The freedom to practice—or not practice—a particular religion is one of the privileges we enjoy in the United States. We can gather at churches, synagogues, mosques or even parks to exercise our beliefs. We choose whether or not we pray or believe in God.

However, the government wants a say in all of this. In June 1952, President Truman signed a proclamation to establish a National Day of Prayer. In 1988, President Reagan amended the law to state that the day be observed the first Thursday in May—this year, it’s May 5.

The debate heated up in October 2008, when the nonprofit Freedom From Religion Foundation filed a federal lawsuit claiming that the National Day of Prayer violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment (“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion …”).

U.S. District Judge Barbara Crabb ruled in the FFRF’s favor in April 2010 when she deemed the law unconstitutional. However, this April, a 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals three-judge panel ruled that the FFRF did not have standing to sue. The FFRF has asked for a review by the entire 7th Circuit.

There’s been action at the state level as well. Gov. Jan Brewer proclaimed Jan. 17, 2010, as a “Day of Prayer for Arizona’s Economy and State Budget.” She also proclaimed an Arizona Day of Prayer in 2010 and 2011 to coincide with the national day. The FFRF sued the state, and Brewer exclaimed, “I intend to fight that lawsuit—vigorously—every step of the way!”

FFRF co-president Annie Laurie Gaylor believes it is not the government’s business to tell us to pray or what to pray for. “They give you a laundry list of items to pray about. I think that is rather stupefying. … They’ll pick some timely topic or recent tragedy or overblown generality that everybody can bring up every year, and then they tell you to pray about it,” Gaylor says.

In the late 1980s, a group called the National Day of Prayer Task Force began to step up efforts to “mobilize prayer in America.” Gaylor points out that the task force writes a theme for the Day of Prayer and gives it to the president and governors; volunteers spread the message to local government officials. Oftentimes, the theme is a Bible verse. This year, the theme is: “A Mighty Fortress Is Our God.”

“The year that we sued over the National Day of Prayer, in 2008, George Bush had issued mostly their wording, and definitely their scripture theme and their Bible verse,” recalls Gaylor. “The National Day of Prayer Task Force sounds like it’s a government (body). It’s private. … When we filed our lawsuit in 2008 … we felt there was this hand-and-glove relationship between the National Day of Prayer Task Force and the government. We sued the National Day of Prayer Task Force, President Bush and his press secretary.”

Eventually, the suit against the task force was dropped, but the presidential suit stands, amended to include President Obama.

Take a look at the task force’s 2011 theme video, and a troubling message appears. The first few frames of the video show a calm, peaceful day. Then, storm clouds start to gather, and the question flashes: “What if we didn’t respond to the call for prayer?” More dark clouds. Shadows appear over people. Ominous music plays. Another question: “What if we didn’t care?” Dark clouds hover, and lightning flashes above the Capitol building. Then people gather to pray. The skies begin to clear, and the sun appears. A final call: “Join with millions in prayer.”

So am I to believe that if we don’t pray on the National Day of Prayer, God will roll out the dark clouds and thunder? Yet everything will be A-OK if we do pray? This fear-based message, blending religious and government images, is disturbing and manipulative.

Moreover, the practice of state and federal days of prayer ignores many citizens. Day of Prayer themes are often Christian. To be truly “national,” where are the passages from the Torah or the Quran? What about those who do not believe in God and prayer? We cannot disregard people simply because they are a minority voice.

Instead of a designated Day of Prayer that violates the separation of church and state while alienating many citizens, why not take a worldly approach? A voluntary celebration and acknowledgement of all citizens—religious, spiritual and nonbelievers—would build bridges instead of walls.

This article appears in May 5-11, 2011.

7 replies on “Messina”

  1. First, I feel I need to correct your assertion that “The freedom to practice—or not practice—a particular religion is one of the privileges we enjoy in the United States.” Freedom of religion is not a privilege, it is a right guaranteed under the Constitution in the 1st Amendment of the Bill of Rights, which states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishing of a religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” There’s nothing in the Constitution or the 1st Amendment that prohibits the government from establishing “A National Day of Prayer.” In addition, the establishment of “A Day of Prayer,” either by a state or the federal government does not violate the individuals’ right or “freedom to practice—or not practice—a particular religion.” We can still “gather at churches, synagogues, mosques or even parks to exercise our beliefs,” and we can still “choose whether or not we pray or believe in God.”

    There’s no violation of the “Establishment Clause of the First Amendment (“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion …”), because Congress is not making a law respecting the establishment of a religion. Rather, what Congress is doing is designating a particular day for individuals to pray, if they choose to pray. It is clear that the “Establishment Clause of the First Amendment” is meant to prohibit Congress from making a law that would establish a religion. It does not prohibit Congress from making a law to honor all religions, which is what a National Day of Prayer does, nor does it prohibit any state from making a law that would either establish a particular religion, prohibit a particular religion or prohibit all religions. Moreover, the “Establishment Clause of the First Amendment” specifically refers only to Congress, or the federal government, not the states.

    After all, establishing a “National Day of Prayer” does not force anybody to pray, or to believe in God or anything else. However, according to you and the FFRF it’s okay for everyone else to be forced to accept your beliefs, even though what Congress has done clearly does not violate the Constitution.

  2. “And when you pray, you shall not be like the hypocrites. For they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the corners of the streets, that they may be seen by men. Assuredly, I say to you, they have their reward. But you, when you pray, go into your room, and when you have shut your door, pray to your Father who is in the secret place; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you openly.”
    –Gospel of Matthew

    And as to the effect of this most-definitely-unconstitutional Day of Prayer, please note that on last year’s Day, the Dow Jones dropped 900 points in the “flash crash”. Dark clouds and thunder indeed!

  4. If we all pray for the economy to get better, and it doesn’t, will we be told next year to pray even harder?

  5. … nothing fails like prayer… a pure waste of time and energy… If it is to be, it is up to ME… not anyone or anything else… wake up world…

  6. Now I will correct Chuck.

    The First Amendment DOES NOT SAY “a religion,” “a national religion,” “one sect or society,” or “any particular denomination of religion.” It is religion generically that may not be established.

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”

    About the word “thereof”:

    An overlooked aspect of the free exercise clause is that it looks back to the establishment clause for its definition of “religion”. The establishment clause says that Congress may make no law respecting the establishment of religion, while the free exercise clause says that Congress cannot prohibit the free exercise “thereof”. Logically, the word “thereof” must have the same content as the object to which it refers. Accordingly, what counts as religion for one clause MUST count as religion for the other. The free exercise clause makes no sense unless the word “religion” is read to encompass more than a church, denomination, or sect. As the free exercise clause pertains to religion generically, the word ‘thereof’, being placed where it is, clearly signifies that the establishment clause does likewise.

    The National Day of Prayer is a constitutional violation in that the congress officially endorses religion generically (and so it does not matter if it’s of just one religion, though promoting “Jesus” as they do is especially egregious). If federal judges weren’t the cowards they are, and the court system wasn’t politically fixed as it is to protect right-wing politicians who reap huge financial & voter rewards by pushing a pseudo-theocracy upon all of us, they would stop using “standing” as an easy way of avoiding these issues THEY KNOW are unconstitutional actions of government.

    “Believing… that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their Legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church and State.” ~ Thomas Jefferson, letter to the Danbury Baptists, 1802. ME 16:281

  7. Suggesting or proclaiming a day of prayer is ridiculous and an insult to anyone who has the intelligence to distinguish a canard from a canary. Besides, the god you are praying to likes to drown people.

Comments are closed.