At Pentagon Christmas Service, Franklin Graham Praises ‘God of War’ “We know that God loves. But did you know that God also hates?"

Servus · Tuesday at 11:18 AM

essentialsaltes said:
This is all part of the freedom of religion part of the First Amendment. The topic in this thread is the freedom from government religion, which is a separate part of the First Amendment.

Schools cannot lead voluntary prayers. This is settled constitutional law. How is the Pentagon any different? it is an agent of the government.

Right. But is it forbidden for faculty to participate in voluntary prayer?

essentialsaltes · Tuesday at 11:22 AM

Servus said:
Right. But is it forbidden for faculty to participate in voluntary prayer?

You are purposefully straying away from the topic, but you already know the answer "the prayer must be [self]-initiated, voluntary, and not disrupt instructional time or other students' rights"

BCP1928 · Tuesday at 11:26 AM

Servus said:
So school faculty who are Muslim are not allowed to pray? Like a Muslim can't also do his prayers on school property if he's a vice principal?

He certainly can't lead them or compel non-Muslims to be present. But a more apt example would be if he was a Shia and made clear that he thought Sunnis weren't "real" Muslims. Then when he prayed in public he would be sending the message that he was praying for Sunnis only.

essentialsaltes · Tuesday at 11:27 AM

It is unconstitutional for ___________ to _____________ inviting everyone to a 'voluntary' prayer.

The principal --- get on the PA system
SecWar -------- send email to all Pentagon employees

We know the first case is a true statement. How is the Pentagon any different? it is an agent of the government.

Servus · Tuesday at 11:27 AM

essentialsaltes said:
You are purposefully straying away from the topic, but you already know the answer "the prayer must be [self]-initiated, voluntary, and not disrupt instructional time or other students' rights"

I'm pointing out the difference between voluntary and mandatory. The way I see it, your complaint or concern only holds water when it comes to mandated prayer. Like the students in school or the people in the Pentagon are told that it's time for them all to pray.

essentialsaltes · Tuesday at 11:29 AM

Servus said:
I'm pointing out the difference between voluntary and mandatory. The way I see it, your complaint or concern only holds water when it comes to mandated prayer.

SCOTUS says otherwise. Government-led prayer is unconstitutional in the schools, even if students are allowed to not participate.

Servus · Tuesday at 11:30 AM

essentialsaltes said:
It is unconstitutional for ___________ to _____________ inviting everyone to a 'voluntary' prayer.

The principal --- get on the PA system
SecWar -------- send email to all Pentagon employees

We know the first case is a true statement. How is the Pentagon any different? it is an agent of the government.

It is unconstitutional for public school officials or government entities to organize, lead, or endorse prayer at school events (like graduations) or in classrooms, even if framed as "voluntary," because it violates the First Amendment's Establishment Clause by coercing participation and showing government preference for religion, as established in cases like Engel v. Vitale and Lee v. Weisman.

Servus · Tuesday at 11:59 AM

According to what I looked up.

Here’s the background on why Pete Hegseth was able to hold a voluntary prayer event at the Pentagon and what legal/constitutional issues people are debating:

Why the event happened

He’s the Secretary of Defense — As a senior Cabinet official, Hegseth has authority over activities in the Department of Defense and can organize voluntary events in Pentagon spaces. He chose to host a Christian prayer and worship service in the Pentagon auditorium and broadcast it internally, and said it would be a recurring monthly event. AOL
Attendance was framed as “voluntary” — Pentagon officials have repeatedly said that the prayer service is voluntary and that no one is required to attend. That’s the key argument used to justify why the event is allowed: people are free not to participate. Spokesman-Review+1
Religious services for service members already exist — The Pentagon already provides space for worship (chapel services, chaplain-led events) for many faiths as part of accommodating religious practice. Supporters say Hegseth’s gathering was just another voluntary religious option. Washington Examiner

Why some people argue it’s legally permissible

Voluntary participation matters legally: Under current U.S. law, government employees and military personnel may choose to take part in religious activities on federal property as long as participation isn’t coerced. Courts have generally upheld voluntary prayer or worship gatherings when they don’t impose government-mandated participation.
Tradition argument: Hegseth and supporters argue that prayer and appeals to religion have long been part of American military tradition (e.g., prayers led by chaplains) and that voluntary events continue that tradition. Washington Examiner

essentialsaltes · Tuesday at 12:13 PM

Servus said:
Attendance was framed as “voluntary”

It is unconstitutional for ... government entities to organize, lead, or endorse prayer ... even if framed as "voluntary,"

Everybody is putting air quotes around 'voluntary' for good reason.

Servus said:
Under current U.S. law, government employees and military personnel may choose to take part in religious activities on federal property as long as participation isn’t coerced.

That's why the Pentagon has chapels and chaplains and iftar dinners during Ramadan. But, as we have seen, if a school organizes prayer, coercion is part of the reason why it is unconstitutional. Using the power of his office, a principal making these statements is inherently coercive, according to SCOTUS. Pete Hegseth is no different.

ViaCrucis · Tuesday at 12:17 PM

rjs330 said:
Yes and Freedom From Religion would ban that expression. Freedom of Religion allows it.

If the official government accounts had said "There is no God but God and Muhammad is His Prophet" instead of "Let the Earth receive her King" would you be okay with it?

ViaCrucis · Tuesday at 12:22 PM

Servus said:
I'm gonna bet 95% of stuff like that isn't produced by MAGAs, Republicans, the right, conservatives. The left paints him as a Messiah far more than any others.

Are you sure about that?

Servus · Tuesday at 12:25 PM

essentialsaltes said:
Everybody is putting air quotes around 'voluntary' for good reason.

That's why the Pentagon has chapels and chaplains and iftar dinners during Ramadan. But, as we have seen, if a school organizes prayer, coercion is part of the reason why it is unconstitutional. Using the power of his office, a principal making these statements is inherently coercive, according to SCOTUS. Pete Hegseth is no different.

I don't see anyone being coerced so that's moot. In what I posted earlier it says at events like graduations or in classrooms. Meaning during event or in a classroom the principal can't say "I invite you all to pray" - as in right then and there. That's a big difference from a prayer meeting being held in a certain room two weeks from now if anyone wants to show up for it. In other words, in the latter situation, no one is being put on the spot.

So I'm still not seeing anything to be upset or worried over. But this is really about wanting to take down Hegseth, isn't it?

essentialsaltes · Tuesday at 12:59 PM

Servus said:
I don't see anyone being coerced so that's moot. In what I posted earlier it says at events like graduations or in classrooms. Meaning during event or in a classroom the principal can't say "I invite you all to pray" - as in right then and there. That's a big difference from a prayer meeting being held in a certain room two weeks from now if anyone wants to show up for it.

A school that promoted See You At the Flagpole prayer events ahead of time (as well as an assortment of other Christian activities) also lost in court.

From the decision:

The Defendants have not identified any secular purpose supporting the flagpole event. They argue that the Supreme Court has never extended its Establishment Clause jurisprudence to foreclose private religious conduct during nonschool hours merely because such conduct takes place on school premises where elementary school children are present, citing Good News Club, 533 U.S. at 116. In fact, Defendants contend, courts have upheld a student group’s right to engage in morning prayer at the school flagpole, relying on Westfield High Sch. L.I.F.E. Club v. City of Westfield, 249 F. Supp.2d 98, 118 (D. Mass. 2003).
The Westfield case mentioned only briefly that the school permitted a L.I.F.E. club to meet before school at the flagpole for morning prayer. 249 F.Supp.2d at 102. The critical fact in Westfield was that the religious activities at issue were student-initiated and student-led.

Servus said:
But this is really about wanting to take down Hegseth, isn't it?

This is about the constitutionality of these actions he's taking, as well as the warlike nature of the Christmas sermon.

BCP1928 · Tuesday at 1:00 PM

Servus said:
I don't see anyone being coerced so that's moot. In what I posted earlier it says at events like graduations or in classrooms. Meaning during event or in a classroom the principal can't say "I invite you all to pray" - as in right then and there. That's a big difference from a prayer meeting being held in a certain room two weeks from now if anyone wants to show up for it. In other words, in the latter situation, no one is being put on the spot.

So I'm still not seeing anything to be upset or worried over. But this is really about wanting to take down Hegseth, isn't it?

Well, I certainly wouldn't trust a prayer coming from a Seven Mountains man.

BPPLEE · Tuesday at 1:07 PM

essentialsaltes said:
A school that promoted See You At the Flagpole prayer events ahead of time (as well as an assortment of other Christian activities) also lost in court.

From the decision:

The Defendants have not identified any secular purpose supporting the flagpole event. They argue that the Supreme Court has never extended its Establishment Clause jurisprudence to foreclose private religious conduct during nonschool hours merely because such conduct takes place on school premises where elementary school children are present, citing Good News Club, 533 U.S. at 116. In fact, Defendants contend, courts have upheld a student group’s right to engage in morning prayer at the school flagpole, relying on Westfield High Sch. L.I.F.E. Club v. City of Westfield, 249 F. Supp.2d 98, 118 (D. Mass. 2003).
The Westfield case mentioned only briefly that the school permitted a L.I.F.E. club to meet before school at the flagpole for morning prayer. 249 F.Supp.2d at 102. The critical fact in Westfield was that the religious activities at issue were student-initiated and student-led.

This is about the constitutionality of these actions he's taking, as well as the warlike nature of the Christmas sermon.

When I was a youth pastor and on the school board I led See You At The Pole meetings for prayer at the flagpole.
It was a private school though.
At a public school it would have to be student planned and led

ViaCrucis · Tuesday at 1:20 PM

BPPLEE said:
When I was a youth pastor and on the school board I led See You At The Pole meetings for prayer at the flagpole.
It was a private school though.
At a public school it would have to be student planned and led

I attended almost every "See You At the Pole" events when I was in high school back in the tail end of the 90s. Churches advertised it, students organized it, and since this happened outside of school hours, there wasn't a problem for teachers to be present on their own time. The school couldn't promote it, and teachers couldn't promote it in their capacity as representing the school. But there was no problem for both students and teachers to be present--but it was always planned and led by students acting on their own.

Where I grew up we just had the one public high school--there was a small alternative school meant for kids who were struggling or having issues which parents could apply to have their kids attend as an option. The only other high-school level education available was the local Catholic school, and another private school run by the largest church (and most influential, but that's a different story) in town (it was and still is non-denominational). My grade school education was through a very tiny IFB church that a K-12 school, but the 7-12 grades were cut due to lack of enough students, and when the church folded so did the school, this happened before I entered high school.

I don't know what "Meet You At the Pole" was like at any of these other schools, just the one that happened every year at the main public high school. And it was as I said, always a student-led and organized affair. Even when teachers were present in non-official ways.

Servus · Tuesday at 1:44 PM

essentialsaltes said:
A school that promoted See You At the Flagpole prayer events ahead of time (as well as an assortment of other Christian activities) also lost in court.

From the decision:

The Defendants have not identified any secular purpose supporting the flagpole event. They argue that the Supreme Court has never extended its Establishment Clause jurisprudence to foreclose private religious conduct during nonschool hours merely because such conduct takes place on school premises where elementary school children are present, citing Good News Club, 533 U.S. at 116. In fact, Defendants contend, courts have upheld a student group’s right to engage in morning prayer at the school flagpole, relying on Westfield High Sch. L.I.F.E. Club v. City of Westfield, 249 F. Supp.2d 98, 118 (D. Mass. 2003).
The Westfield case mentioned only briefly that the school permitted a L.I.F.E. club to meet before school at the flagpole for morning prayer. 249 F.Supp.2d at 102. The critical fact in Westfield was that the religious activities at issue were student-initiated and student-led.

So who are the students in the Pentagon?

essentialsaltes said:
This is about the constitutionality of these actions he's taking,

In the hopes that he'll get in trouble and be removed, based on the overall rhetoric against Hegseth.

essentialsaltes said:
as well as the warlike nature of the Christmas sermon.

I just listed to the sermon. It wasn't warlike. It was about the wrath of God and the escape from God's wrath upon sinners being though Christ. Which is a standard Christmas / Christianity 101 message. It didn't have anything to do with America going to war against anyone.

essentialsaltes · Tuesday at 2:03 PM

Servus said:
So who are the students in the Pentagon?

Employees. Employees can choose to pray, or go to a chapel, or otherwise self-initiate their religious activities. It is not to come down from above through official promulgation and endorsement.

Pommer · Tuesday at 2:34 PM

rjs330 said:
Freedom From Religion is the opposite of Freedom of Religion in how they want it. Both ban government Religion. Both do not ban religious expression of governement officials. Freedom From Religion wants to ban religious expression of government officials. Freedom of Religion supports free expression of ones religion. We the People weee fine with that at the founding. And We the People are still okay with that.

The government of the United States of America is to hold no opinion on matters religious.
The personal beliefs of the office holders are safe (and sacrosanct); the Office, which these people hold, has no official “position” with regards to sectarian beliefs.

Servus · Tuesday at 2:35 PM

essentialsaltes said:
Employees. Employees can choose to pray, or go to a chapel, or otherwise self-initiate their religious activities. It is not to come down from above through official promulgation and endorsement.

Well from what I'm reading at this point is it's not clearly legal nor clearly illegal. So it will have to be up to a court to decide. Apparently the worst case scenario is the court will issue an injunction saying the secretary of defense may not organize, sponsor, or promote sectarian prayer services, especially using official email, government facilities, his official title.

We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

At Pentagon Christmas Service, Franklin Graham Praises ‘God of War’ “We know that God loves. But did you know that God also hates?"

<><

Fact-Based Lifeform

Well-Known Member

Fact-Based Lifeform

<><

Fact-Based Lifeform

<><

<><

Why the event happened​

Why some people argue it’s legally permissible​

Fact-Based Lifeform

Confessional Lutheran

Confessional Lutheran

<><

Fact-Based Lifeform

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Confessional Lutheran

<><

Fact-Based Lifeform

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

<><

Similar threads

Why the event happened

Why some people argue it’s legally permissible