Arizona City Council Rescinds Christian-Only Invocation Policy September 22, 2015

Arizona City Council Rescinds Christian-Only Invocation Policy

Last week, the Coolidge City Council in Arizona (below) passed a resolution saying it would have invocation prayers at all future meetings. An amendment to that resolution stipulated that all the invocations would be Christian.

Councilmember Rob Hudelson explained the theocratic move this way:

Speaking last was Hudelson, who himself is a preacher. He made clear his views that the United States is a Christian nation.

“I think it’s very important,” Hudelson said. “We just proclaimed Constitution Week. You know what was said at the end of the [Revolutionary] war? A treaty in Paris that said ‘In the name of the most holy and undivided trinity.’ You don’t get that from the Quran. You get it from the Bible. You get it from Christianity. That’s our heritage.

Last night, however, the council voted unanimously to rescind their mistake. Invocations will still be given, but they will no longer be limited only to Christians. (This would be a good time for the Satanic Temple to put in a request.)

So Hudelson voted against the very measure he proposed. Talk about a Bible-based flip-flop! He wouldn’t admit any wrongdoing, though:

“History will look back on us and say, ‘There is a city council who stood for Christ and Christ alone,'” [Hudelson] said. “For that, we should never be ashamed.”

The council then unanimously voted to allow representatives of any religious group within city limits to offer a prayer prior to a council meeting. There was no public comment, and council members said little about the vote.

Actually, they should be ashamed. A city council has no business standing for “Christ and Christ alone.” Individuals can do that. Churches can do that. But the government shouldn’t be taking sides.

But if that sort of bluster is what it takes for Hudelson to save face and make the right decision, I’ll live with it.

"The way republican politics are going these days, that means the winner is worse than ..."

It’s Moving Day for the Friendly ..."
"It would have been more convincing if he used then rather than than."

It’s Moving Day for the Friendly ..."

Browse Our Archives

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
error: Content is protected !!