US Taxpayers Pay Over $1,600 Per Prayer To Congressional Chaplains

[TenEightyOne]

It's a non issue, of all the wasteful spendings it's no surprise this is one to be singled out. You must not spend a dime on a prayer but you must spend a fortune on the nsa(insert anything else).

Interestingly there has to be a plan for life after Earth. Guess which of the two spends is looking at something real?

 

[squadops]

Interestingly there has to be a plan for life after Earth. Guess which of the two spends is looking at something real?

Spend away at your something real, you'll meet no opposition in the U.S. from religion.

 

[huskeR32]

Why it bothers atheists so much is beyond my comprehension.

If we spent another $800,000 per year to have somebody (actually, I volunteer for this job...) stand up there right after the prayer was done and say "Oh by the way, the magical sky dad that dude just prayed to doesn't actually exist," do you really think that theists would just be cool with it?

 

[squadops]

Sure, why not?

Atheists seem to have a hatred for theists that is not reciprocated. Why all the anger?

 

[MatskiMonk]

Hey... in God you Trust... right?

 

[huskeR32]

Atheists seem to have a hatred for theists that is not reciprocated. Why all the anger?

I don't hate theists, and I don't think very many atheists do either. We would simply like to do away with any traces of religion in government. And before you try to claim that it's not actually an issue, let's look at what you just said:

We might have had more than one atheist leader in our times, but there is a reason they all proclaim at least an association with a religion

It's a problem that one must profess Christian faith in order to be an elected official; it shouldn't be remotely relevant.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Interestingly there has to be a plan for life after Earth. Guess which of the two spends is looking at something real?

If it's spending $300,000,000 so Obama can walk in grass for 6 hours vs. $800k a year for prayers I know where my vote goes.

If we spent another $800,000 per year to have somebody (actually, I volunteer for this job...) stand up there right after the prayer was done and say "Oh by the way, the magical sky dad that dude just prayed to doesn't actually exist," do you really think that theists would just be cool with it?

Why must 240 years of tradition be destroyed because of atheists? No one is harmed, the words are peaceful and uplifting. There's nothing confrontational about it. The amount of money is peanuts in the grand scheme of things. Atheists can tune it out and do a little silent meditation if they want. How about atheists get their own traditions and leave the prayer service alone?

 

[squadops]

@huskeR32

That depends on whether you think government represents the people or not to some degree. Religion does not impede a person's ability to uphold the constitution in any way whatsoever.

Do away with a person's conscience, that sounds like a sound plan

 

[huskeR32]

How about atheists get their own traditions and leave the prayer service alone?

That's exactly what I'm advocating for. Theists can keep their prayer, and atheists can start their own daily acknowledgement of reality. I'm glad we agree on this.

Do away with a person's conscience, that sounds like a sound plan

How did you get to this?

 

[Danoff]

No one is going to say, "I'm not going to be the leader of the greatest nation in the world if I can't play golf", either.

But they might choose not to be president if there is no down time, and that's a real possibility with that job. The president would probably go insane if they can't have some time to blow off steam (however they choose).

haha, there is no reason to be so against it of all things. Why it bothers atheists so much is beyond my comprehension. So what if they spend a bit to have a minister or whatever, they spend plenty of other money in frivolous ways.

How dare they?

I'm going to assume this is directed at me even though you give no indication who you're talking to (please stop that, I like to know when people respond to me).

The money should serve a purpose. Golf serves a purpose, this doesn't actually help anyone. Even religious people are not receiving a benefit from this.

 

[squadops]

That's exactly what I'm advocating for. Theists can keep their prayer, and atheists can start their own daily acknowledgement of reality. I'm glad we agree on this.



How did you get to this?

Stick with your reality by all means.

How did I get to this? It's pretty simple actually, what a silly question that I can leave the answer to someone much smarter than I could ever claim to be.

Conscience is the most sacred of all property; other property depending in part on positive law, the exercise of that, being a natural and unalienable right. To guard a man’s house as his castle, to pay public and enforce private debts with the most exact faith, can give no title to invade a man’s conscience which is more sacred than his castle, or to withhold from it that debt of protection, for which the public faith is pledged, by the very nature and original conditions of the social pact.

....

I'm going to assume this is directed at me even though you give no indication who you're talking to (please stop that, I like to know when people respond to me).

Nope, I'm conversing just in general, if I wanted to specifically address you I would have.

But they might choose not to be president if there is no down time, and that's a real possibility with that job. The president would probably go insane if they can't have some time to blow off steam (however they choose).

As long as it's not in the form of prayer?

 

[Danoff]

How did I get to this? It's pretty simple actually, what a silly question that I can leave the answer to someone much smarter than I could ever claim to be.

That doesn't address the point, which is why you think conscience is somehow "done away with".

Nope, I'm conversing just in general, if I wanted to specifically address you I would have.

Next time you converse in general about something I wrote, I'm asking you kindly to send a notice to me so that I can know to read it. Thanks.

 

[Johnnypenso]

But they might choose not to be president if there is no down time, and that's a real possibility with that job. The president would probably go insane if they can't have some time to blow off steam (however they choose).

The money should serve a purpose. Golf serves a purpose, this doesn't actually help anyone. Even religious people are not receiving a benefit from this.

No one said no downtime. I'd argue though that spending $300,000,000 walking on grass and hitting a little white ball is not really an efficient use of government funds and there are many more cost efficient ways a POTUS could be spending downtime. Wouldn't you? And how do you know no one is helped by the prayers?

 

[huskeR32]

How did I get to this? It's pretty simple actually, what a silly question that I can leave the answer to someone much smarter than I could ever claim to be.

I meant how did you get to this:

Do away with a person's conscience, that sounds like a sound plan

What did anybody say about "do(ing) away with" a person's conscience? Are you suggesting that if our Christian lawmakers don't hear a prayer every day, they'll suddenly turn into horrible people? Are most Christians really hanging by that thin of a thread?

 

[squadops]

Next time you converse in general about something I wrote, I'm asking you kindly to send a notice to me so that I can know to read it. Thanks.

These sorts of complaints are pointless, I would much rather converse than complain about how one might. There is a topic at hand.

What did anybody say about "do(ing) away with" a person's conscience? Are you suggesting that if our Christian lawmakers don't hear a prayer every day, they'll suddenly turn into horrible people? Are most Christians really hanging by that thin of a thread?

What is the problem exactly for you, it seems to me you are all for xyz as long as it fits into your narrow view. Is the main problem that the government pays for a service that they want, or is it a problem that you happen to disagree with what they are paying for?

Of course they could do away with it, if it was up to me we'd do away with much much more of federal government spending all together so, why is this one small thing such a thorn in your side other than the fact you have a distain?

 

[huskeR32]

I'd argue though that spending $300,000,000 walking on grass and hitting a little white ball is not really an efficient use of government funds and there are many more cost efficient ways a POTUS could be spending downtime.

The article said $3 million, how did that number suddenly increase 100x?

And you do realize that the vast majority of that money goes towards transportation and security details, right? In other words, anytime any president goes anywhere, similar expenses are going to be paid. So unless you are in fact advocating for no down time, then your point is moot.

 

[Danoff]

No one said no downtime. I'd argue though that spending $300,000,000 walking on grass and hitting a little white ball is not really an efficient use of government funds and there are many more cost efficient ways a POTUS could be spending downtime.

Pretty sure you have to leave that up to the guy who is deciding how to unwind.

Wouldn't you? And how do you know no one is helped by the prayers?

Let's investigate this. You have a guy saying something (praying) while everyone else is standing around thinking about what he's saying.

If there is a God, that's one person praying and others listening.
If there are multiple Gods, that's one person praying to a false god, and others listening.
If there is no God, that's one person wishing and others listening to the wish.
Either way, it's a single individual's thoughts being broadcast. Some of the people in the audience will agree, some will not. God gets to receive thoughts from some prayers and some people thinking "that's not what I think". If there are multiple Gods, it just incurs wrath.

Now let's imagine that there were a moment of silence to collect thoughts.

If there is a God, that's almost everyone praying slightly different prayers but each of which is the content of their hearts. Nobody is disagreeing because they're all just composing their own thoughts.
If there are multiple Gods then maybe one or two of the people in the audience is actually praying to one of them. This may incur slightly less wrath than when one person chooses the wrong deity to pray to.
If there are no Gods then it's just everyone making themselves happy.

So when we have one guy leading the prayer, none of those scenarios (if there is a god, if there are multiple gods, or if there are no gods) are better for anyone than if you just have a moment of silence to let all the crazy people have all their crazy thoughts in private. That is, nobody is better served except the guy getting paid.

 

[Danoff]

These sorts of complaints are pointless, I would much rather converse than complain about how one might. There is a topic at hand.

How exactly am I supposed to converse if I don't know there's a conversation? It's a courtesy I'm requesting.

 

[squadops]

How exactly am I supposed to converse if I don't know there's a conversation? It's a courtesy I'm requesting.

You come into a thread and read and post and wonder if there is a conversation happening?

Courtesy sure, I try to do that but what bothers me is the diversion. I honestly believe that the crying over a politician's religion be it sincere or not is a joke. As I said, there only duty is to uphold the constitution, how hard is that?

 

[Danoff]

You come into a thread and read and post and wonder if there is a conversation happening?

I can't do that for every thread I've posted in.

Courtesy sure, I try to do that but what bothers me is the diversion.

Me too.

I honestly believe that the crying over a politician's religion be it sincere or not is a joke. As I said, there only duty is to uphold the constitution, how hard is that?

One way would be to not blow tax dollars on something that amounts to a diversion (see what I did there?).

 

[squadops]

One way would be to not blow tax dollars on something that amounts to a diversion (see what I did there?).

That is true. If only I had a hatchet...

 

[huskeR32]

What is the problem exactly for you, it seems to me you are all for xyz as long as it fits into your narrow view.

That the government is spending $800k on one faith while ignoring all others is the problem. And you're right, I am all for xyz (all faiths being treated the same). You're in favor of x only (your faith getting preferential treatment).

Is the main problem that the government pays for a service that they want, or is it a problem that you happen to disagree with what they are paying for?

The main problem is that there's no way a congressman who was a Sunni Muslim could get Congress to appropriate $800k to bring an Imam in to lead a prayer every day - and the same reality applies to any other non-Christian faith. Provide the same benefits for all of them, or none of them, I don't care. But picking and choosing is wrong.

Of course they could do away with it, if it was up to me we'd do away with much much more of federal government spending all together so, why is this one small thing such a thorn in your side other than the fact you have a distain?

Because it's the topic of this thread...?

 

[squadops]

That the government is spending $800k on one faith while ignoring all others is the problem. And you're right, I am all for xyz (all faiths being treated the same). You're in favor of x only (your faith getting preferential treatment).

How do you figure I'm only for x? I'm actually in favor of zero.

The main problem is that there's no way a congressman who was a Sunni Muslim could get Congress to appropriate $800k to bring an Imam in to lead a prayer every day - and the same reality applies to any other non-Christian faith. Provide the same benefits for all of them, or none of them, I don't care. But picking and choosing is wrong.

Why pay for a service none of them want? Over compensation should be left to middle aged vette owners lol.

Because it's the topic of this thread...?

O.K. let's be dry but can't you realize all the other wastes of money up on the hill?

 

[Danoff]

O.K. let's be dry but can't you realize all the other wastes of money up on the hill?

Yes!

...and I'll argue about all of them. The president's down time is nowhere near my top 20,000 things to bring up, but there are worse ones than this I'm sure.

 

[huskeR32]

How do you figure I'm only for x? I'm actually in favor of zero.

I guess the same way you arrived at this:

you are all for xyz as long as it fits into your narrow view

If you want to project assumptions onto me, I'll do the same back. I'd actually prefer that we both just allowed the other to voice their own views, but you don't seem very interested in that lately.

Why pay for a service none of them want? Over compensation should be left to middle aged vette owners lol.

None of them? You're seriously suggesting that we have no Muslims in this country?

O.K. let's be dry but can't you realize all the other wastes of money up on the hill?

Sure I can. But again, it is the topic of this thread. Why would I come in here shouting about something completely unrelated?

 

[squadops]

I guess the same way you arrived at this:
If you want to project assumptions onto me, I'll do the same back. I'd actually prefer that we both just allowed the other to voice their own views, but you don't seem very interested in that lately.

I don't think it's an assumption, have you not clearly stated you are against the money spent on prayer?

None of them? You're seriously suggesting that we have no Muslims in this country?

That is a silly argument, why would I think that? I said pay for a service they do not want, surely if there was a desire for it they'd gladly pay for it, they love spending other people's money.

Sure I can. But again, it is the topic of this thread. Why would I come in here shouting about something completely unrelated?

It's not unrelated however, wasting money is wasting money, I honestly believe you have a specific anger towards religion.

btw, all this multi micro quoting is such a pain in the ass but I guess that is how you guys like it so...

 

[huskeR32]

I don't think it's an assumption, have you not clearly stated you are against the money spent on prayer?

Let's go back to the record, shall we?

Provide the same benefits for all of them, or none of them, I don't care. But picking and choosing is wrong.

Nope, looks like I'm not against money spent on prayer. I'm against money being spent preferentially on one group.

That is a silly argument, why would I think that? I said pay for a service they do not want, surely if there was a desire for it they'd gladly pay for it, they love spending other people's money.

So you're acknowledging that there are Muslims, but you don't think they have a desire to pray? That's even sillier.

It's not unrelated however, wasting money is wasting money, I honestly believe you have a specific anger towards religion.

I'll continue to think for myself, and to voice those thoughts for myself. I'm not angry at religion. I'm voicing my opinion on the question this thread was originally about: taxpayer money should not be spent preferentially on one religion over all others.

 

[squadops]

Let's go back to the record, shall we?

Nope, looks like I'm not against money spent on prayer. I'm against money being spent preferentially on one group.

So you're acknowledging that there are Muslims, but you don't think they have a desire to pray? That's even sillier.

I'll continue to think for myself, and to voice those thoughts for myself. I'm not angry at religion. I'm voicing my opinion on the question this thread was originally about: taxpayer money should not be spent preferentially on one religion over all others.

For the record ladies and gentlemen

preferential treatment, really? I've yet to see a muslim on the hill voice a grievance. You however are voicing a concern that is not warranted.

Of course Muslims would like a prayer, what is stopping them? You are imagining things.

Taxpayer money need not be spent on prayer, that much we can agree upon. I'm not seeing any of this preferential treatment you speak of.

To get back to the OP, this is not an issue of church and state in any fashion, the hill is not forcing religion on anyone.

 

[TenEightyOne]

If we spent another $800,000 per year to have somebody (actually, I volunteer for this job...) stand up there right after the prayer was done and say "Oh by the way, the magical sky dad that dude just prayed to doesn't actually exist," do you really think that theists would just be cool with it?

I could do it, I'm a Reverend*

Why must 240 years of tradition be destroyed because of atheists?

I get that this is your "anti-progressive" line where improvement is (seemingly) never considered... but 240 years? Shut the front door.

Jainism and Buddhism definitely trump Christianity for age and therefore tradition. Boo for Christianity trying to do away with Millenia of doing things the same way every day for thousands of years.

*This is actually true

 

[squadops]

Jainism and Buddhism definitely trump Christianity for age and therefore tradition. Boo for Christianity trying to do away with Millenia of doing things the same way every day for thousands of years.

I thought we were speaking of the U.S. Congress?