WASHINGTON — U.S. Rep. Gresham Barrett wants public
officials to be able to pray openly at a public meeting — and invoke
a specific deity’s name if they wish.
If you don’t like that, Barrett says, you can just leave the
room.
“I assume some people will say this is an extreme measure,” said
the Republican from Westminster, who invokes Jesus’ name when he
prays in public.
“We’re trying to bring it back to what the framers of the
Constitution had in mind.”
After introducing a bill Thursday that he said would protect the
rights of elected and appointed officials to pray openly, Barrett
was asked about those who might take offense at the invocation of
Jesus’ name in a public meeting.
“The person doesn’t have to be in the room,” said Barrett, whose
district covers the western part of the state from Pickens to Aiken
county.
“That’s way too close to, ‘If you don’t like the way we do it
here down South, go home,’” said the Rev. Joseph Darby, pastor of
Charleston’s Morris Brown AME Church. “If I, as a Christian
minister, can refer to ‘the Creator’ when praying in public, so can
a public official.
“I’m bothered by Christians who think Jesus is so small they have
to pass a law.”
Barrett’s bill would move some of the most controversial cases
about public prayer from federal to state courts.
Barrett noted that while the Constitution prohibits Congress from
passing laws “respecting an establishment of religion,” it also
prohibits laws that would inhibit the free exercise of religion.
It is the latter that the bill seeks to protect, he said. It
would allow public officials “to pray in public as they see fit, no
matter their religion.”
Barrett, who said he personally has never been challenged on his
public prayers, introduced the bill in the wake of an August federal
appeals court ruling that said prayers invoking Jesus’ name at Great
Falls Town Council meetings are unconstitutional
Under Barrett’s bill, federal courts would not hear such
cases.
The Constitution would allow it, said Eldon Wedlock, a USC
professor of constitutional law. But the result would be a
“nightmare” of conflicting state court decisions.
“This is an attempt to end-run the federal courts,” said Wedlock.
“The genius of the Constitution is that it says that certain areas
of the law should be the same,” no matter the state.
As for Barrett’s argument that he is simply defending the intent
of the framers of the Constitution, Wedlock said that’s not always a
noble goal.
“Slavery was constitutional once, too,” Wedlock said.
But Todd Young, policy director for the Atlanta-based
Southeastern Legal Foundation, said Barrett’s bill seems to make
sense.
While a South Carolina state court might permit public officials
to invoke Jesus or Allah in a public prayer, Massachusetts might
not.
Ultimately, Young said, voters could decide what prayer to permit
in public meetings.
“If you don’t like what public officials are saying, vote the
rascals out.”
Reach Markoe at (202) 383-6023 or lmarkoe@krwashington.com.
.gif){kind=spacer}
