Congress Tackles The Tough Issues
Tweet
Sigh. Stop. Please stop.
A bipartisan group of U.S. House members offered a simple message to the American people today: “Pray, or God will lift his caring hand from the great nation.”
Over three dozen representatives joined U.S. Rep. J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.) on the west lawn of the U.S. Capitol today to urge Americans to pray for the U.S. and its leaders for at least five minutes each week. Forbes, who is also the leader of the Congressional Prayer Caucus, said he hopes “God will hear our prayers and heal our land.”
43 Responses to “Congress Tackles The Tough Issues”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
WTF?
What’s next? The Pope visits the US?
It’s not like Congress is setting up the National Church of Robertson.
Through my vast network of contacts I have obtained the actual text of Rep. Forbes’ prayer:
“Dear Lord, please deliver us from the mess we Republicans have made of things over the past six years. That sure would be a lot easier, Lord, than it would be for us to get a clue. We ask in Jesus’ name, Amen.”
Ah, frank, he’s always there with the totally idiotic non-sequitor.
How’s teh crazy working out for you, my friend?
There you go, more “Blame America first” Republicans.
Who would Jesus Impeach?
frameone: Can’t you spell “the”?
I guess I would have been more “on topic” if I expressed alarm and dismay at the imminent theocracy, eh?
How’s the insolence, arrogance, and self – absorption working out for you?
man based on the headline I thought you were going to condemn the democrats employeeing outside law firms to conduct further “investigations” into the firing of US attorneys who serve at the pleasure of the president!
Silly me…
Frank, maybe you should look up “teh.” I find it hard to believe that you’ve never seen this particular slang spelling before.
Secondly, are you fucking kidding me? Congressional Prayer Caucus? WTF? What a joke. And Frank, a theocracy is probably not far from what the Repubs want… yet another reason to vote Dem (as if the other 1,723 reasons weren’t enough).
Maybe if you were younger, brighter, less stubborn and more thoughtful you’d realize that these sorts of actions by members of a major governing body are either A: a complete joke, a mockery of the state, or B: promoting dangerous ideals into public discourse.
Maybe if I pray hard enough, you WILL get younger and smarter! That’s a thought!… everyone break out their Bibles, I’m gonna need some help with this one…
“I guess I would have been more “on topic” if I expressed alarm and dismay at the imminent theocracy, eh?”
No, frank, only if you had made an analogy that made even the slightest bit of sense. The pope visiting the United States is not even close to a bunch of elected officials suggesting that Jesus is the answer to the country’s problems.
Congress opens with a prayer by Chaplains of differing faiths, all the time.
“A bunch of elected officials suggesting that Jesus is the answer to the country’s problems” doesn’t worry anymore than a visit from the Pope. But, of course, you didn’t get that — so there’s something wrong with me!
Quelle surprise!
As for the “slang” spelling of teh, I was being sArCAstIc.
“In the online slang known as Leet, it is deliberately used in place of the, and occasionally spelled t3h with a numeral 3 in place of e.”
My teenage sons aren’t even trendy enough to use that nonsense.
Mambochicken, where is your sense of humor? You are one dour sumbitch.
And I’m already smarter than you — how smart do you want me to be?
Well on the other hand…
With apologies to Marvin Gaye “When I get that feeling we need political healing.”
I think that would fix things well enough. Y’know, without bothering God and all.
“‘A bunch of elected officials suggesting that Jesus is the answer to the country’s problems’ doesn’t worry anymore than a visit from the Pope.”
Um, frank, I believe that’s the problem …
frameone, I don’t even believe it’s a problem (your smug “um” not withstanding). I think it’s a sign that something is seriously wrong with a bunch of people if they are actually fearful in the mere presence of a religious practice.
I find it unsettling that our country has reached a point that the idea that government officials engage in a religious practice actually upsets people.
That seems to be worlds away from “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”
Frank,
These idiots weren’t just going to church to pray for guidance and strength. Some of them were openly evangelizing that embracing Jesus Christ was the only answer to the nation’s problems. Ya, that isn’t making a law but it should certainly be unsettling to anyone who cares about the Constitution because it isn’t “world’s away” from passing a law establishing a religion, it’s advancing the “rationale” for a such a law, spoken by a fucking lawmaker …
“…it should certainly be unsettling to anyone who cares about the Constitution…”
No, not really.
Don’t you think it is a wee bit presumptuous of you to say that anyone who isn’t filled with fear and trepidation by the prospect of a few Congressmen exhorting us to prayer (hardly “openly evangelizing”), “doesn’t care about the Constitution”?
The Constitution doesn’t say that the practice of religion by lawmakers is prohibited.
Oliver is quite clearly advocating that Congresshumans cease and desist from suggesting we pray. That may be his right, but the “fear” is all yours.
I thought Jesus frowned on public prayer.
I forgot, these people aren’t Christians, they just play them around election time.
Prayer. It’s literally the least one can do.
I’m no more dismayed by the public declaration that prayer is all the nation needs, than I would be if everyone in government suddenly became UFO cultists and suggested that the only way to save this country is if one million people formed a giant human circle around Devils Tower in Wyoming.
I thought Jesus frowned on public prayer.
I forgot, these people aren’t Christians, they just play them around election time.
a) No, He didn’t.
b) The next Congressional elections are in 2008.
Frank,
Here’s the authority in the matter:
“Matthew 6:5-6: “And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men….when thou prayest, enter into thy closet and when thou has shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret….”
This is part of the reason it is probably appropriate to call the Prayer Caucus at the very least hypocrites.
zadura: I’m familiar with the citation. One interpretation is:
Obviously, Jesus was not referrin to praying in a closet, or even in private — else, why have Church services?
* Notice that it doesn’t say “in front of other people”.
The Congressmen only suggested publicly that people pray, not that they pray publicly.
One thing to note: the Congressional Prayer Caucus is not bipartisan, as there are no Democrats in its membership (Mark Green isn’t the Mark Green from NY politics).
Frank, the congressmen didn’t simply suggest that people pray. They suggest that people pray to jesus and that only prayer to jesus could save this country. I don’t care if they attend church or tell people to pray for strength and guidance in their own life. What you are deliberately and obstusely ignoring is the overt political purpose of their meeting. This was not a strictly religious event, it was an event entirely designed to blur the boundaries between religion and politics. That’s unsettling, or at least is should be. I guess if you’re christian and happen to agree with the congressmen that jesus is the country’s salvation you wouldn’t have a problem with this. Then again, a lot of Americans aren’t and don’t.
Then again, a lot of Americans aren’t and don’t.
That doesn’t seem to be a problem to me.
A Congressman suggesting to me that our nation is in peril unless we pray to Jesus has no more authority than Pat Robertson, or my next door neighbor. I believe in, and follow, who I choose.
You have yet to explain what “troubles” you, as if somehow that is self – explanatory. Shedding some light on the political purpose of this meeting would be helpful, too.
I see the insults are beginning to creep in. If you want me to participate in this discussion, you should stop.
“I see the insults are beginning to creep in.”
Whatever frank.
It is unsettling to me for a bunch of lawmakers to make a direct, political link between jesus and running this country. These guys believe that a belief in jesus is the only way to “save” this country and they are in a position to enact that belief into law. Events like this suggest to me that they would if they could which reveals a fundamental contempt for the principle’s behind the constitution. In other words, they don’t respect the principle of separating church and state, they see it as an impasse to “saving the nation.” That’s a problem.
has no more authority than Pat Robertson
Well, there’s authority, and there’s influence.
Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Jerry Falwell et al have little “authority” in government or the GOP.
Their “influence,” however, is another story.
Frank,
Let’s not engage in a biblical discussion. Instead, I am curious to know whether you approve or disapprove of a Congressperson exhorting each American to “pray for five minutes” so that God may continue to grant the U.S. with his favor. In my religious tradition, both public prayers and prayers of petition are deeply heretical.
These lawmakers sure make an awful lot of presumptions about God.
(a) God “favors” the United States.
(b) God will just take away his favor if we do not subscribe to the Christian faith.
(c) God’s favor will “save the nation.”
(d) That the ways in which God chooses to “save the nation” will be to these lawmakers’ liking.
I’d love to sit down with these fellas to have a long conversation about their close personal friend the Almighty. Boy, would I have questions:
We’ve only existed for 200-odd years. Who was your most favored nation before that? When did we finally merit favored status? What did the other nations do to lose your favor?
The real question is, how can anybody take the Republican party seriously anymore? After what, four years of exclusive Republican rule, only Jesus can save us?
How bad did they screw things up that the only way they can think of fixing their mess is to pray to Jesus?
Worst. Party. Ever.
Instead, I am curious to know whether you approve or disapprove of a Congressperson exhorting each American to “pray for five minutes” so that God may continue to grant the U.S. with his favor.
Personally, I’d rather hear them say, “We’re going to ask God’s help to keep us from acting like a bunch of horse’s asses”. But I don’t expect that to happen anytime real soon. I also think it’s wrong for them to call themselves ‘non-denominational’, when there are some denominations that don’t believe what they believe — like praying to Jesus.
But do I “disapprove”? No, I believe that “live and let live” applies even to Congressmen, and I don’t believe that government has a mandate to be ‘religion – free’.
I think that this is the root of Oliver’s and frameone’s objection, and I disagree.
SpiderJ: I believe the deal was entered into here:
“I don’t believe that government has a mandate to be ‘religion – free’.”
But Frank, our government does have a mandate to be religion free. It’s called the Constitution.
frameone: I don’t care to argue the issue of “separation of Church and State” all day.
The First Amendment to the Constitution says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…”
It does not say the government shall in no wise engage in any religious activity, or acquire any religious trappings.
To make no law respecting an establishment means what it says: Congress shall make no law favoring a religious denomination or congregation (the 18th Century definition of “establishment.”
It was never understood by the Founding Fathers that the government was to be religion – free.
If it was determined to be so by subsequent Supreme Court decisions, that doesn’t mean it’s in the Constitution.
Frank – Nice quote. Doesn’t prove anything, unless John Winthrop got God’s name on the contract he believes he signed.
The world is full of nations who believe that God finds them most worthy. But considering the nationalistic asshats running those nations and the pure Goodness that is God, I’d consider it more likely that God doesn’t favor any of them.
Frank, And I’m not suggesting that these guys are making a law to establish a religion. They are, however, clearly in contempt of the idea that they can’t — and they are lawmakers.
These guys are advocating a particular religion over all others as the only one capable of “saving” the nation. That’s troubling, frank, and it’s a very different from putting “In God We Trust” on our currency (although I don’t think we should be doing that either) as God is a rather vague concept that cuts across a variety of different faiths. You put Jesus on there and you got a big problem.
The point being is that I have never said what these asshats are doing is unconstitutional, only that it’s troubling. Which it is.
Doesn’t prove anything… I never said it did. You asked a question. I answered it.
frameone: You’re troubled by it. Don’t be.
You “answered” my question without providing an actual answer. Bravo.
“You’re troubled by it. Don’t be.”
Because I know that Christian conservatives have the best interests of the country and myself at heart. Right, frank.
SpiderJ: You asked a silly question. I gave you a reasonable answer. You made an even siller demand. End of game.
Well, frameone, I only know a few Christian conservatives, and they’ve never hurt me. But I know the secret handshake.
Oliver, you have aimed the wrong way. We want to encourage more Republican denominational public prayer on government property, film it, and broadcast it. Getting in their way would be like asking them not to say macaca, not to wave confederate flags, and not to tell incredibly stupid lies. We want to see more like…
This really happened at the Senate office building. As some people say, “It’s not like Congress is setting up the National Church of Robertson.”
With more and more of this, even Bushvoters start, if not to think, at least to have second thoughts.
Religion in the Senate? Eyeeeew!
What next? Blowjobs in the White House?
Heh.
Daniels’s Law: As Bushvoters discussion grows longer, the probability of references to The Clenis approaches one. (With apologies to Mike Godwin.)