The act of invocation means invoking a transcendent authority, petitioning or appealing to such. As per the definitions, usually this is a religious, prayerful act, invoking God.
I wouldn’t have a problem in removing invocations from meetings altogether, rather than this tit-for-tat nonsense of “me-too-ism!” in the name of ‘inclusivity’, blah blah blah fishcakes, AND if the same progs would promise not to go after Christians running bakeries, photographers, etc. who don’t want homosexuals’ gay wedding business, etc.
But the hatetheists want to have their cake and eat it too; they want to push us out, unless we conform, but they want in, in any form or guise. They’d rather see an invocation of Allah, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, than of God.
How can you have an ‘atheist invocation‘, when, according to atheist dogma, there is no supreme, creator being, and there are no deities, so therefore, who or what is being invoked in an ‘atheist invocation’?
Following the ruling, Dan Courtney of the Atheist Community of Rochester asked that he be allowed to present an invocation at an upcoming meeting, and was granted his request.
“We, as citizens, the beginning and the end, the alpha and the omega of our destiny are not, as the great philosopher Immanuel Kant warned, mere means to the ends of another, but we are ends in ourselves,” Courtney said during his invocation.
Ah; invocation and therefore worship of humanity; typical secular humanist…
They of course fail to realize that in doing this, they are no longer atheists, but have replaced worship of God with worship of humanity… Fools.
Of course, we know the…
View original post 21 more words