Quote Originally Posted by Beskar View Post
It raises up another point, PVC, are you simply attacking the "athiest" for being an atheist? What about if it was a Muslim, Hindu or another faith? It is pretty low of you if you are doing it simply because they are atheist.

As for the force-council mass, no one should have to leave the room, simply because some people want to pray at the start of the meeting. They can do it in their own time. I don't really care what they are doing, but I am not paying for people to do a private activity and not doing their job. When I am in Tesco, I don't want to listen to a sermon from a cashier, I want to have my grocerys dinged and pay for service. If the councillors organised a pre-meeting ebay hunt, I wouldn't be amused either.

Also, what is to stop the councillors from meeting up before or after work to pray?
You're still upset because you think I called you immoral, aren't you?

Well I didn't mean to imply that, and I'm sorry that I offended you.

To clarify the relevent point: I have said repeatedly in this thread (including in response to you) that the manner in which the Council is run should be decided by the Council by democratic vote; particularly when there is only one dissenter. In this instance we have a Council which has decided democratically (multiple Councils in point of fact) that they wish to formally say a prayer before opening business. This is democratically decided view of the democratically elected Councillors; it should not be overridden by the National Secular Societ, or anyone else.

In particular, the Courts should not make a habit of interferring in the running of the Executive, we don't use them for that.

If the Council had democratically voted to remove the prayers, replace them with prayers from another faith, or have a "moment of reflection" I would be equally happy with that.

What I object to is an ideologically motivated national society with large reserves of cash using the Courts to bully a small and impoverished Town Council for the sake of making an ideological point.

Now, let me be COMPLETELY clear on this point Beskar, because I think you have misunderstood the situation slightly. This is not a "forced-Mass", which would involve compelling the atheist to take Holy Communion from a Priest before opening proceedings, it is a short prayer said before proceedings.

So my question to you is the same as my question to everyone else: Namely, how is it better to "force" the entire Council, bar one, to meet beofre formal proceedings to have this prayer than it is to "force" one man to leave whilst it is said In Council? Surely it is better to inconvenience one man than ten others?