God Don't Want No Coalescing

Dear Spaz,

On January 23^rd you issued a press release saying that Governor Blunt wasn't doing any private talking about selling MOHELA.  I guess they were so private you weren't invited.  Of course it could be that Blunt was just praying quietly about it so no one but God (the Christian one) was listening.  Well, God and Sallie Mae must have joined together on that one.  Perhaps that is an acceptable coalition in the view of our republican governor.  But I’m a bit confused.

To help guide us through acceptable prayers, gods and coalitions, Representative David Sater has introduced HCR 13.  Sater apparently thinks Carl Bearden’s HJR 39 is insufficient to clarify and guarantee the first amendment right to pray on public property. Maybe Sater just thinks we need to be clearer about which God we can pray to. 

HCR 13 Sater, David
Resolves that voluntary prayer in public schools, religious displays on public property, and the recognition of a Christian God are not a coalition of church and state. (LR# 4572L.02I):  “…we stand with the majority of our constituents and exercise the common sense that voluntary prayer in public schools and religious displays on public property are not a coalition of church and state, but rather the justified recognition of the positive role that Christianity has played in this great nation of ours, the United States of America.”

Sater, I’m sure, thinks we need to know that it is good to stand with the majority and exercise common sense; that it’s good to pray in public schools, to have Christmas trees on public property and to do so with the secure knowledge that doing so is not a coalition of church and state.  I had been really troubled by that, shaking in my snow boots actually, and am relieved that Sater is asking the General Assembly for clarification.  Without that clarification, I might have thought that my third grade daughter might be coalescing with the state when she says a prayer before lunch at school or when I, in the gallery of the House, join in its daily ritual of an opening prayer. Until this Resolution is adopted, Blunt should be very careful to avoid arrest as he prays for a good sale price for MOHELA. I was really getting concerned, Spaz, that the governor and my representatives, duly elected by the common sense of their majority constituents might be hauled off in cuffs any day now for coalescing of church and state.

But what I’m wondering, Spaz, is whether I should surmise that if someone prays to a non-Christian God then that would be a coalition and against the common sense of the majority. After all, as Sater so eloquently wrote, prayer to the Christian God is a justified recognition of the role that Christianity played in our nation (which he reminds us is the United States of America) and apparently no other religion played a positive role.  So common sense, I guess, would dictate that a similar prayer to God by a Jew or a Muslim or a Hindu would be a coalition and therefore not protected by the majority, let alone the constitution (of the United States of America.)

So Spaz, I’m wondering if you might issue one of your sorely needed releases giving us your insider’s knowledge on what public talking Blunt might do to advise non-Christian youth and parents on how to pray for loans to public colleges and universities and still avoid a coalition (and bankruptcy.)  Blunt seems to have that private versus public thing down pat and I don’t think Sater has given much thought to the positive role anyone other than his Christian voters might contribute to this great state of ours, the State of Missouri.  So I await with blunted breath your clarifying release.