capitol hill dome open
That's My Congress
A politically independent journal of the campaigns and legislation of the United States Congress.
  • Home
  • Special Topics
  • Contact
  • Card Game

James Inhofe Filibusters Against Any Religion but His

Posted on April 26 2009 by Congressional Aid

In*tol*er*ant. adj. not tolerating or respecting beliefs, opinions, usages, manners, etc., different from one’s own, as in political or religious matters; bigoted (Random House Dictionary)

Publicity Hog James Inhofe Posing In Front of the CamerasSenator James Inhofe of Oklahoma has announced his intention to filibuster the confirmation of David Hamilton to the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Why?

On November 30, 2005, as Judge in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, David Hamilton ruled on a complaint, Hinrichs v. Bosma,made by four residents of Indiana about the state legislature of Indiana:

Four Indiana residents and taxpayers have sued the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the Indiana General Assembly. They allege that most of the prayers the Speaker has permitted to open House sessions are sectarian Christian prayers, in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Such prayers are deemed government speech for purposes of applying the Establishment Clause. Plaintiffs bring this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

…. To summarize, the evidence shows that the official prayers offered to open sessions of the Indiana House of Representatives repeatedly and consistently advance the beliefs that define the Christian religion: the resurrection and divinity of Jesus of Nazareth. The Establishment Clause “means at the very least that government may not demonstrate a preference for one particular sect or creed (including a preference for Christianity over other religions). ‘The clearest command of the Establishment Clause is that one religious denomination cannot be officially preferred over another.’” County of Allegheny v. American Civil Liberties Union, 492 U.S. 573, 605 (1989), quoting Larson v. Valente, 456 U.S. 228, 244 (1982). The sectarian content of the substantial majority of official prayers in the Indiana House therefore takes the prayers outside the safe harbor the Supreme Court recognized for inclusive, non-sectarian legislative prayers in Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U.S. 783 (1983). Plaintiffs have standing as Indiana taxpayers to bring their claims, and they are entitled to declaratory and injunctive relief. This relief will not prohibit the House from opening its session with prayers if it chooses to do so, but will require that any official prayers be inclusive and non-sectarian, and not advance one particular religion.

…. Fifty-three opening prayers were offered in the House during the 2005 legislative session. See Jt. Ex. 23. Forty-one of those invocations were delivered by clergy identified with Christian churches; nine were delivered by Representatives; and one each was delivered by a lay person, a Muslim imam, and a Jewish rabbi.

…. The substantial majority of prayers offered during the 2005 session were explicitly Christian in content. Several examples illustrate the point…. The prayer for March 28th included this prayer for worldwide conversion to Christianity: “We look forward to the day when all nations and all people of the earth will have the opportunity to hear and respond to messages of love of the Almighty God who has revealed Himself in the saving power of Jesus Christ.” Id. at 12.

…. On April 5, 2005, Reverend Clarence Brown delivered the invocation.2 The prayer included the thanks: “Father we are so gracious [sic – grateful?] to You for Your grace and mercy that You have allowed us to be able to have and Father I thank You for our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, who died that we might have the right to come together in love. Father, let us love one another as he has loved us.” The prayer concluded: “I thank You in Jesus Christ’s name. Amen.” Id. at 13-14.
After the invocation and Pledge of Allegiance, Speaker Bosma reintroduced Reverend Brown, saying: “I understand he has a wonderful voice and he is going to bless us with a song.” Reverend Brown proceeded to sing “Just a Little Talk with Jesus.” A number of the legislators, staff, and visitors present in the chamber stood, clapped, and sang along at the invitation of Reverend Brown. Jt. Stip. Facts (First) ¶ 21. This event prompted at least some members of the House
to walk out because they believed the sectarian religious display during the legislative session was inappropriate.

…. The prayer on April 29th was pervasively Christian in content: “Today on behalf of every man and woman under the sound of my voice, every representative present in this house of government of the great State of Indiana, I appeal to the God and Father of Jesus Christ, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of the whole earth, that He would find not only a welcome here, among those whom He has honored to allow to sit in this place of authority, but also hearing ears and perceptive and courageous hearts that would walk in the ways of righteousness, govern in the way of justice, and make right choices. . . . Let it be known today that it is required in leaders that a man be found faithful. That integrity is a requirement of a leader, and that every Representative is a leader before men and God. . . . As a minister of the gospel, I exercise my right to declare this room a hallowed place. I invite into this room, into the proceedings of the day, into the decisions that will [be] made today, to each person, the mighty Holy Spirit of God. Holy Spirit, give these here the mind of Christ . . . I ask this in the name of Jesus Christ.”

…. After reviewing all available transcripts of prayers from the House sessions in 2005, the court finds that, the actual practice amounts on the whole to a clear endorsement of Christianity, sending the message to others that they are outsiders and the message to Christians that they are favored insiders. No other specific religious faith was endorsed or invoked. The only available transcript of a prayer led by anyone not professing the Christian faith, by a Muslim imam on March 8th, was inclusive and was not identifiable as distinctly Muslim from its content. No cleric or Representative has ever been admonished, corrected, or advised in any way about the religious content of the prayer that he or she delivered.

…. In this case, for the reasons set forth above, plaintiffs are entitled to a permanent injunction against the Speaker in his official capacity barring him from permitting sectarian prayer as part of the official proceedings of the Indiana House of Representatives. If the Speaker chooses to continue any form of legislative prayer, he shall advise persons offering such a prayer (a) that it must be nonsectarian and must not be used to proselytize or advance any one faith or belief or to disparage any other faith or belief, and (b) that they should refrain from using Christ’s name or title or any other denominational appeal. See Simpson v. Chesterfield County, 404 F.3d at 278-79, 284.

All parties in the case agreed that the prayers constituted government speech. James Inhofe has vowed to filibuster the judicial confirmation of David Hamilton because he stood against the overwhelming use of the Indiana legislature’s opening prayers to declare Indiana politics as subordinate to proselytizing Christianity.

In other words, Senator James Inhofe has vowed to keep anyone out of government who stands in the way of Christians using government to declare themselves, their religion and their deity in charge of government.


the*o*crat. noun. one who favors a theocratic form of government, government of a state by immediate divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided (Merriam-Webster Dictionary)

Tags: 1st amendment, bigotry, christianity, church and state, david hamilton, establishment clause, filibuster, hinrichs v. bosma, indiana, inhofe, intolerance, James Inhofe, jesus, religion, theocrat

One Response to “James Inhofe Filibusters Against Any Religion but His”

  1. Gordon Klingenschmitt Milks the Fundamentalist Cash Cow says:
    April 26, 2009 at 3:38 pm

    [...] this month, Senator James Inhofe announced he would filibuster the confirmation of David Hamilton to the federal courts. Why? As a district judge for Southern Indiana, Hamilton had made the outrageous, unforgivable [...]

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Blue Dogs Struggle With The Internet Thing
143 Year Old Boat Gets More Congressional Attention Than Torture
  • red congress banner
  • Recent Comments

    • R. C. Jackman on Roll Call: 88 Tea Party members of Congress vote for Unrestrained War Powers
    • Richard Page on Jones and Cleaver Try To Convert Churches Into Political Tools
    • Viv Szabo on Status of the Equal Rights Amendment
    • James on Fact Check: Do 70 Members of Congress Belong to Socialist Party of America Caucus?
  • RSS Legislative News

    • Barack Obama Supports Big Brother Spying Powers Against Americans. Do You?
    • 5 Year Extension Of Warrantless Surveillance On Americans Advanced By Secret Senate Hearing
    • Beloved Defender of the Constitution Ron Paul Just Voted Against the Constitution Again
    • New Sanctions Against Iran Smelling Very Oily
    • 77 Democrats Sacrifice Medicare To Protect Military Spending
    • Dozen Democrats Join House GOP To Demolish Nuclear Nonproliferation
  • Legislative Scorecards

    112th Congress of 2011-2012:

    Senate Scorecard

    House Scorecard



    Historical Records
    111th Congress
    ...House
    ...Senate
    110th Congress
    ...House
    ...Senate
    109th Congress
    ...House
    ...Senate

  • This Week In Congress Newsletter

    Receive our This Week in Congress Newsletter by e-mail:



    Our Privacy Commitment: We will not sell or give your e-mail address to any other person or company. We will only send you our This Week in Congress Newsletter, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

  • Recent Posts

    • Congress Preparing To Extend Electronic Spy Dragnet For Five More Years
    • Arkansas Liberals Find An Alternative To Blue Dog Democrats
    • Does Super PAC Pay Aguilar Family Member’s Salary on Ground Campaign?
    • Connie Mack Lunches With A Lobbyist
    • 79 House Democrats Vote To Keep Afghanistan War Going On Even Longer
    • Silly Season And Serious Season In The U.S. House
    • Michael Grimm Taking Money In Private Cigar Club Tonight
    • Terrorists and Heart Disease: Who in Congress Focuses on the Real Harm?
  • Search For Legislation

     

     
  • Tags

    afghanistan barack obama blue dogs california campaign finance christianity climate change congress constitution cosponsorship deepwater horizon democrats dennis kucinich economy energy environment equality fisa amendments act florida global warming Green Party gulf of mexico health care house house of representatives lgbt lobbyists marriage military new york obama offshore drilling oil oil spill patriot act pollution religion republicans senate separation of church and state spending spying surveillance taxes war
  • Categories

    • Activism
    • All Articles
    • campaign gear
    • caucuses
    • Ethics
    • Events
    • Featured
    • House campaigns
    • House hearings
    • House legislation
    • Ideas
    • Links
    • Personalities
    • Podcasts
    • Power Plays
    • questions
    • Senate campaigns
    • Senate hearings
    • Senate legislation
    • Site News
  • Older Articles

  • Newsfeeds

    RSSTMC Articles
    RSSComments
    RSS5 Most Liberal Senators
    RSS5 Most Conservative Senators
    RSS5 Most Liberal Representatives
    RSS5 Most Conservative Representatives

  • Archives

    • May 2012
    • April 2012
    • March 2012
    • February 2012
    • January 2012
    • December 2011
    • November 2011
    • October 2011
    • September 2011
    • August 2011
    • July 2011
    • June 2011
    • May 2011
    • April 2011
    • March 2011
    • February 2011
    • January 2011
    • December 2010
    • November 2010
    • October 2010
    • September 2010
    • August 2010
    • July 2010
    • June 2010
    • May 2010
    • April 2010
    • March 2010
    • February 2010
    • January 2010
    • December 2009
    • November 2009
    • October 2009
    • September 2009
    • August 2009
    • July 2009
    • June 2009
    • May 2009
    • April 2009
    • March 2009
    • February 2009
    • January 2009
    • December 2008
    • November 2008
    • September 2008
    • August 2008
    • July 2008
    • June 2008
    • May 2008
    • April 2008
    • March 2008
    • February 2008
    • January 2008
    • December 2007
    • November 2007
    • October 2007
    • August 2007
    • May 2007
    • April 2007
    • March 2007
    • November 2006
    • October 2006
    • September 2006
    • August 2006
    • July 2006
    • June 2006
    • May 2006
    • April 2006
    • March 2006
    • February 2006
    • January 2006

Admin


Log in

Copyright © 2012 That's My Congress - Wordpress Theme developed by Web Hosting Fan