Warren mayor says atheist can't put up 'reason station' inside city hall

[rug]

7:31 PM, April 16, 2014
By Christina Hall
Detroit Free Press Staff Writer

Warren Mayor Jim Fouts has turned down an atheist’s request to place a “reason station” inside city hall for one year, saying it would disrupt an existing prayer station allowed by the city.

Douglas Marshall, a Warren resident and a member of Freedom From Religion, wanted to put up a table inside the atrium of city hall to promote free thought, use of reason and logic and separation of church and state.

But Fouts denied the request, saying it would disrupt the existing prayer station in violation of the Constitutional right to freedom of religion.

Marshall filled out a Civic Center Facilities Rental Application on April 9 indicating the station would be 11 a.m.-3 p.m. Tuesday and Thursday from May 1 through April 30, 2015. He expected six people in attendance.

http://www.freep.com/article/20140416/NEWS04/304160202/Mayor-Fouts-denies-aetheists-request-for-reason-station-to-balance-prayer-station

[hrmjustin]

1. Prayer stations have no business in city hall.

[LiberalFighter]

2. Must be something wrong if they need prayer stations.

And apparently they haven't helped either.

[okasha]

3. What's a prayer station?

NT

[rug]

4. You stop there if you're feeling terminal.

[okasha]

6. Oh

I was wondering about price per gallon.

[longship]

5. I have an idea. Let's turn City Hall into a church!

Let's put in a prayer station. And which prayers would they be endorsing? Or forbidding, if any?

I'd like to put a Moslem in there to use it. And a Sihk. And a Buddhist. And a Shinto. And a Wiccan. And a Hindu. What would the mayor say to that? Would he forbid that? On what basis?

Apparently they are forbidding non-prayer. On what basis?

This is as clear an establishment cause violation as any.

R&K

[okasha]

7. I dunno.

I think just about any government building could use a nice big plaque with the inscription"God deliver us from these idiots!"

[longship]

10. Good point you've got there. nt

[okasha]

11. I worked for county government

for a few years after taking early retirement from teaching. You would not believe.

[hrmjustin]

8. Great post.

[longship]

9. Thanks. :-) nt

[AtheistCrusader]

12. That is essentially what the atheist group is drawing attention to.

[cbayer]

14. AGree. The whole prayer station idea is really, really bad.

I think we had a discussion about it here a few months ago. At the time, I really didn't think they would follow through with this.

[longship]

15. FFRF is undoubtedly going to spring on this.

Or, the ACLU, or AU. Somebody.

I hope somebody sues.

[cbayer]

17. They probably all will, lol.

Should be an easy one for them and somebody has to do it.

[goldent]

18. I hope with the attention this is getting

he will just close down his religion station and we'll be done with it without either side wasting their money.

[longship]

19. An outcome devoutly to be wished.

It's always better to avoid a court case.

But this shit is happening far too often these days. What I'd really like to happen is for there to be a definitive SCOTUS case on all this crap that says, "Yes, the First Amendment says unequivocally that religious expression ends at the boundaries of government and the public square."

That would make this country a far better place. Unfortunately, it would all but outlaw the Republican Party.

[goldent]

20. You are right. But there are some cases like this one that seem clear cut

and yet others that are not so clear cut. The first amendment has two clauses related to religion:

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

It seems like the difficult cases occur when these two principles conflict, and people see it in different ways.

[longship]

21. Yup, indeed!

But it does say "respecting the establishment of religion". That one word, respecting, is important especially if one is aware of the other drafts of the amendment, and those debated on the floor of Congress before it adopted this one.

One cannot rip the amendment out of its historic context nor can one rip it out of its legislative context.

The Supreme Court has interpreted those words appropriately as meaning a wall of separation. Government cannot make any move which endorses religion. There are notable exceptions, but they are few.

The religious right, and the GOP in general, want the first amendment to be interpreted as something quite different. That is something we cannot allow to happen. This is not a Christian Country. No matter what they say, or how loud they say it.

[cbayer]

13. I think the mayor is making a big mistake here.

He should have never allowed the prayer station, but if he's going to have that, he absolutely has to have alternatives.

He really doesn't get it at all.

[pinto]

16. He's only digging himself a deeper hole for separation of church / state challenge.

And one would be appropriate, imo.