think this would have ever gone to court if they had just said, “OK, instead of opening the meeting and then starting the invocation, we’re going to do the invocation and then open the meeting.”
It seems like just a technicality, but it actually makes a big difference.
This article appears in Jul 9-15, 2014.
Hurrah! for Dan Courtney offering an Atheist invocation at a Town of Greece monthly Town Board meeting, though it might be just as well if there were no invocations of any kind at any of our governmental meetings. I’m not a Justice Scalia, but from my readings of the US Constitution there’s a clear desire by our Founding Fathers to separate church and state.
If our mass interest in faith were any measure of our collective judicious processes, you’d think the moral imperative to solve Climate Change would rule, but it doesn’t–at least on any scale that will matter. The poor of our nation and the nations that didn’t cause Climate Change are going to get hit the first and the hardest by Climate Change and yet when we try to address this profound immorality, like in the previous 20+ Climate talks, we tend to fail.
Squabbling about who gets to say what before a governmental meeting is a tempest in a teapot. Rather we should focus on the decisions taking place at these governmental meetings and if faith has any merit at all it should shine through.
I would like to call out our good friends at the Greece town board. They claim to universally accept faiths, and indeed spent (how much?) money taking a claim to the supreme court to support their stance that prayer belongs at a governmental meeting. Their claim was that they allow “all faiths” to offer up a prayer and yet they ridicule faiths such as Paganism and Pastafarianism in the public media claiming they’re not going to allow members of those faiths to provide opening prayers. Apparently they get to decide what are “serious” faiths. I am an ordained pastafarian minister, and yet they didn’t even deign to give my application to offer up a prayer a reply. Another friend with pagan beliefs got a similar shrug off.
Freedom of religion does not mean free to be Christian or not religious. It means ALL religions are treated equally – whether YOU happen to believe in them or not. This is a lesson the Greece board still needs to learn. Their insistence at being inclusive of religion in the town of Greece, means they must be inclusive, not exclusive. ALL religions, regardless of their “seriousness” in their eyes.
Greece; Critical Thinking Rediscovered
Thank you Dan Courtney…for reminding us that men and women are capable of critical thinking to make moral decisions without relying on the god’s to determine (let alone agree upon) what’s right and wrong.
Len Simms
The U.S. Senate and House start their sessions with prayer every day. The President of the United States has participated in the National Prayer Breakfast for the last 61 years. There are chaplains in every branch of the armed forces to tend to the spiritual needs of its members. Law enforcement, fire departments and hospitals have chaplains as do public universities. Many of the Founding Fathers such as John Adams were Deists who believed that religion was good for one’s moral character, even if they rejected the orthodoxy of religion. Thomas Jefferson wrote his own version of the Bible. 86% of the people in Greece according to the Census are Christian. An overwhelming 65% are Roman Catholic. Majority rules in this country. The fact that a small handful of shrill atheists want to ram their opinion of a Godless world down everyone else’s throat doesn’t mean they should be allowed to run roughshod.
Too bad that Dan Courtney is going to deliver an inclusive invocation. This will demonstrate absolutely nothing about the principle at stake here. If Greece had been hosting inclusionary invocations, there would have been no court case. I heard samples of these invocation on 1370 Connections — WOW!!. I wish I could find transcripts of them to point you to, because until you hear what was being said at these invocations, you cannot get to an informed opinion on the matter. Most callers into Connections said that they were in favor of the invocations until they heard the tapes. These invocations trashed non-Christian religions and their followers in the most blatant and insulting way. That the Supremes could have ruled in their favor without at least a scolding for allowing such divisive hateful utterances is evidence of just how UNrepresentative these guys are — this Gang of Five white, Catholic guys, with their ridiculously idolatrous view of the Founding Fathers.
I believe the Town of Greece is viewed in the nation kind of like Dayton Tennessee was following Scopes. I really hope it doesn’t besmirch our whole region.
So glad I don’t live in an intolerant place like Greece NY.
Steve – you are misinformed about the constitutional purpose in guaranteeing freedom of religion. The fact is that freedom of religion was SPECIFICALLY put into the constitution to protect minor religions from the predations of major religions like Christianity. That specifically large orthodox churches of various denominations could not jam THEIR Christian beliefs down others throats. The freedom of religion clause specifically forbade the government from adopting a single religion of any sort as their “base” religion. In that way the very people you named guaranteed that people like yourself could not – even if they were in the majority – dictate what religion people were exposed to as part of government. In the case of freedom of religion the majority most certainly should NOT rule.
The way many of us see it, it’s not Freedom of Religion, but Freedom FROM Religion. While the founding fathers may have wanted to protect the rights to practice any religion, the overarching point is that there would be no national religion established.
The point is to protect us from ever having an Inquisition here.
The point of separation of church and state is to prevent us from being asked to bow our heads and close our eyes in a room where all parties should have their eyes open, and focused.
“The U.S. Senate and House start their sessions with prayer every day.”
But they shouldn’t. Prayer before a session begins is not establishment of religion. Prayer as part of opening a session is, and that is illegal per Amendment I.
“The President of the United States has participated in the National Prayer Breakfast for the last 61 years.”
But shouldn’t participate as President, only as a private citizen. The National Prayer Breakfast should not be sponsored by government . That is establishment of religion, prohibited by Amendment I.
“There are chaplains in every branch of the armed forces to tend to the spiritual needs of its members.”
In due keeping with freedom of religious practice, also under Amendment I, yes. But these should be provided at the expense of their respective religious or philosophical organizations, not at government expense. That is establishment of religion, i.e. illegal.
“Law enforcement, fire departments and hospitals have chaplains as do public universities.”
See above, these should not be provided using public funds, nor should their ministries be part of any official activities. That is establishment of religion, illegal.
“Many of the Founding Fathers such as John Adams were Deists”
Adams certainly was not a Deist. He believed in miracles and Jesus as the redeemer of humanity.
“The Christian religion is, above all the religions that ever prevailed or existed in ancient or modern times, the religion of wisdom, virtue, equity and humanity, let the blackguard Paine say what he will.”
(Adams’s diary entry for 26 July 1796, in response to having read Paine’s Deistic criticisms of Christianity in his book _Age of Reason_ )
“Thomas Jefferson wrote his own version of the Bible.”
Which excluded all reference to any supernatural trait or event. Jefferson actually was a Deist, though he didn’t identify himself as such. However Jefferson also wrote the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, and in fact considered it one of his greatest accomplishments, even more so than his Presidency since the Statute is included in his self-chosen epitaph while his Presidency is not.
Some choice quotes from that Statute: “to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical”– “forcing him to support this or that teacher of his own religious persuasion is depriving him of the comfortable liberty of giving his contributions to the particular pastor whose morals he would make his pattern, and whose powers he feels most persuasive to righteousness” — “our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions any more than our opinions in physics or geometry” — “to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency is a dangerous fallacy which at once destroys all religious liberty” — “all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of Religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge or affect their civil capacities”
“86% of the people in Greece according to the Census are Christian.”
Which means exactly nothing in this context, according to Amendment I.
“An overwhelming 65% are Roman Catholic.”
Also meaningless here.
“Majority rules in this country.”
But not absolutely, nor even within the framework of the law, which seeks to secure the liberty of all, minorities very much included.
“The fact that a small handful of shrill atheists”
It doesn’t matter who the minority is or how shrill they are. Replace ‘shrill atheists’ in this sentence with ‘uppity blacks’ or ‘stingy Jews’ or ‘bra-burning feminists’ and you may realize how bigoted it is.
“want to ram their opinion of a Godless world down everyone else’s throat”
In case you don’t know, this is called a ‘straw man’ — a lie told to distort the perception of something or someone you oppose — it’s simply not true that atheists opposing ‘official prayer’ are trying to force their opinion on others, what they’re trying to do is get government to follow the actual letter of the law per Amendment I in keeping with the important reasons it exists.
“doesn’t mean they should be allowed to run roughshod.”
The people really running roughshod in this matter are the Christians of the town of Greece. That’s the whole point, which you seem to have missed entirely.
Steve is correct in pointing out the many government bodies who begin sessions with invocations. While I strongly favor elimination of all this superstitious nonsense within our government, there are several things that make the situation in Greece especially troublesome. First, as I said in my previous post, the invocations in Greece have gone off the rails. These are not invocations that convey any respect for those present who are not practicing Christians. You can listen to a sample at: http://wxxinews.org/post/connections-discu… . The replay of the invocation begins some 5 minutes into the program.
Second (a point made in the court’s dissenting opinions), a town board meeting is not at all like a legislative session. Regular citizens are coming in to make their case to their town government, “to petition for redress of grievances”. Imagine you are a non-Christian coming to one of the meetings to speak, to try to persuade the board members to weigh your concerns in making their decisions. First thing you are confronted with is a highly sectarian prayer. You can either pretend to be one of these Christians, or else you need to identify yourself as an outsider, not of this club. Of course, as a resident of the town, you are not an outsider. but the invocation certainly stamps you as one. The board members all “amen” right along with almost everyone else. So are you now made to feel like you’ve got a prayer (pun intended) of your views being considered impartially?
None of the Christians I know would condone the intolerance being expressed in these invocations. I can only hope that a large contingent of attendees at these gatherings start walking out for each and every one of these invocations. C’mon Grecians, how ’bout standing up (and walking out) for what’s right!
I find it outrageous how some are twisting words and twisting history to make their point. The reason the Founders established freedom of religion was to prevent a national church, such as the Church of England in the UK, from being established. They did NOT oppose religion. John Adams was a Christian Deist; look it up. Please read The Founders on God and Government and quit making attacks on people trying to set the record straight. Many of the Founders supported days of prayer and thanksgiving (Washington issued several such proclamations, despite not being a communicant in the Episcopal Church). Most of the Founders believed in some degree of Christian thought (what is now considered cultural Christianity), because the overwhelming majority of people in this country in the 1790s believed in the Christian religion. And the fact is that 65% of people in Greece are Roman Catholic and ought to be given more consideration than a handful of disgruntled atheists who do not have the right to run roughshod over the majority. While people of faith (like ME) respect the rights of non-believers or others, such as Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc., it doesn’t mean we should have to listen to nonsense about their not being respected. In many countries, not being the official religion results in prison, torture and death. If people don’t want to listen to Christian prayer at a meeting of mostly Christians in a heavily Republican and Catholic town, they should try putting cotton in their ears or arriving AFTER the invocation. Do what Washington did when Communion was served in the Episcopal Church: Leave along with the other non-communicants and return for the invocation. Leave while the prayers are going on or come after them. Or sit respectfully like people once did, keep your mouth shut and bear it.
There aren’t enough audiences for all the religious talkers out there. Greece Supervisor Bill Reilich should keep opening prayers brief. Why does he bring people in who never want to stop talking? When Reilich says “Amen”, I think there is a feeling of unity and shared relief that the speaker has finally finished!
Invoking the Spanish Inquisition. Equating Galloway v. Town of Greece with the Scopes trial. Expecting us to believe the First Amendment establishes atheism as the State religion. Expecting us to believe prayer to open Congressional House and Senate sessions is a violation of the First Amendment. Methinks the secular fundamentalists doth protest too much.
Greece seems like its full of Hateful Catholics. I won’t be going there and spending anymore of my money there. I’m pretty sure I am not welcome there anyways….
As a Bible believing born again Christian, a US citizen and
resident of of Greece I think this is wonderful. We need more
inclusion, not less. We need more viewpoints, not fewer. We want
to encourage expression, not squelch it. I’m proud to live in the
Town of Greece where the expression of diverse views are welcome.
The Supreme Court’s decision was wise. There is an appropriate
place for religious spiritual and moral expression in our civic
life.
How dare Greece Supervisor Bill Reilich rejected as “wacky” a requests to give the invocationfrom a member of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. personally have been touched by His Noodly Appendage and I have faith She exists. Who gave Bill the power over my faith.!