Weaponizing Public Prayer

George Will is a theologian now. He will explain Deism for you. It’s watery. It’s atheism. George Will is an adeist.

There are elements of Mr. Will’s argument about public prayer with which I am sympathetic. Mainly, I agree that it’s generally a small burden to have to sit through a brief solemnization of some public proceeding, and that generous souls ought to be able endure such niceties without taking offense.

But he deliberately misses the point, or neglects to mention, that there are a not inconsiderable number of people in this country who are pushing public prayer explicitly to assert that this country is a Christian nation based on biblical principles. The Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court recently implied that the First Amendment only applies to Christians. This can obviously become a problem. Solemnizing a public proceeding is a kind of benign ritual. Using the solemnization process as a political weapon or statement, is neither benign nor routine.

What the Supreme Court has done here in another 5-4 conservative/liberal decision is to weaponize public prayer for the religious right.

Author: BooMan

Martin Longman a contributing editor at the Washington Monthly. He is also the founder of Booman Tribune and Progress Pond. He has a degree in philosophy from Western Michigan University.