news-record.com

WINSTON-SALEM (MCT) — Attorneys for the Forsyth County Board of Commissioners are arguing that a lower federal court erred when it banned the saying of sectarian prayers at the start of the board's meetings, as the first filings in the county's appeal were made Wednesday with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit.

Mike Johnson, the county's lead attorney, said that the outcome of the case would have far-reaching implications for "countless public bodies throughout this region."

''There is no previous federal court in America that has determined that all sectarian references are unconstitutional," said Johnson, an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund, a conservative Christian organization active in church-state issues. The fund is paying the county's costs to litigate the case.

Janet Joyner, a Forsyth County resident who was one of the three people who sued the county over sectarian prayer in March 2007, said she hopes that the ruling that stopped such prayers will stand.

''I believe that nonsectarian prayer is in fact the law and that we should abide by that," Joyner said. "The government should not show favorites."

Joyner, Constance Lynn Blackmon and a third resident who has since left the case said in their original lawsuit that because most people giving prayers at board meetings made reference to Christ, the county was advancing Christianity to the exclusion of other faiths.

The American Civil Liberties Union and Americans United for Separation of Church and State backed the citizens filing suit.

On Jan. 28, Judge James A. Beaty Jr. of U.S. District Court ruled in favor of Joyner and Blackmon, and issued an injunction that stopped the county from allowing prayers with sectarian content.

ACLU attorney Katherine Parker said that both the U.S. Supreme Court and the 4th Circuit appelate court have in fact determined that government prayers have to be inclusive and not tied to a particular sect.

Parker said that the ACLU would file its response to the county's brief by June 21.

Wednesday, the Rutherford Institute, a conservative legal organization based in Virginia, filed a friend-of-the-court brief in support of the county.

The institute argued that the federal-court ruling against the county was "unprecedented" because it looked at the frequency of Christian references made in the prayers, rather than first determining whether the county had improperly intended to advance Christianity with its prayer policy.

John Whitehead, the president and founder of the Rutherford Institute, said he believes that the county's prayer practice is constitutional.

''This case is a very important case, one that could possibly wiggle its way to the top ... at the Supreme Court," Whitehead said.