OPINION – An out-of-town atheist pressure group blasted our town council because someone opened a meeting with scripture and a few individuals took offense. Cue the claims of “divisive,” “unconstitutional,” “alienation.” Translation: if any resident thanks God aloud, constitutional protections crumble. Nonsense.
Here are the facts — moral and lawful. The Constitution bars establishment; it doesn’t ban personal religious expression in a public forum. Arizona law is no different on that point: the town does not organize, endorse or fund religious exercise — members speak for themselves. Supreme Court rulings — Town of Greece, American Legion, Shurtleff, Kennedy — affirm this basic principle: equal access and personal exercise are protected. The test is coercion or discrimination, not whether a spectator gets offended.
At the council meeting, no one was compelled to pray, pledge, bow or agree. That is neutrality, not endorsement. Demanding a gag order on councilmembers’ conscience because someone “felt alienated” is a heckler’s veto in moral disguise. Such a shackle would chill protected speech and religious freedom — seemingly the outcome the atheist pressure group seeks.
