In Public Prayer Case, Scalia Asks ‘What About Devil Worshippers?’ A Satanist Responds.

Is there 1 prayer to make Christians, Jews, Muslims, Atheists, Polytheists, Wiccans, and Devil Worshippers all happy?

The Supreme Court will hear a case that could have significant ramifications on the government's ability to regulate emissions.
National Journal
Brian Resnick
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Brian Resnick
Nov. 6, 2013, 10:21 a.m.

At the Su­preme Court on Wed­nes­day, the justices heard ar­gu­ments for a case styled Town of Greece v. Gal­lo­way, in which a very ba­sic ques­tion pro­voked long, long, and im­per­fect an­swers.

JUSTICE SCALIA: What about dev­il wor­ship­pers?

Should the town of Greece, loc­ated in the tun­dra out­side of Rochester, N.Y., be al­lowed to start a monthly meet­ing with a pray­er? The plaintiffs say the Chris­ti­an over­tones of the monthly in­voc­a­tion make them un­com­fort­able, and ar­gue that it con­sti­tutes a gov­ern­ment en­dorse­ment of Chris­tian­ity.

In 1983, the Court de­term­ined in Marsh v. Cham­bers that the state of Neb­raska could start le­gis­lat­ive pro­ceed­ings with a pray­er, but, as SCOTUS­b­log ex­plains it, the ex­act cutoff as to when pray­er be­comes state-en­dorsed re­li­gion has nev­er been drawn, aside from a vague re­stric­tion on not pros­elyt­iz­ing or de­noun­cing out­right an­oth­er re­li­gion.

As part of the or­al ar­gu­ment Wed­nes­day, the justices wondered wheth­er there could pos­sibly be one pray­er nondenom­in­a­tion­al enough to be cool with Chris­ti­ans, and, let’s say, wor­ship­pers of Zeus. They were pick­ing apart the ar­gu­ment of Douglas Lay­cock, a pro­fess­or of law and re­li­gion at the Uni­versity of Vir­gin­ia, who said that pray­ers could be al­lowed if they were not sec­tari­an. 

“Well, if that is your ar­gu­ment, then you are really say­ing you can nev­er have pray­er at a town meet­ing,” Justice Samuel Alito said. Lay­cock then tried to de­fend his po­s­i­tion.

The ex­change that fol­lows high­lights the cent­ral prob­lem of the is­sue: How do you both al­low pub­lic pray­er and be all in­clus­ive? The an­swer veers in­to the ab­surd, dis­sect­ing pray­ers in­to their least of­fens­ive and vaguest com­pon­ents, ap­prov­ing the ones that pass a sniff test, but still im­pli­citly in­voke God and there­fore will of­fend someone, some­where. Justice Ant­on­in Scalia, the staunch Cath­ol­ic, jumped in won­der­ing wheth­er such a pray­er could make dev­il wor­ship­pers happy.

For the re­cord, Lu­cien Greaves, the com­mu­nic­a­tions dir­ect­or of the Satan­ic Temple, says the an­swer is no.

“If the ques­tion is one of wheth­er or not there can be one pub­lic pray­er gen­er­al­ized enough to be all-in­clus­ive to every re­li­gion, the an­swer is ob­vi­ously no,” he wrote me via email.

“The dis­cus­sion re­gard­ing some type of all-in­clus­ive pub­lic pray­er na­ively as­sumes one type of re­li­gious con­struct (that of ser­vitude and su­per­nat­ur­al­ism) while seem­ingly dis­reg­ard­ing not only oth­er re­li­gious con­cep­tions, but the pres­ence of those who don’t wish to as­so­ci­ate them­selves with any type of re­li­gion what­so­ever.”

JUSTICE ALITO: All right. Give me an ex­ample. Give me an ex­ample of a pray­er that would be ac­cept­able to Chris­ti­ans, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus. Give me an ex­ample of a pray­er. Wic­cans, Baha’i.

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: And athe­ists.

JUSTICE SCALIA: And athe­ists. Throw in athe­ists, too.

(Laughter.)

MR. LAY­COCK: We — we take Marsh to — to im­ply that athe­ists can­not get full re­lief in this con­text, and the Mc­Creary dis­sent­ers said that ex­pli­citly. So points on which be­liev­ers are known to dis­agree is a — is a set that’s in the Amer­ic­an con­text, the Amer­ic­an civil re­li­gion, the Judeo-Chris­ti­an tra­di­tion — ­

JUSTICE ALITO: Give me an ex­ample then. I think the point about athe­ists is a good point. But ex­clude them for present pur­poses and give me an ex­ample of a pray­er that is ac­cept­able to all of the groups that I men­tioned.

MR. LAY­COCK: About a third of the pray­ers in this re­cord, Your Hon­or, are ac­cept­able.

JUSTICE ALITO: Give me an ex­ample.

MR. LAY­COCK: Can I have the joint ap­pendix? The pray­ers to the almighty, pray­ers to the cre­at­or.

JUSTICE ALITO: To “the almighty.”

MR. LAY­COCK: Yes.

JUSTICE ALITO: So if — if a par­tic­u­lar re­li­gion be­lieves in more than one god, that’s ac­cept­able to them?

MR. LAY­COCK: Well, some re­li­gions that be­lieve in more than one god be­lieve that all their many gods are mani­fest­a­tions of the one god. But the true poly­the­ists I think are also ex­cluded from the Mc­Creary dis­sent.

JUSTICE SCALIA: What about dev­il wor­ship­pers?

(Laughter.)

MR. LAY­COCK: Well, if dev­il wor­ship­pers be­lieve the dev­il is the almighty, they might be OK. But they’re prob­ably out —

(Laughter.)

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Who is go­ing to make this de­term­in­a­tion?

What We're Following See More »
JUST AS SENATE VOTES ITS DISAPPROVAL
Trump Backtracks on Putin's "Incredible Offer"
2 days ago
THE LATEST
ARMS CONTROL, SYRIA WERE DISCUSSED
Russians Refer to "Verbal Agreements" with Trump
3 days ago
THE LATEST

"Two days after President Trump’s summit with Russian President Vladi­mir Putin, Russian officials offered a string of assertions about what the two leaders had achieved. 'Important verbal agreements' were reached at the Helsinki meeting, Russia’s ambassador to the United States, Anatoly Antonov, told reporters in Moscow Wednesday, including preservation of the New Start and INF agreements," and cooperation in Syria.

Source:
WAS "GRUDGINGLY" CONVINCED
Trump Was Shown Proof of Russian Interference Before Inauguration
3 days ago
THE LATEST

"Two weeks before his inauguration, Donald J. Trump was shown highly classified intelligence indicating that President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia had personally ordered complex cyberattacks to sway the 2016 American election. The evidence included texts and emails from Russian military officers and information gleaned from a top-secret source close to Mr. Putin, who had described to the C.I.A. how the Kremlin decided to execute its campaign of hacking and disinformation. Mr. Trump sounded grudgingly convinced, according to several people who attended the intelligence briefing. But ever since, Mr. Trump has tried to cloud the very clear findings that he received on Jan. 6, 2017, which his own intelligence leaders have unanimously endorsed."

TAKE THAT, HATERS
Trump: High IQ People Loved the Putin Meeting
4 days ago
THE LATEST
"POLICY DIFFERENCES DON'T MATTER"
Comey Says to Vote Democratic This Fall
4 days ago
THE LATEST
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login