The Wrong Path of Federal Courts

Here is yet another example of the courts, specifically the federal courts, being out of control. According to the Associated Press,

"A federal judge in Wisconsin ruled the National Day of Prayer unconstitutional Thursday, saying the day amounts to a call for religious action.

U.S. District Judge Barbara Crabb wrote that the government can no more enact laws supporting a day of prayer than it can encourage citizens to fast during Ramadan, attend a synagogue or practice magic."

This is what we get when a judge rules on rational, personal conviction and, I will add, an agenda and not on precedent and law. Crabb writes regarding her ruling,

"... that her ruling was not a judgment on the value of prayer. She noted government involvement in prayer may be constitutional if the conduct serves a "significant secular purpose" and doesn't amount to a call for religious action. But the National Day of Prayer crosses that line, she wrote.

"It goes beyond mere 'acknowledgment' of religion because its sole purpose is to encourage all citizens to engage in prayer, an inherently religious exercise that serves no secular function in this context," she wrote. "In this instance, the government has taken sides on a matter that must be left to individual conscience."

Judge Crabb's comments are problematic because as she attempts to remain general and vague what she has done is reveal her true ruling - the secular worldview is the only worldview that is constitutional. She claims her ruling is not a judgment on the value of prayer as long as it serves a "significant secular purpose."

She claims that the government can "no more enact laws supporting a day of prayer than it can encourage citizens to fast during Ramadan, attend a synagogue or practice magic." Really? If that is the case then her ruling is technically unconstitutional as it is enacting a law supporting a type of prayer, that which is secular. It is putting the government squarely on one side - that of the secular worldview. According to Judge Crabb, the government is not take sides in personal matters. She has a huge problem with that statement as the government does take sides in personal matters of all varieties.

Despite the government's attempt to sell us on this idea that the secular worldview is not really a worldview, it is a worldview that is marked by liberal theology and social tendencies. It is one that is marked by a large government and an elitist mentality. This is the dirty little secret that most liberal secular humanists do not want us to know. The liberal social agenda is an elitist agenda with a certain select group of people running the show - them.

Judge Crabb's goals are the goals of the liberal agenda, anything that empowers the individual or takes away from the government's power will be deemed "unconstitutional." Do not take my word for it; do your own study, and you will find the same thing I found.

The federal courts have been going in the wrong direction for many years. This is but one more example of that direction which has never been about the law or even justice. It has always been about power and more of it. Judge Crabb's ruling is not about the constitution of the past, but a ruling about what is now the only worldview that is constitutional today - that of the secular variety.