Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
An interesting situation in Warren, Michigan, where a local church has been allowed to set up a "Prayer Station" inside city hall:
For those who have fallen victim to job loss, medical or financial problems and aren't sure where to turn, a religious group behind a spiritual booth at City Hall is recommending faith as an option."Our goal would be that we would saturate our city and Metro Detroit with prayer in a very visible way," said the Rev. Darius Walden, the senior pastor for The Tabernacle, a Church of God congregation. "It is a misconception that the church is a building. The church is people."
The Freedom From Religion Foundation is asking questions:
The Freedom from Religion Foundation said resident concerns over the booth -- located in the lobby of city offices and adorned with a banner that simply reads "Prayer Station" -- prompted the nonprofit to file a request for copies of city policy, its rental agreement with the church and verification it is being charged to use the space. The group is also criticizing the city's failure to disassociate itself from the religious message of the church."This is ridiculous. Prayer should be private," said Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-president of the Wisconsin-based nonprofit. "A government is supposed to be neutral when it comes to religion."
Warren Mayor Jim Fouts said the city rents the space to any group that complies with policies and fills out the proper paperwork. The church is leasing the space free of charge, because it's a nonprofit.
If Mayor Fouts is correct and the city has a policy that allows any non-profit group to lease the space, it's unlikely that the courts would view this as a constitutional violation. In fact, they might well view it as a violation of the Free Speech Clause to prevent a church from leasing the space.
In a series of cases beginning with Lamb's Chapel v Center Moriches School District, the Supreme Court has held that when a government-owned building or property is made available for use by community groups it must be open to use by religious groups as well.
It will be interesting to see what information is turned over to the foundation.
Politics
Comments
As long as all faiths (and atheists) are allowed the same accommodation it's fine by me. Something tells me thought, that an muslim muzzein would probably cause some folks to get a bit upset; never mind what would happen when the Pastafarians showed up.
Posted by: democommie | June 27, 2009 9:43 AM
And if they remember that freedom of religion is a two way street. Any atheist visitor is welcomed to make vocal comments directed at the prayer booth, including the idiocy of a 'prayer booth'.
Posted by: MarkusR | June 27, 2009 10:23 AM
"Our goal would be that we would saturate our city and Metro Detroit with prayer in a very visible way,"
I think that statement says a lot.
This isn't about praying to God. If it were, there would be no need to have a public booth, or to advertise it. There would be no need for the booth to be in thw town hall. No Christian I have spoken with believes that God only listens to prayers said on government property - a quiet prayer offered in someone's own home would be as effective as one given in public.
No, this is about putting on a show of prayer that everyone can see. Even the organiser admits the idea is for the prayers to be 'very visible.' The purpose of the booth is to make an announcement to the whole down: "Christianity is the only religion endorsed by your local government, and we're so powerful we can erect a small monument to our religion in the town hall."
It's the same with the ten commandments displays and the crosses on public property. They arn't messages to show God how he is loved, because God would need no such message to know. They are statements to the rest of the community, expressions of power to make sure everyone knows which religion is in charge.
Posted by: Suricou Raven | June 27, 2009 10:24 AM
This seems a little different than a community group renting a government building. In this case, you have a church using City Hall free of charge for use as a Church. That is what a church is after all - a prayer station.
And since it is being used as a church, one has to ask what need does the church have of municipal property. After all, they have a perfectly good frackin' church building already sitting on government-subsidized land to be used specifically for that purpose. It seems clear that the reason for this prayer center is to proselytize in City Hall. Talk about chutzpah!
If this arrangement is considered constitutional, then religious sects need not erect their own churches - they can simply petition the government to provide government facilities to be used as their tabernacles.
I am also kinda surprised that space has only been made for one religious sect without demanding that a reasonable cross section of religious sects - say, Christian, Jewish, and Muslim - all be given equal space simultaneously, so that even the appearance of favor not be shown to the Christian sect. (As it is almost always the Christian sect that does this sort of thing, isn't it?)
Posted by: Gingerbaker | June 27, 2009 10:28 AM
I'm trying to figure out what on earth those two statements have to do with each other. The latter is easy to agree with, but what business does an FFRF-er have telling religious people that they should only pray in private? If they want to pray in city hall, let them pray in city hall. So long as no city official is telling people to pray, or leading them in prayer, I don't see what the problem is.
Posted by: Gretchen | June 27, 2009 10:28 AM
Or, you know, "We recognize that a lot of people are going through a hard time right now, and want to show our support by praying together for each other in a public place, and inviting them to join us."
Posted by: Gretchen | June 27, 2009 10:33 AM
I assume the purpose it to allow anyone to enter the booth for a little private time with their God of choice? Weird ideas these Christians have.
Posted by: Owen | June 27, 2009 10:34 AM
"'Our goal would be that we would saturate our city and Metro Detroit with prayer in a very visible way,' said the Rev. Darius Walden....'"
Matthew 6:5-6
Posted by: Ferrous Patella | June 27, 2009 10:57 AM
I don't really see what the problem is, as long as everything is on the up and up. I'd guess it is.
But it is somewhat irritating that they picked City Hall.
Posted by: Leni | June 27, 2009 10:58 AM
I really really hope another non-profit group takes them up on their offer to lease some space in the courthouse (for free, of course). What would be the most ridiculous non-profit to have a display in their courthouse? It's too bad the Pastafarians haven't applied for non-profit status yet.
Posted by: Iason Ouabache | June 27, 2009 11:23 AM
So, by this logic, a non-profit could also set up a meditation booth, or a tarot booth, or a voodoo-doll booth, or a confessional. City Hall could be packed with religious booths of all kinds.
Funny, when I think of going to city hall, I don't usually consider it a place for religious observances, even when I lived in Kentucky. There are plenty of church buildings for that.
BTW, a lot of Pentecostal/AoG churches consider city and county governments unsaved, and make special efforts to send "prayer energy" during worship services toward City Hall and the Courthouse. This CoG pastor is taking it one step further.
Posted by: wheatdogg | June 27, 2009 11:40 AM
Posted by: Herod the Freemason | June 27, 2009 11:45 AM
As he/she of the metal kneecap pointed out, according to the NT it would actually be infinitely more effective.
If the policy is as the city states, I expect to see an NCOD event at city hall on October 11.
Posted by: ebohlman | June 27, 2009 11:49 AM
Gretchen said:
Are you saying that a government-subsidized chapel in City Hall complete with "Prayer Station" banner is telling people not to pray? Or is neutral on the issue of prayer?
When a government building is used for community groups whether they be religious or not, it seems to me that there is a secular benefit to the community because these organizations have no other means to hold these meetings. But that is not the case here. There is no community benefit because the there is no need for the space.
I can't see how this "Prayer Station" has any role other than as a religious church, which seems to me to be the opposite of religion neutral. This is a government sponsored church, which seems to me to be the very definition of what is unconstitutional.
Posted by: Gingerbaker | June 27, 2009 12:37 PM
Neutral on the issue of prayer, yes, if any other non-profit organization could do exactly the same thing. Or do you believe that the First Amendment doesn't protect the right of private citizens to religious expression in public?
Posted by: Gretchen | June 27, 2009 1:43 PM
The acid test, as in so many cases where the government plays hide-the-sausauge on the Establishment Clause, will come when someone tries to promote a minority religious (or anti-religious) view in the same way.
Do I really believe the city is trying to be neutral towards religion in this case? Not for a second. Colour me cynical.
Posted by: DaveL | June 27, 2009 1:54 PM
This group sees itself as doing a community service so the choice of a public space does not strike me as odd. As someone who works for a non-profit I think the idea is quite clever, and if we were in need of space, would be looking into this immediately. Cities lease space to non-profit agencies all the time. Habitat for Humanity (a christian based organization) has offices located in city buildings but this doesn't seem to raise hackles. There are other charities and religious based organizations that utilize city and state facilities for a variety services which are completely unrelated to that city's government. City buildings are a good place to go to find out what community services exist. I don't buy that people are so stupid as to think just because a group houses itself in a city building, it speaks for the city. It sucks to be outsmarted. Unless like groups were previously denied similar space or requests, I don't see a problem here only sour grapes that someone more palatable didn't do it first.
Posted by: Anna | June 27, 2009 2:01 PM
If this is open to any and all, I wonder if we can get someone to set up a small altar to Ba'al, where passers-by can burn some incense - or something similar (perhaps change the god or goddess daily).
Posted by: Badger3k | June 27, 2009 2:01 PM
I would be intensely annoyed to walk into my local government buildings and find someone praying in a christian chapel, because that's what the "prayer station" sounds like.
Unless they don't mind someone like me standing within earshot of the "PS" talking about those mofo bastards in the mayor's officce and those lying sacks of shit in the Assessor's office and those thieving s.o.b.'s on the city council. I curse with the intensity that others use for their "praying"--although with considerably less expectation that it will make a material difference--and both have about the same effect, which is to say, none.
Posted by: democommie | June 27, 2009 2:05 PM
Agreed. Hopefully, someone from Detroit has thought of this also.
Posted by: mxh | June 27, 2009 2:09 PM
I would think that someone cruising through city hall spouting obscenities is not all to uncommon and part of what any group who keeps offices there would have to deal with. On second thought, maybe housing my organization in city hall ain't so great after all....
Posted by: Anna | June 27, 2009 2:15 PM
Is NAMBLA a 503(c) organization?
Posted by: kehrsam | June 27, 2009 2:25 PM
I'd like to see someone ask for several private chambers reserved for solitary rather than group prayer. And maybe ask for footbaths
Posted by: rnb | June 27, 2009 2:26 PM
democommie:
I don't know about anyone else here, but as long as there's strippers for both sexes, the beer is a local micro and not cheap swill, and the ramen is as good as I'd find at Wagamama in Boston, I'd go for it.
Posted by: Brian X | June 27, 2009 2:30 PM
How about an Asatru prayer-station, complete with drinking-horns and casks of mead, where those who feel inclined can loudly toast the Gods, the Ancestors, and the Heroes?
As to Gretchen's point, most government buildings are very limited in terms of floor-space, so there'd only be so much room for prayer-stations in general before actual public functions are compromised and foot-traffic gets restricted. How many prayer-stations can fit in a courthouse? Not nearly as many as the number of religions equally deserving of such accomodation. So how does one decide which religion gets favored?
Posted by: Raging Bee | June 27, 2009 5:13 PM
Sorry to be off topic but here is a news item about NRA/Fundies hving a gun love fest at a Louisville,Kentucky chruch.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090604/ap_on_re_us/us_guns_in_church
Oh my...WWJD? I bet he would take that 100,000 Terrawatt phaser out from under his robe and show these fools what a real weapon is :) Light up that podium! Make that pipe organ sing!
Posted by: naturalist | June 28, 2009 5:45 AM
Gretchen, I think you are deliberately confusing "public" with "government building". There are already public places to practice religious observances, they are called churches if I remember correctly.
Posted by: DJ | June 28, 2009 9:12 AM
Raging Bee
How much do you get out? I have lived in a number of cities across the US and whether or not you agree with the who or what uses city office space, this is a poor assumption. I used to love going to the City Hall in my home town because we could run unobstructed down long open corridors for quite a while before we actually ever saw an adult - and the outdoor waiting area was used primarily by skateboarders. City Hall and the Courthouse are different buildings in this case and in most other places I have lived and I don't believe any of those courthouses housed outside non-profit groups of any kind, but I'm not going to make stupid assumptions since I do not regularly frequent local courthouses. Unlike City Hall which is a hub for community services, the courthouse has a single purpose. While it makes sense to offer space to outside community groups at city hall,it makes no sense to do so at the courthouse - unless it is directly related to legal service. Unless other requests were made and denied, no one is getting favored here. If other groups begin to request space and it becomes a problem, then the city will need to address it. At this point there is no indication that anyones rights are being denied. There is also no indication that the city will be inundated by various religious groups clamoring for space. So unless religion B and C make similar requests, the complaints and jumps to I hate group X so lets add opposing group Y just spiteful, childish, and wingnut like behavior.
Posted by: Anna | June 28, 2009 11:37 AM
"How much do you get out? I have lived in a number of cities across the US and whether or not you agree with the who or what uses city office space, this is a poor assumption. I used to love going to the City Hall in my home town because we could run unobstructed down long open corridors for quite a while before we actually ever saw an adult - and the outdoor waiting area was used primarily by skateboarders."
I get out a fair amount and none of the city halls I've been in lately had room to spare; in most cases they were overcrowded and not as well maintained, as in years past, because of funding issues.
I have lived an worked in about 10 different cities and towns in the last 20 years and skateboarding in public areas or on public ways is outlawed, except in designated skateboarding areas, in the majority of them. Doesn't mean kids won't do it; it does mean that they'll be ticketed or grabbed up if caught.
""Our goal would be that we would saturate our city and Metro Detroit with prayer in a very visible way," said the Rev. Darius Walden, the senior pastor for The Tabernacle, a Church of God congregation. "It is a misconception that the church is a building. The church is people.""
If what Rev. Walden says is true, then why do they need a church OR a praying station. Why can't he and the rest of the skypilots prosletyze and pray out of doors, in the GOD given weather that is made for them?
Posted by: democommie | June 28, 2009 4:36 PM
It depends.
Pretty much anyone who belives in a god, belives that that god is either not omniscient, not omnipotent, or not omnibenevolent. Otherwise it would make no sense.
The liberal xtians don't really belive that god is omnipotent. He'd like to help out, but he just can't - for one reason or another.
The fundies belive that god is not omnibenevolent. He will happily roast the unbelivers in hellfire for all eternity.
That leaves the people who set up this booth - the traditional christians. God is willing and able to help, but first you have to somehow get his attention. Stained glass, candles, mass rallies and "prayer saturation" is how you go about it.
Posted by: Paul Murray | June 28, 2009 10:43 PM
@Paul Murray #30:
Church of God = traditional christian? It will be interesting to see you make that claim good.
Posted by: Robin Levett | June 30, 2009 8:21 AM
It is so funny how people get offended when God's people show up and display His character and heart. These people who are for the separation of church and state, when actually the forefathers ruled the government by the Bible. In their unbelieving and so called intellectual minds they have rejected God and serve themselves. they complain about everything and really do nothing about it. Jesus said "if your not for me, your against me." You either have God as your father or the devil. God's children reflect him and the devil's children reflect him with their complaints, unbelieve, criticism and offenses.
Posted by: Travis | July 4, 2009 7:24 PM
These people who are for the separation of church and state, when actually the forefathers ruled the government by the Bible. In their unbelieving and so called intellectual minds they have rejected God and serve themselves. they complain about everything and really do nothing about it. Jesus said "if your not for me, your against me." You either have God as your father or the devil. God's children reflect him and the devil's children reflect him with their complaints, unbelieve, criticism and offenses.
Posted by: Travis | July 4, 2009 7:25 PM
Those who are against Christians and God are children of the devil.
Posted by: Travis | July 4, 2009 7:28 PM
Posted by: Taz | July 4, 2009 7:37 PM
Jesus said "if your not for me, your against me."
Yeah that's when Jesus was casting out demons from people. Healing blind and deaf people by casting out the demons from them. That's some pretty sophisticated theology there somewhere, I'm sure.
And then somebody thinks he casts out demons by using Satan powers, so he says, "And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?"
Well, maybe he could cast out just a couple demons, or maybe he could have a kingdom with demons not inside of people or something. Duh!
And then follows more verses full of more non sequiturs and idiot logic that people still today apparently think are truly "wise".
Posted by: 386sx | July 4, 2009 8:08 PM
Travis:
I'm not a KKKristian, so I think I can tell you to go fuck yourself without endangering myself.
Posted by: democommie | July 5, 2009 3:27 PM
Travis - So, you think I'm a 'child of the Devil', eh?
Well all I can say to you then is: "Good morning father". ŏ - DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | July 5, 2009 3:41 PM