I know this will be shocking to many, but I have uncovered a liberal writing opinion articles in one of my local newspapers, the Fort Lauderdale, Florida based Sun-Sentinel.  The opinion-writer's name is Gary Stein.  How do I know he is a liberal?  Well, see if you agree that this is the work of a liberal mind:

It is time to get rid of prayers at government commission meetings.  Invocations do nothing but cause controversy and disharmony[.]

Liberal-speak 101, right?  (Click here to see the full article.)

If  Mr. Stein is correct, and he seems emphatic about it, how come I never knew this?  Why didn't they teach me this in school?  (They probably did, but I just wasn't listening.)  How has America survived and thrived for hundreds of years amidst all the controversy and disharmony from this practice?

This liberal oracle went on to say:

The invocation doesn't make the commissioners work better or harder.

Whoa.  How can Mr. Stein, or anyone for that matter, assert with absolute certainty that an invocation does not make a single commissioner currently serving, who previously served, or who may serve in the future work better or harder?

To the contrary, the presence of a man or woman of the cloth at a public meeting will tend to get the positive attention of those in attendance who believe in a Creator.  Usually the words of the person giving the invocation speak to the seriousness of the work to be done.  A request is made for God's assistance in guiding the actions of the people who are meeting to decide public policy. 

The words of the invocation are inspirational -- maybe not to all, but certainly to those of faith.  Upon hearing these words, it is hard not to be motivated to work better or harder (or better and harder). 

For those uncomfortable with listening to an invocation, it's a minute or two of their lives that they can spend meditating on their respective belief systems, playing Words with Friends, checking on their carbon credits, or silently reciting the words to John Lennon's "Imagine." 

Mr. Liberal was not done.  He went on to repeat an earlier argument:

All it does is cause more disharmony in cities, or make people feel uncomfortable. We don't need that.

So the liberal logic here is that the elimination of the invocation at government commission meetings will cause there to be less disharmony in cities and will make people feel comfortable.  Sounds good.  Let's do it!

Wait.  What about the people who appreciate the invocation?  If the invocation is eliminated, won't this create more disharmony in cities or make people uncomfortable by its absence?  (Or worse yet, it may create more disharmony and make people feel uncomfortable.)

This appears to be an issue where there is no solution that will be satisfactory to all members of a community.  This tends to happen a lot in a free society.  Sadly, liberals like Mr. Stein believe that if what a person or group of people are doing is controversial to another person or another group of people, the solution is to stop the controversial activity.  Never mind that this solution leads to less personal liberty; society will be more harmonious and/or more comfortable if we all just let liberals make the rules.

It may come as a surprise to Mr. Stein that the Founders of our country debated this issue at the very first Continental Congress.  Our Founders were members of several different faiths, and while they all agreed that there should be an invocation at the beginning of the Congress, they could not agree on which faith should deliver it.  During the discussion Sam Adams said that he was "no bigot, and could hear a prayer from a gentlemen of piety and virtue, who was at the same time a friend to his country."  These words, in many ways, are a summary of America's unique approach to religious liberty and tolerance for the faiths of all Americans.

On the list of problems that create disharmony in our cities and make people feel uncomfortable, prayer, if it is on the list at all, is at the very bottom.  At the top of the list is the perversion of our constitutional republic by liberals and RINOs.  With firm reliance on Divine Providence, we will defeat the forces that seek fundamental transformation, replacing them with men and women who will support and defend the Constitution of the United States.