Is it really that hard to understand? Is it really that hard to understand that one group does not get to impose its religious beliefs on everyone else? Church and state are separate; freedom of religion also means freedom from religion. I suspect if anti-theist atheists or Muslims or Scientologists started reciting their beliefs through a government entity, you Christians would start to actually understand all this.
The Hawaii state Senate, as Christian-dominated as anywhere in the U.S., is, however, with you in their intentional ignorance.
When Senate President Colleen Hanabusa introduced a reverend to say the invocation, Mitch Kahle stood from his seat in the gallery of the Senate chambers and said, “I object. My name is Mitch Kahle and I object to this prayer on the grounds that it’s a violation of the first amendment of the constitution of the United States. I object.”
Kahle’s protest lasted about seven seconds. Then he stopped talking and sat down. The Senate’s Sergeant at Arms was determined to remove Kahle. When Kahle resisted he was forcefully removed and roughed up. The incident was caught by several video cameras including a camera belonging to Hawaii News Now.
“Then what they did to add insult to injury was, they arrested him for disorderly conduct,” said William Harrison, Kahle’s attorney.
Fortunately, the courts are more and more frequently getting it.
District Court judge Leslie Hayashi needed less than an hour to find Kahle not guilty.
“Number one, there was no disorderly conduct. Number two, he has a first amendment right to speak in a public forum such as he did. And number three, the legislature was violating our U.S. Constitution as well as the Hawaii constitution by having these invocations,” [Kahle’s lawyer] Harrison said.
Fortunately, Kahle and his photographer, Kevin Hughes, are suing.
via Pharyngula
Filed under: News, Religions | Tagged: Colleen Hanabusa, Hawaii, Kevin Hughes, Mitch Kahle, pharyngula, State Senate |
For the Sake of Science 
Incidentally, I’m currently in the process of writing a paper concerning Malcolm X. My focus is very narrow in terms of the writings of the man, and it’s actually going to be a fairly short paper (10 or so pages), so I don’t pretend to be intimately familiar with all his writings. However, from all I have read, I’m reminded: he writes about the obliviousness of whites to the power they have (just as so many others have done – just not as well). It’s impossible not to notice overlap in principle with Christians today. For instance, he raises the point that it’s impossible not to be aware of being black in America. Just the same, it’s impossible not to notice being non-Christian today (and anytime in our past).
I’d have to say if he has the right to speak in a public forum, as he did and does and should, so does everyone else, including the minister in question.