State bill proposes Christianity be Missouri’s official religion

[badstar]

On one hand, I'm laughing my ass off. On the other...I'm pissed off that taxpayers dollars are being wasted on this, and that it hasn't been thrown out.

http://www.kmov.com/topstories/stories/030206ccklrKmovreligionbill.7d361c3f.html
(registration required)

Missouri legislators in Jefferson City considered a bill that would name Christianity the state's official "majority" religion.

House Concurrent Resolution 13 has is pending in the state legislature.

Many Missouri residents had not heard about the bill until Thursday.

Karen Aroesty of the Anti-defamation league, along with other watch-groups, began a letter writing and email campaign to stop the resolution.

The resolution would recognize "a Christian god," and it would not protect minority religions, but "protect the majority's right to express their religious beliefs.

The resolution also recognizes that, "a greater power exists," and only Christianity receives what the resolution calls, "justified recognition."

State representative David Sater of Cassville in southwestern Missouri, sponsored the resolution, but he has refused to talk about it on camera or over the phone.

KMOV also contacted Gov. Matt Blunt's office to see where he stands on the resolution, but he has yet to respond.


Text of the intro of the bill:

http://www.house.mo.gov/bills061/biltxt/intro/hcr0013i.htm

Comments

[blaisepascal]

My prediction? It's likely to pass, because few of the State representatives and State Senators in Missouri are likely to take a stand against it.

On the otherhand, it doesn't do anything. It says a bunch of stuff, and says the House and Senate support something, but no one gets any money; no one has to do anything; no one is prevented from doing anything based on the resolution.

It's appalling, yes, but it's a do-nothing, feel-good resolution.

[fuego.livejournal.com]

establishing a state religion is doing nothing?

Yep.

[blaisepascal]

Here's the text of what the resolution does:

Now, therefore, be it resolved by the members of the House of Representatives of the Ninety-third General Assembly, Second Regular Session, the Senate concurring therein, that we stand with the majority of our constituents and exercise the common sense that voluntary prayer in public schools and religious displays on public property are not a coalition of church and state, but rather the justified recognition of the positive role that Christianity has played in this great nation of ours, the United States of America.

While I disagree with what it says, and feel it shouldn't be passed, all it does is express an opinion of the House and Senate.

Think of it this way..... What could someone do to generate an "actual case or controversy" needed to go to court over this resolution. As far as I can see, nothing. In no way does this resolution affect the lives of the citizens of Missouri. It doesn't require them to do anything, nor does it prevent them from doing anything, nor does it cause the State to spend any funds on anything religious, nor any State employee to perform a religious action.

Re: Yep.

[tecie.livejournal.com]

I disagree, in that it endorses prayer in schools, which is rather dangerous (IMHO).

the bumper sticker says....

[fuego.livejournal.com]

as long as there are tests, there will be prayer in schools.

i have no problem with prayer in schools. or anywhere else. if some kind feels the need/want to pray...have at it.

i don't think it belongs in government legislation...documentation, whatever you want to cal it.