The High Point City Council recently voted on a resolution to stick with non-sectarian prayers at the start of their meetings. The resolution passed, with Councilman Mike Pugh casting the lone, dissenting vote, saying, “No, in the name of Jesus Christ”. As you may recall, Pugh would rather start city council meetings with prayers to Jesus.

:::

Last week was an interesting and unusual week for me.

Early in the week, I found myself wrestling with this cartoon – after running it by a few people, I’d gotten a very mixed bag of feedback on it. Some thought it was very good, some thought it was too contentious, and others thought it missed the mark in comparing Pugh’s attitude with the verse from Matthew.

Later in the week, my Pulpit Forum cartoon started generating some negative responses, including a Letter to the Editor in the News and Record.

All this prompted a lot of thinking on the role and responsibilites of a political cartoonist, as well as on the limitations of the medium.

I’m generally not a mean or confrontational person, which makes editorial cartooning a bit uncomfortable for me at times. Having to publicly ridicule people on a regular basis tends to go against Mom’s admonition that if you can’t say something nice, you shouldn’t say anything at all.

However, one well-known political cartoonist (I can’t remember who it was at the moment, unfortunately) said that the job of the cartoonist is to hold people in power accountable for their actions, and to me that is an important distinction. Wielded against an appropriate target – those in power – and with the purpose of encouraging them to use their power in good ways, a stinging cartoon can become a way to help right wrongs. I don’t pretend that my cartoons amount to a crusade for truth and justice, but I do find the idea of holding those in power accountable to be a useful guiding principle. Towards that end, kind and gentle cartoons are unlikely to get the job done.

Unfortunately, while editorial cartoons can be a powerful device, they also can be a bit of a blunt instrument. Exaggeration is one of the primary tools of the cartoonist, and because of this it’s sometimes difficult to present a nuanced, detailed position on a subject. Background info and context can get left out or inadequately communicated, and that can lead to misunderstandings.

For example, some critics of my Pulpit Forum cartoon seemed to assume that I am racist. (Ironically that’s the exact thing my cartoon was critical of – attributing any criticism to racist motivations rather than to a legitimate complaint about the person or group in question.) However, I’m sure that the members of the Pulpit Forum are fine people. I have no problem with the members themselves, only with their seemingly hair-trigger, unsupported use of the “racist” label – a tactic which detracts from any legitimate arguments they may actually have.

Similarly, the Pugh cartoon may not convey enough context for some people either. At first glance, there may indeed seem to be a disconnect between the bible verse and my criticism of Pugh, or someone may (incorrectly) think I am speaking out against all public prayer. After all, in Matthew 6, Jesus is not prohibiting public prayer, but rather cautioning against praying publicly for the wrong reasons – for the glory of the petitioner rather than of God.

And that’s where some context can help out. I tried to put it in by echoing Pugh’s words at the council meeting: “No, in the name of Jesus Christ”. When Pugh said those words, he was not in prayer, or in fellowship with other believers. He was casting a vote on a contentious subject at a City Council meeting. That is one point of reference.

A second point of reference was not in the cartoon, but may be familiar to anyone following the story. At an earlier rally with supporters, Pugh threatened to take his fight all the way to the Supreme Court. These sorts of actions – threats and grandiose proclaimations – smack of grandstanding. In other words – in my opinion – I think Pugh is doing exactly what we are warned not to do by Matthew 6:5-6.

As I’m finding out, some people will understand that point, and maybe agree with it. Others will disagree. Ideally, the cartoon will get people – maybe even Pugh himself – to think about the issue in a way they may not have. If that happens, the cartoon will have done its job.

Mike Pugh got a standing ovation even before he finished telling the gathering for the “In Jesus’ Name” prayer rally Saturday that he is willing to take the fight to invoke the name of Jesus in opening City Council meetings all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

I see two possible outcomes to this.

The first is that they fight it out in court and lose. Similar cases have been tried before, and the courts have been consistent – sectarian prayers that advance one specific faith over another are unconstitutional. If Pugh and the city council are merely going to “fight to invoke the name of Jesus in opening City Council meetings” then they are going to lose that fight – at the taxpayers’ expense.

The second possible outcome hinges on the council taking a slightly different approach. From the News and Record article linked above:

Pugh’s proposal would allow for a rotation of people of various faiths, which would give non-Christians the same right to invoke the name of their deity during prayer — something he thinks would pass muster with the courts.

That has the potential to succeed in court. However, winning that battle sets the council up for a whole different set of problems. It’s been shown in the past that while some folks *say* they are willing to give people of other faiths equal access, when that possibility becomes a reality they suddenly become firm believers in the idea of separation of church and state. The most recent example that comes to mind is the Virginia fiasco revolving around a pagan flyer handed out at schools.

Christian groups in Albemarle County, Virginia pushed their school district to allow churches to distribute flyers to schoolchildren through a school “backpack mail” program. After being threatened with legal action by the Liberty Counsel – a Religious Right legal group – the district acceded to the request, opening the “backpack mail” program to all religious groups. Soon after, some local Pagans took advantage of the opportunity with a flyer promoting a December holiday event with a Pagan twist to it. Christian leaders and parents in the community suddenly saw this as inappropriate, and expressed outrage at the idea that the school system would allow such flyers to be distributed.

ReligiousTolerance.org has some examples that are even more relevant:

The Tampa city council has had a long tradition of having Christian ministers and an occasional Jewish rabbi deliver an invocation before the start of each meeting. Ed Golly, chairperson of Atheists of Florida offered to have someone from his group take a turn saying the invocation. Councilman John Dingfelder agreed. He later said that people of different beliefs, or lack thereof, deserve a chance to give an invocation without censorship. He said “I thank God every day that I live in a country that accepts everybody.” The Atheist group had selected Michael R. Harvey to say the invocation. Councilman Kevin White tried to deny him an opportunity to speak, saying: “We have never had people of an Atheist group represent Americans and I don’t think it is appropriate in this setting.” He called for a vote to either find a different person to pray, or to bypass the invocation for this meeting. Different sources say that there was either one or two votes in favor; the vote would have had to be unanimous in order to take effect. White then walked out of the meeting, along with fellow council members Mary Alvarez and Rose Ferlita.

And this:

Cynthia Simpson, a Wiccan priestess, was informed that she could not lead the opening prayer at a Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors meeting. The county asserted that her beliefs as a Wiccan were not consistent with the Judeo-Christian tradition.

So, how will High Point Councilmembers and citizens react when a Muslim Imam wants to deliver the invocation, praying in the name of Allah? Or a Wiccan Priestess? A Satanist? Is that something that Pugh and his supporters really want to see?

This issue has come up before, and I think Jon Lowder had a great take on the situation in the comments:

As far as the City Council and whether/how they pray, personally I don’t see a need for any government forum to start with a prayer of any kind. To me it is city business, not city worship. I’ve never been in a business meeting that started with a prayer and I don’t see the need for it at a city business meeting.

Despite what some of the people quoted in the News and Record article seem to think, no one is trying to stop any private citizens from praying on their own time as they see fit. The circumstances in question are very limited – actions by a government body at a government business function. As Mayor Becky Smothers pointed out, “Council is perfectly able to pray informally before we get up on that dais.” They can also pray silently to themselves at absolutely any time they want to.

I think some words from Matthew are appropriate here:

And now about prayer. When you pray, don’t be like the hypocrites who love to pray publicly on street corners and in the synagogues where everyone can see them. I assure you, that is all the reward they will ever get. But when you pray, go away by yourself, shut the door behind you, and pray to your Father secretly. Then your Father, who knows all secrets, will reward you.

Whatever reward Pugh is seeking through a legal battle, I don’t think it’s going to work out quite the way he hopes.

School board representatives are in a bit of a tussle trying to determine whether the most recent redistricting of High Point schools will remain in effect, or whether parents can override it and choose where to send their kids.

High Point City Attorney Fred Baggett has issued a stern warning to the High Point Council about the content of their invocations.

Baggett said he received a phone call from the ACLU in Raleigh, which received a complaint from someone in attendance at a High Point council meeting. The complaint alleges that during an invocation, one council member used the word “Jesus.”

Baggett said city policy requires generic terms for God and also states that an invocation can’t reflect a specific faith’s belief.

I think their policy of non-sectarianism makes sense. The Council is a government entity, and opening it with a sectarian prayer is a de facto endorsement of a specific religion. Of course, that’s not acceptable to some:

“Don’t ask me to pray again,” Councilman Latimer Alexander directed at Mayor Becky Smothers. “When I am asked to pray, I will pray to the Father I know, believe in and worship in my faith.”

Councilman Mike Pugh echoed Alexander’s comments and requested he not be asked to give the prayer either.

Are Alexander and Pugh worried that God won’t know He’s being addressed if they call Him “God”? The founding fathers often used very generic, all-encompassing terms for God – “Nature’s God”, “Creator” and “Divine Providence” to quote a few from the Declaration of Independence. It’s strange that such grand, yet non-sectarian titles are fine for the architects of our government, but not good enough for the High Point City Council.

Between the impending air traffic from the new Fed Ex hub, and the plans for a new juvenile detention center, North High Point seems to be shaping up to be one of Guilford’s premier locations for Things You Don’t Want in Your Backyard (or flying over your house).

The International Home Furnishings Authority is trying to step up its game to compete with the new Las Vegas furniture market, but Greensboro and Winston-Salem seem reluctant to help out.

Although the governments were receptive, most said they wanted to see more concrete numbers on how the market — which pumps an estimated $1 billion into the Triad’s economy and creates about 12,500 jobs regionally — impacts their communities.

For example, how many visitors stay in hotels, eat at restaurants and shop outside of High Point.

But since the meeting, one local government said it is still waiting for the numbers.

“We haven’t heard anything from them yet,” said Winston-Salem’s assistant city manager Derwick Paige, who attended the initial meeting with High Point leaders.

As a result, none of the surrounding communities — except for Guilford County — has included additional money for the market in their upcoming budgets.

However, according to the article, a similar study was done as recently as 2004. That seems rather recent to me, and according to an article written about that study, it sounds like it addressed many of the relevant questions:

The new study, for the first time, takes into account spending by businesses that serve those directly involved in market, said Andrew Brod, a professor at UNCG and author of the study. As just one example, the study takes into account the money spent renovating showrooms between markets and it factors in the jobs created from this.

It seems a bit strange that Greensboro and Winston-Salem are dragging their feet on this in the face of the Vegas Market’s potential threat. They are certainly benefitting from the furniture market, and it’s got to be easier to stay ahead of the competition, rather than have to play catch up.

They patrol your streets, collect your trash, patch potholes and keep the city’s parks clean. They run afterschool programs for your children and help them find library books.

They are the city of High Point’s nearly 1,500 employees, and they received $77.2 million in salary and benefits in the 2005-06 fiscal year.

As a taxpayers, [sic] you help pay their salaries and should know who they are and how much they get for what they do.

The article then proceeds to list the name of every city of High Point employee, along with his or her job title and salary. Starting with the City Manager, the list works its way through every director, police officer, fireman, and sanitation worker. While I appreciate the fact that as a taxpayer I have the right to know this information, listing it all in the newspaper seems a bit intrusive.

If someone feels they really must know how much their neighbor the firefighter or city office worker makes in a year, they are free to make a call to High Point’s Human Resources department to hunt down that information. Does it really need to be handed to me on a silver platter (or, I suppose, in a plastic bag on my driveway) so I can get a glimpse into their finances over breakfast?

If the News and Record really feels we should have this information available at our fingertips, would it not have been better to just list specifics for the mayor and a handful of top city positions, and then just give salary ranges broken out by job title? That would still give everone a good idea of where money is being spent without plastering individual workers’ actual salaries all over the paper. If anyone felt they needed more information, they could always go into stalker mode and make the call to Human Resources on their own.

The High Point ABC Board was having some trouble recently, between illegal sales of liquor, slush funds, and shady real estate deals. That board got the axe – hopefully the new board will turn things around like they say they’re going to.