Still Attacking Ashcroft

[Todd]

John Ashcroft just can't get a break these days.

Monday's Washington Post featured a front-page story on how his daily Bible study sessions, held at the Justice Department, offend "some who do not share Ashcroft's Pentecostal Christian beliefs." One Justice attorney told the Post that Ashcroft's daily prayer meeting "strikes me and a lot of others as offensive, disrespectful, and unconstitutional." Other critics called the sessions "alienating."

Oh, the horror! A religious man is our nation's attorney general!

Ashcroft isn't the only one who holds prayer meetings. Many members of Congress hold prayer meetings at the Capitol. Ashcroft's meetings are not mandatory--employees are welcome, but they're not required to attend. Even the sitting president, over the years, has attended prayer meetings. For nearly 100 years, the Congress sponsored religious services on Sunday mornings.

So what's wrong with Ashcroft holding prayer meetings? Isn't he just exercising his constitutionally protected freedom of religion?

Yes, but this is different. This is a conservative attorney general in a Republican administration. Which means he's Democrat Enemy Number One. The Democrats wailed against his nomination in January, and they haven't stopped wailing. Now they're looking to exploit any aspect of his character. And the media have found willing assistants in hypersensitive workers who are offended by another's free exercise of religion.

What's next for the Washington Post? Are they going to find gay Justice Department employees who are offended by John Ashcroft's traditional arriage?

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/5/14/222211.shtml

 

[Todd]

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/monacharen/mc20010515.shtml

Mona Charen May 15, 2001

Bulletin: Ashcroft Prays In The Office

The big lead story on the front page of The Washington Post Monday morning is the shocking news about what John Ashcroft has been caught doing in his office -- praying! Whatever next? Acts of loving kindness and mercy? And when you consider what some presidents have done in their offices ...

I am not among the Washington Post-hating right. Though it's a liberal newspaper, it isn't nearly as biased as its competitor (in the influence market), The New York Times. In some stories, you can almost hear the grunts of effort as it conscientiously attempts to present both sides.

But liberals, even liberals trying to be fair, do not make the same news judgments as conservatives. That's why the Ashcroft story is so revealing. They truly believe that a daily Bible study and prayer session is controversial -- and sufficiently newsworthy to merit front-page treatment! Would they have treated the story the same way if Ashcroft began each day studying Confucius? Or if Joe Lieberman were attorney general and began each day with morning devotions, as observant Jews do, would that be cause for front-page treatment?

As he did while a U.S. senator, John Ashcroft starts each day at 8 a.m. by reading a section of scripture. Between three and 30 staffers, including one Orthodox Jew, participate in what they call RAMP -- "read, argue, memorize and pray."

A number of Justice Department employees are offended. "It's alienating," one lawyer told the Post. "He's using public spaces to have a personally meaningful event to which I would not be welcome, nor would I feel welcome." Another was more strident, and more pompous, "The purpose of the Department of Justice is to do the business of the government, not to establish a religion. It strikes me and a lot of others as offensive, disrespectful and unconstitutional ..."

As far as the exclusion argument goes, Ashcroft has said that the prayer group is open to all. But the constitutional argument is a caricature of the liberal case against mixing church and state. In public, when their names are attached to what they say, liberals usually insist that they are all for religion. Some, like Barry Lynn of People United for the Separation of Church and State, insist that in their personal lives, they are quite pious. The only reason they oppose public displays of religion, they claim, is constitutional fastidiousness. But when offering anonymous quotes to The Washington Post, they reveal the truth, which is that they are getting pretty close to regarding religion itself, well Christianity anyway, as unconstitutional.

Now it is true that in a pluralistic society like ours a certain amount of tact among members of the majority religion is appreciated. I've been to countless meetings and dinners in which a prayer is offered "in Jesus' name." The ministers and priests who put it that way probably never consider that other believers cannot say "amen" when the prayer is concluded that way. Isn't it just as easy to speak of the almighty or the creator and leave no one out? (Atheists and agnostics are not left out when others are praying. They are not required to pray.)

But honestly, to suggest that Ashcroft is somehow compromising his position or offending the Constitution by praying every day -- as scores of senators, congressmen and judges also do -- really amounts to selective bullying. They are bullying the Christians and only the Christians.

The irony is that in the same week that The Washington Post broke the prayergate scandal, the Los Angeles Times issued a report on Ashcroft's tenure so far that suggests he's a man of his word. As he promised during his confirmation hearings, he has vigorously prosecuted the civil-rights laws (only committed left-wing ideologues ever doubted he would), aided black colleges, sent federal lawyers to Cincinnati to investigate white-on-black shootings, requested the extradition of a fugitive accused of murdering an abortionist and declared racial profiling a top priority.

But he's a dangerous fundamentalist if he cracks a Bible every day.

©2001 Creators Syndicate, Inc.

 

[Expertise]

Hey Todd

On a far more simplistic level.....

Did you ever consider the "office politics" aspect of it????

If i'm Jewish or Muslim or atheist or whatever and I don't go to these meetings am I hurting myself career wise as compared to another Penny-Hopper or Christian who is getting more "Face Time" with the Boss.

Its usually a bad idea not to share the same views or be "on the team" of your superiors.

Even if there is no "advantage" to attending, i'm sure the perception exists that there is. And my friend, perception especially in politics and or business means A LOT.

I would never attack the man for his religous views but I would for his actions. This is a dumb fuck move, he should keep prayer away from the office or to himself while he is there.

 

[Laurel]

Let me say this: if a government official was holding a daily Satanic worship in a public office, the same "he has a right to his religious beliefs" people would be threatening lawsuits, if not terrorism, against him. One of the reasons there is a need for a separation between church and state is because you cannot mix the two without some sort of implied endorsement and/or comdemnation by the government of a specific belief system.

 

[Expertise]

Let me say this: if a government official was holding a daily Satanic worship in a public office, the same "he has a right to his religious beliefs" people would be threatening lawsuits, if not terrorism, against him. One of the reasons there is a need for a separation between church and state is because you cannot mix the two without some sort of implied endorsement and/or comdemnation by the government of a specific belief system.

TAKE SHELTER!

The fact that Laurel and I agree on something that is not sports or music related is one of the signs that the apoccolypse is upon us!

 

[Todd]

ok so let me understand this:

In the whitehouse religion bad, extramartial sexual encouters good.

Thanks for clearing that up

 

[Expertise]

ok so let me understand this:

In the whitehouse religion bad, extramartial sexual encouters good.

Thanks for clearing that up

WOOHOO! Jimmy Swaggart for prez! That way we can have both in one wind tunnel tested hair do, which could also double as a missile defence sheild... just imagine the tax savings.

 

[Fleshmachine]

ok so let me understand this:

In the whitehouse religion bad, extramartial sexual encouters good.

Thanks for clearing that up

Wow now I can run for Prez. I'm not married but I'm all for extramarital affairs. I'm not religious, I'm a nihilist, I'm a ringer.

Now if it weren't for all of those nude photos of me floating around the net.........