To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 9965
9964  |  9966
Subject: 
Re: Thoughts on prayer
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Tue, 10 Apr 2001 22:57:42 GMT
Viewed: 
168 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
Some years ago a friend who'd done some study on the matter defined black
magic (as many sources do) as the practice of ritual or enchantment without
the permission and/or knowledge of the intended recipient.  By this
definition, prayer without the consent or knowledge of the recipient is
black magic.  I know that not everyone defines it that way, and I'm not
trying to convince anyone that they should, but it's interesting to hear
another perspective on what many consider to be a kind and charitable act...

When my mom says she prays for me, I equivocate it with saying "My thoughts
and hopes are with you." In that sense, any sort of prayer (whether it's
praying to God, Jesus, Shivva, Buddha, poking pins in voodoo dolls, doing a
rain dance, drawing a pentagram, touching an idol) is all the same to me.
Although I feel none of these acts will create any sort of benefit granted
from a higher power, I like the idea that someone, in their own way, wishes
me well.

I've even watched pro athletes give praise to God and Jesus for hearing their
prayers so they could win the championship.

Or when boxers thank the Lord for giving them the strength to beat their
oponents into unconsciousness!

Heh heh, doesn't make sense if Jesus was about peace.

I'm not up on the latest legalities, but my understanding is that while
_organized_ prayer is not permitted, individuals can pray to their souls'
content.  The problem arises not simply through the presence of prayer in
the public (ie: government sponsored) institution; when the institution
itself puts forth a prayer, that prayer becomes by definition state-sponsored.

So is a moment of silence considered state-sponsored prayer?

After all, doesn't our money say "In God we trust"?

I've reflected on this point at various times in my life.  I'm not really
offended by it, since I'm not too concerned personally about what's printed
on my dollar as long as it's accepted as coin of the realm.  However, a
literal reading (perhaps by some alien race that isn't convinced of our
dominion over them) could suggest that the currency is itself the "God" in
which we trust.

Ha! Well, it seems the more wrong done with our money, the more we drag God
through the filth WE'VE created. Also, I don't think a true separation of
church and state would allow putting "In God We Trust" on government
currency or require people to swear oaths of office on the Bible (although
I've heard a Koran or Torah is just as acceptable).

Dan



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Thoughts on prayer
 
(...) You can also swear on the Constitution. It wouldn't suprise me if there are other recognized religious and non-religious documents you can swear on. Jeff (24 years ago, 11-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Thoughts on prayer
 
(...) Some years ago a friend who'd done some study on the matter defined black magic (as many sources do) as the practice of ritual or enchantment without the permission and/or knowledge of the intended recipient. By this definition, prayer without (...) (24 years ago, 10-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

11 Messages in This Thread:


Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR