A ruling this week showed once again just how fully unenlightened and hopelessly out of step with modern culture I am.

A federal judge issued a permanent injunction barring House Speaker Brian Bosma from permitting sectarian prayer in the House.

The ruling came as the result of four people, including a Quaker lobbyist, who said they found the offering of Christian prayers offensive.

Now see, that's the part I don't get. Do we have some inalienable right not to be offended in this country?

Because if we do, where's my lawyer? I am gonna start suing everything and anything that's offensive to me.

Apparently, however, you only have a right to be "not offended" if it has to do with religion.

That, of course, sets religion aside as the only thing remaining that it's cool to discriminate against.

What a twisted-up mess.

Pornography is protected free expression no matter how many people it offends. No matterÊhow many studies show it can have a detrimental effect on certain individuals. No matter how much "harm" it creates in society. It's protected because we're free to express ourselves.

But prayer? Now there's a problem. A manger on the courthouse lawn? There's another problem. And I can imagine there are legions of people offended by the phrase "In God We Trust" on our money.

All this because of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which says, "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free expression thereof."

Did Congress make a law regarding Brian Bosma and the state legislature? Did I miss something?

I guess I have to take the liberal point of view on this issue.

I think you should be able to pray anywhere, anytime, anyway you want free of any and all government intervention.

That's freedom of speech.

That's freedom of religion.

That's, frankly, what I think the framers intended. They wanted Congress to "make no law" one way or the other regulating religion.

Now, if you're in the room and you're offended by somebody's prayer, well, I feel for you.

But I get offended at least a couple of times a week by things people say. So what?

Some of the columnists I publish make good money offending people.

Heck, I'm pretty sure I'm offending readers right now.

But to avoid anyone being offended, a federal judge gets to tell the Indiana legislature how to do business.

Do you suppose that was the intent of the First Amendment?

Of course, this bizarre line of reasoning has become so pervasive, it's slopping over into our culture.

It's to the point where you have to be concerned about saying "Merry Christmas" because you might offend somebody.

To an unenlightened boor like me, that's just silly. [[In-content Ad]]