Friday, January 02, 2009



"So help me God" wrong?

We read:
"A press release from the American Humanist Association reports that a lawsuit was filed on Dec. 30 in Washington, D.C. federal district court challenging two elements of the upcoming inauguration ceremony planned for Barack Obama. The complaint in Newdow v. Roberts, (D DC, filed 12/29/2008) asks the court to enjoin the Chief Justice-- who will administer the oath of office-- from adding "so help me God" to the constitutionally prescribed presidential oath (Art. II, Sec. 1). It also asks the court to declare unconstitutional the use of clergy to deliver an invocation and benediction. Plaintiffs allege that both of these practices violate the Establishment Clause, Free Exercise Clause and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

Source

Eugene Volokh thinks that past verdicts in similar matters leave the petition with little chance. Newdow is of course a serial pest.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

Why not have a witch-doctor from Kenya to do it?

Anonymous said...

I read somewhere over the past few days that the phase "under God" was added into the oath after it was originally written. If so, in the same vein as having a prayer said, it should be up to the candidate on whether it is in the oath or not. By no means should a person's religion, non-religion, or any other personal preferences, be pushed on others.

Anonymous said...

The very first thing CJ Roberts should do upon returning to work is ban atheism! In spite of what atheists try to portray, atheism is simply an opinion, not a religion, and therefor not a protected religious right. Atheist activists, like gay activists, are trying to force the majority of people to accept their ways, and again like gays, are attempting to use the courts to get what they want.

The SCOTUS should also, once and for all, make it very clear that the Constitution says nothing about separating the Church from the state!

Anonymous said...

Religion is an opinion as well. Where is the scientific proof that god exists?

Anonymous said...

where is the proof that you are there 5:32 or that I am here ? the proof is in the responce , the proof you are there is you have responded to the Original Post ,the proof I am here is I have responded to your comment , the proof GOD is there is when I comply with his conditions and ask a favor in compliance with his conditions HE responds by granting that favor . are you there 5:32 ?
or would anyone else like to proove they exist ?

Oboma take the oath with GODS help and have your heart swayed by him in the exicution of your office.

superman the student architect

Anonymous said...

Santa Claus grants my wishes when I get presents at Xmas - so he must exist.

Anonymous said...

The separation of church and state is a myth.

In the US, in the 1st ammendment, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;.."

The "separation" came from a letter from Thomas Jefferson.

So if a private individual (the President) wants to invoke God during his inaguration - fine.

The US was founded on christian principles, so "In God We Trust" is reasonable.

Anonymous said...

First, I don't need "scientific" proof that God exists. There is proof enough for me in everything I see regarding nature and the natural order of things on this earth. It cannot be random. That would be tantamount to tossing an entire junkyard into the air and having a 747 fall back in its place. As far as the first amendment, the other part of the establishment clause states "nor prohibit the free exercise thereof;" That pretty much clinches it for me. If an individual objects to those words while taking the oath of office, then he can refuse to say it that way. Common sense! Nobody is shoving religion down anyone's throat and if you don't want to hear it, don't listen.
Bill R.

Mike said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mike said...

Yes, and similarly, there is no 'right to never be offended' anywhere in the Constitution - at least for now.

Anonymous said...

The apparent "order" of the Universe can have any number of causes besides your version of a god. The "order" is also extremely dangerous for humans to live in!

Anonymous said...

A true athiest shouldn't be offended by the words "under God". To a true athiest, the word God has no real meaning. How many people would be offended if someone said "under Odin"? We might think of the person as eccentric, odd, or even stupid, but there is no reason to be offended.
People who choose to be offended because of anothers beliefs must not be completely comfortable with their own beliefs. What would be offensive is if someone tried to force religion upon you, like in some countries where you must belong to a specific religion to be in the government, or you pay different taxes depending on your religion, or you are summarily sentenced to death because of your religion.
A prayer to a true athiest is nothing but empty words, like a poem, but should not be offensive unless the words actually call for violence or harm to that person. The fact that so many athiests are offended shows how weak their "unfaith" is.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
"Religion is an opinion as well. Where is the scientific proof that god exists?"

Where is the scientific proof that global warming exists?


"What would be offensive is if someone tried to force religion upon you"

That's very true. It is also offensive to have someone (atheists) force religion out of our lives, our country, and our society !

Anonymous said...

The oath should be taken with whatever is appropriate for the person taking the oath. That is the only thing that should matter.