Comments on: Open Eyed Talk Of ACHD Prayers

By: Cynic

Cynic — Sat, 07 Mar 2015 17:28:10 +0000

The 3 commissioners pushing this should resign.

By: Grumpy oleGuy

Grumpy oleGuy — Sun, 01 Mar 2015 08:11:25 +0000

I would think that persons of religion would object to such prayer simply because they become so meaningless. They so often are rote expressions, items near the top of the agenda, times of paper shuffling and other “getting settled and ready” activities they certainly have little or no religious implication(s). But, alas, I appear to be in the minority of the minority on this one, too. Since I think most prayer is downright silly and public prayer is the proof of that pudding.

By: Easterner

Easterner — Sun, 01 Mar 2015 04:49:49 +0000

wellll… actually BoiseCitizen that is exactly the case that the Supreme Court decided on last year.

The city in the case, Greece (ironic eh?) only used Christian prayer for many years and not until someone cried did they have others. So their scorecard was like 408-4, Christian to nonC.
Court said (5-4) that was okay, because the city was primarily Christian but open to anyone for the prayer. (Apparently the Mormons were banished from Greece long time ago. 😛 )

So people get what they have- or what they invite- or who requests the prayer.

For sure ACHD will now have to have some policy: who/when & how.

Let’s agree with Sara Baker. Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.

By: BoiseCitizen

BoiseCitizen — Sun, 01 Mar 2015 01:01:09 +0000

Fine, you want to open the meetings with a prayer. Then you better be prepared to use one from the Koran, the Jewish Torah, Hindu Vedas, and whatever book satanists use, to name a few. Otherwise you will be in violation of the constitution of the U.S. by picking ONE religion over all others.

By: Voter

Voter — Sat, 28 Feb 2015 23:08:05 +0000

The reason we elect these folks is to represent us – the public and the taxpayers. I would guess if you put it to a public vote that prayer would win.

In any case it is good to see that votes were cast – as they should be – so we can see who agrees or disagrees – so we can see how they represent us – or they do not.

By: Sara Baker

Sara Baker — Sat, 28 Feb 2015 21:07:17 +0000

Guest. I’ll tell you what I have consistently said while debating this issue.

What is allowable is not always advisable.

By: P. Hautzinger

P. Hautzinger — Sat, 28 Feb 2015 20:40:00 +0000

I hope Boise Guardian will remind us at election time. These three guys need to look for employment elsewhere.

By: Guest

Guest — Sat, 28 Feb 2015 20:34:29 +0000

I might point out that many, many governing bodies open in prayer including Congress and the Idaho Legislature. The US Supreme Court has made it clear that doing so does not violate the First Amendment of the US Constitution. I have two questions for Ms. Baker and Ms. Arnold:

1) Did the Supreme Court get it wrong?
2) Should Congress and the Idaho Legislature stop opening in prayer?

I for one support the move and applaud the decision.

By: J Smith

J Smith — Sat, 28 Feb 2015 18:02:14 +0000

Any time that God, flags, or patriotism are injected into govt, you know that you are about to be fleeced. It is an effective way of silencing dissent, and bullying the majority into unquestioning support. I’ve found that those who are publicly religious are the worst and lowest of snakes.

By: Rod in SE Boise

Rod in SE Boise — Sat, 28 Feb 2015 17:57:30 +0000

I am equally offended by the ACHD’s approval of prayer at public government meetings as I am at the ACHD’s disregard of citizens concerns and their kowtowing to business interests that Sara Baker described.