Glade Hill, VA, Sep. 7, 2011 – “What I saw last night was inspirational. Whenever you see hundreds of people standing in the pouring rain to peacefully protect their inalienable rights proves that the American spirit is alive and well in Virginia,” said State Senator Bill Stanley. He added, “It should make every elected official sit up and take notice. Folks in office need to realize that when you are representing the will of the people they will support you, and no one in public service, elected or unelected, should ever take them for granted. The people are in charge, and it is our honor to represent them.”

WSET Video:

During the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisor’s meeting Senator Stanley had the opportunity to speak. Stanley defended the decision of the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors to continue to offer a Christian invocation.

Stanley said, “The fact that the ACLU has come into our community and demanded that our locally elected leaders dispense with the practice of offering Christian prayer that mentions “Jesus Christ” before meetings is indicative of the fundamental problems we are facing in our nation today.

Our founders were deeply religious men, the majority of them were Christian, and made reference to God in the founding documents. They made reference to the Creator without hesitation, and with great reverence. They acknowledged His hand of providence, and expressed gratitude for the blessings that they enjoyed. They invoked His blessing upon their worthy and noble efforts, and sought His will in making the decisions that guided them in times of peril. Statutory prohibition of the mention of the name of God obviously infringes on the constitutionally guaranteed free exercise of religion.

Why do some now believe that when free people gather to discuss important matters it is improper to ask for divine guidance, and to know the will of a loyal, loving, and trusted God by whatever name He may be known? Is it that they want not to offend? Or, is it rather that they would remove the thought of God from our minds, and reference to Him in our discussions as to not be bound by a moral code that requires accountability to something, or someone greater than themselves?

Perhaps in some communities there are those who are truly offended by hearing a prayer, but I’m not aware of this being the case here. Some may choose to be offended, but how many more of us are offended by having someone, or some group tell us we are not allowed to express our faith in a being much greater than the government. In fact, I am offended that any entity of human formulation would restrict my ability to speak to my Creator when the opportunity arises and I find myself in need of His guidance. If any group of people gathered for any noble and worthy purpose choose to ask for guidance from the same God that inspired the founders during their experiences in the crucible of trial I applaud their supplication, and would certainly join them with my “amen.”

Our founders made it very clear that the source of our inalienable rights were from our Almighty God. Patrick Henry and others from Virginia made certain that these rights were recognized, guaranteed, and protected by the law. Penned in our Constitution was the assurance that the government would never establish a religion and force any citizen to participate in that religion. They had experienced that tyranny under the British Crown and made certain that would not happen here. To date it has not, but forcing the absence of reference to deity is restricting the free exercise of faith.

Civil society has come to mean tolerance. At least that is what we are taught, but the very same people that demand a civil society are the same people that seem to be intolerant of God, or any reference to Him. I take from this that the fundamental problems we face are not political, they are cultural, and this cultural decay is caused by removing the source of morality from the public discussion.

This attempt to litigate away the choice of free people to ask the God of their faith for guidance is, in and of itself, offensive. It is just one more attempt to destroy the fabric and framework of our society, and ultimately destroy the morality that is the very foundation of our freedom.”

###