Prayer at New College of Florida
Prayer at New College of Florida
Is that even legal?
The Last 60 Days
I sent this tweet out when I signed my oath.
The then Chair of the Board of Trustees and General Counsel informed me that prayer would not be allowed. I then followed up with this thread, among others:
The Preamble of the Constitution of Florida: "We, the people of the State of Florida, being grateful to Almighty God for our constitutional liberty, in order to secure its benefits, perfect our government, insure domestic tranquility, maintain public order, and guarantee equal civil and political rights to all, do ordain and establish this constitution." https://flsenate.gov/Laws/Constitution#A1S01… When I read this and contemplate the oath I have taken, it is clear that I am duty-bound and obligated to fight the New College of Florida's decision to not allow me to open our Board of Trustees meeting in prayer. Our state constitution is written from gratitude to Almighty God. To think that the state would establish gratitude to Almighty God and then prevent others from doing the same is nonsensical.
From there, I was told that my request to pray before the meeting was reviewed again, and indeed it was allowed. I was asked if I would like to have the campus pastor pray. I said, “Thank you, but no, I would like to pray.”
Then the agenda was sent out, and I was told that it was decided that the campus pastor would pray. Fair enough, I suppose that is the Chair’s prerogative. I was comfortable with this decision. I would keep asking to pray myself, and if I kept being denied, that would be fine. As a member of the Board, I could seek to bring the issue to a vote, or I could seek to vote for a new chair, but that would be the extent of my legal recourse. I am only one of 13 trustees.
I will continue to seek to open a Board of Trustee meeting by giving the prayer myself. So far, in two in-person meetings, I have been denied by two different Chairs. I am okay with not getting my way if the process is just and legal. The only caveat to this statement that I would make is that I don’t believe that it is illegal or even inappropriate for a Trustee, in general, to give the prayer. In this case, I would again be obligated to fight that decision or be proven wrong legally.
This issue has been and continues to be a controversial issue. The tweet continues to receive blowback. I have left it as my pinned tweet because the discourse is a strategic part of winning the peace. And that is my goal, peace, not just for New College but also for the nation.
Addressing The Addressable Complaints and Arguments
This tweet represented the most significant percentage of addressable arguments. Many others were vitriolic without much substance. But this graphic and tweet encompassed the separation of church and state argument, citing the first amendment’s establishment clause.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The establishment clause has been erroneously warped and abused in the media to be equated with some atheist hegemony in all government institutions. First, the constitution limits government power and should be viewed that way. Second, the constitution refers to God and our collective relationship with Him. So to pretend that the constitution prohibits the free exercise of our collective relationship with God is absurd. Third, the establishment clause limits congress, not the states nor local governments.
If you are willing to view the Town of Greece ruling as having a bearing on this issue, we should consider Justice Kennedy’s opinion. He writes, “legislative bodies do not engage in impermissible coercion merely by exposing constituents to prayer they would rather not hear and in which they need not participate…Absent a pattern of prayers that over time denigrate, proselytize, or betray an impermissible government purpose, a challenge based solely on the content of a particular prayer will not likely establish a constitutional violation.”
The establishment clause doesn’t mean what most secularists think it means.
Also, there were a few tweets like this:
We have many examples of public prayers in the Bible. Daniel prayed publicly and was thrown into the lion’s den for it. The apostles prayed publicly. And here we have Jesus even explaining during His prayer why He is praying publicly in John 11:41b-42 NKJV.
And Jesus lifted up His eyes and said, “Father, I thank You that You have heard Me. 42 And I know that You always hear Me, but because of the people who are standing by I said this, that they may believe that You sent Me.”
Therefore, I find this argument against praying publicly to be biblically ignorant and/or not intelligent. I define intelligence as simultaneously holding two apparent contradictions in your mind and seeking a deeper truth. The deeper truth is that praying in public can be right and can be wrong. The difference is a person’s motivation; to use public prayer to show off or impress others is wrong, but sincere prayer from a humble heart is right.
Current Discourse with Professors Dr. Liz Leininger and Nicolas Delon
Some Observations Worth Noting
What other county has, at its founding, been so dominated by a religion and chartered such freedoms for other religions? Our constitution is the most significant document for ensuring freedom by limiting government in the history of the world. It was Christianity that dominated the populace. Compare and contrast this with Muslim or Buddhist dominated countries where Jews and Christians are treated somewhere between second-class citizens and outlawed.
Also, the state-sponsored woke narrative is out of touch with the population of this country and Florida specifically. The narrative is that Americans are secular, have no faith in God, and certainly not the God of the Bible. This recent Pew Research study would shock the average young American today.
Pew Research Center, Religious Landscape Study
If you add the Jewish faith’s 3% to Christianity's 70%, you will end up with 73% Judeo/Christian Faith to 3% other faiths. Doing some napkin math here, given an average of four trustee meetings per year, would mean that you could go approximately 18.25 years without having a prayer from another faith before making a solid statistical argument of improper representation. Of course, I am not advocating such (insert legal qualifiers here; I’m not the decision maker, but I’m one of 13 trustees, etc.).
The Essence of the Complaint
If I could distill the essence of the complaint into a comment that resonates with many, it would be, “I don’t think that prayer belongs in any form of government. And if it does, it better be fair and inclusive.” In this statement is an inherent activism that New College of Florida has instilled and codified in its culture. And that activism seeks to find a virtue, in this case, inclusiveness, and then attack the fabric of our society from said virtue. In this case, it attacks religious freedoms from inclusiveness.
It is a difficult question and takes a little longer than a tweet to answer. Our constitutional republic is a perfectly adequate framework to guide the answer. If you don’t like the prayer, the selection of prayer givers, or the prayers themselves, there is plenty of positive and productive recourse. The prayer giver could not be asked to pray again. Simple. What is the damage caused? It is not coercion to simply listen to a prayer you disagree with. Second, if the Board doesn’t like the patterns of prayers, they can say something. If they are not heard, then they can elect a new chair. If the Board of Governors finds fault with the prayers, action could also be taken here. And ultimately, new representatives, including our Governor, can be elected through the ballot box and appoint new trustees. Additionally, as we have seen, public comment can be made at the board meeting, and inquiries, like the one above from Dr. Liz Leininger, can be put forth.
Please also know the hesitancy to engage in this debate. It is implied that Dr. Leininger and Delon are fishing for some gotchya statement in the line of questioning. Something that could be used by a media outlet to slant a story. Something that could bring notoriety. Or something that an activist judge could use to ignore jurisprudence and use a political argument to set an unconstitutional precedent. The unfortunate result of this type of gotchya banter is its stifling effect on public discourse. There is an impulsive search for another grievance to build a narrative of American colonization, racism, and injustice that can only be solved by tearing down American freedoms and institutions. Tearing down is easy and intoxicating and very popular with many young people. Building up starts with dialogue. And I thank Dr. Leininger for her patience in waiting for my reply. I expect to hear more and continue the discussion.
Here is a summary of my assertions thus far:
It is perfectly legal to open in prayer.
Ad hominem attacks won’t dissuade me from standing up for our freedoms.
Our country was founded on Judeo/Christian values giving birth to unprecedented religious freedoms in the history of the world.
Judeo/Christian beliefs still dominate Florida’s population.
Floridians want educators to train our students to preserve our freedoms.
Floridians don’t want to pay educators to train our students to seek to be offended, identify as victims, and become activists to destroy our institutional freedoms.
Prayer at New College of Florida
Great post, Trustee Speir.
I only have one comment. When you say:
“Please also know the hesitancy to engage in this debate. It is implied that Dr. Leininger and Delon are fishing for some gotchya statement in the line of questioning. Something that could be used by a media outlet to slant a story. Something that could bring notoriety. Or something that an activist judge could use to ignore jurisprudence and use a political argument to set an unconstitutional precedent.”
--Trust that instinct. You’re absolutely correct. There’s no need to engage with those who are uninterested in altruistic discourse and who seek nothing other than to box you into a position or statement they can then use against you. I respect Professor Delon and feel that he is sincere in his intellectual inquiry. But be very wary when engaging with the other mentioned Professor.
Look in any phone book, there are thousands of Christian churches . Millions in the nation, the largest denomination of all Americans is Christian. Not only because our forefathers brought it here - but also because it evolved to fit our nations uniqueness. John Wesley for example got here soon after Georgia was an original colony, came to convert Indians, couldn’t even lead local Christians and went back to England a failure. But while back in England, he began to preach to the poor and downtrodden and drunks and the Great Awakening he started jumped the pond - he comes John Wesley’s ideas into the USA highly successful in increase in Christians ! All this when we were English citizens, we were supporting each other in betterment and love - as Christian’s. Circuit riding John Wesley types.
It’s a Christian nation. America is a Christian nation. The world knows India is Hindu. Nobody argues it. The celebrations express it! Same for Ramadan among Muslim nations. We today as a nation celebrate Easter and Christmas, marry in church ceremonies, and are buried with ministers or pastors of the Christian faith officiating. That’s a majority. That’s a Christian nation.
Anyone in America is free to reject their roots. We don’t harm atheists or agnostics. But they are not a founding part of our heritage and Christ is. Our entire justice depends on Judeo-Christianity and our form of democracy let’s you choose freedom. Even from God.
However, the minority over here - the nonbelievers - assume so much power ! For example, a Christian Eddie Speir is sharing the power to fire or hire or change the entire curriculum of a failing school that has 1/2 the students it needs to be viable; the minority goes mad as a wet hen, offended. They refuse to acknowledge Eddie Speir has power. They chastise him, even demand “ any prayer you say must contain all religions not to offend” - and the person making that statement? that person does not understand democracy works through majority rule with minority rights - her type of anger and silly suggestion is a tyranny of the minority; overstepping the bounds of a fair system. Why? She is not in charge, but pretends to be.
A single prayer by a single trustee has become a bright light. It reveals how far out of line, how disrespectful a certain type of person has become in the UNITED STATES. Many exist but they don’t want a “ name” attached, so given the circumstances I’m calling them “ the minority,” as proven through American heritage and Florida population. Minority cannot rule the majority. Not in a Democratic nation.
I grew up Christian. In my high school years a student read a devotional over the loud speaker - a different student each morning. It let us all think about goodness and love, early each morning, daily. It wasn’t proselytizing. It was normal, and I’m sorry that something so kind and so simple has become all caught up in what I can only call the misuse of freedom in a nation where majority rule, minority rights is the backbone of our faith in our Constitution.
Understand your position. It’s not your decision. Eddie Spier represents the majority. Behave and let the man pray.
It’s one prayer. A sinkhole won’t devour the meeting, neither will alligators, nor lightening strike protesters wearing a cross between a Taliban and Puritan mock-up, although the majority of Floridians realize such heavy cloth’s a sure-fire heat stroke in the hot sun and humidity of SW Florida.