Atheists Sue Over the Inauguration

[red states rule]

How will the messiah known as Obama deal with these nuts?

His buddies over at the Daily Kos agree with this court action. So far a majority of them feel

"Yes, it's about time someone pointed out the problem with allowing religion to play such a role in a government sponsored event"


Atheists Sue Over the Inauguration (with poll)
by WayBeyondSoccerMom
Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 02:39:37 PM PST

I was wondering when this was going to happen. With all the hoopla of Rick Warren delivering the invocation at the Obama inauguration, I figured the general idea of religion having a centerstage at the event would cause someone to sue.

Hemant Mehta, the Friendly Atheist, has a great blog about what's going on.

From Hemant's site:

Atheist Michael Newdow (of "Under God" fame) and several other atheists are suing government officials over the injection of religion into the presidential Inauguration.

The lawsuit is being filed today in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

WayBeyondSoccerMom's diary :: ::
Here's more from Hemant's blog:

Who is suing? Anyone and everyone, it seems.

Specifically:

MICHAEL NEWDOW; MEL LIPMAN; DAN BARKER AND ANNIE-LAURIE GAYLOR; MARIE CASTLE; HERB SILVERMAN; KIRK HORNBECK; CATHARINE LAMM; RICHARD WINGROVE; CHRISTOPHER ARNTZEN; JOHN STOLTENBERG; KATHERINE LACLAIR; LOUIS ALTMAN; "UNNAMED CHILDREN;" THE AMERICAN HUMANIST ASSOCIATION ("AHA"); THE FREEDOM FROM RELIGION FOUNDATION ("FFRF"); MINNESOTA ATHEISTS; ATHEISTS FOR HUMAN RIGHT[S] ("AFHR"); ATHEIST ALLIANCE INTERNATIONAL ("AAI"); NEW ORLEANS SECULAR HUMANIST ASSOCIATION ("NOSHA");

Why "unnamed children"? Because, according to Newdow, the public prayers amount to the "coercive imposition of religious dogma specifically denounced by the Supreme Court" in so many other similar court cases.

Who is being sued?

HON. JOHN ROBERTS, JR., CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE U.S. SUPREME COURT; PRESIDENTIAL INAUGURAL COMMITTEE ("PIC"); EMMETT BELIVEAU, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PIC; JOINT CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE ON INAUGURAL CEREMONIES ("JCCIC"); SENATOR DIANNE FEINSTEIN, CHAIRPERSON, JCCIC; ARMED FORCES INAUGURAL COMMITTEE ("AFIC"); MAJOR GENERAL RICHARD J. ROWE JR., CHAIRPERSON, AFIC; REV. RICK WARREN; REV. JOE LOWERY;

What do the plaintiffs want?

They want to stop "so help me God" from being said during this inauguration and all future ones. Same with the prayers — both the invocation and benediction.

They don’t want extra money, but they do want to "recover costs, expert witness fees, attorney fees," etc.

<snip>

A couple key reasons:

The addition of "so help me God" to the presidential oath of office (said by Chief Justice John Roberts) violates the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment.

The government-sponsored use of any clergy at all during the inauguration violates the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment
To be clear, this is not an attack on Rick Warren for his bigoted views. That’s a separate issue.

It’s a lawsuit against using religion at all in a presidential inauguration.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/12/29/17263/661/89/678260

[PostmodernProphet]

It's all about tolerance, you know.....

[red states rule]

It's all about tolerance, you know.....

Yep, give them what they want or else

[namvet]

if he can't say "so help me god" what then???? we'll see how it goes???? :lol:

[April15]

I am an atheist, but I like the pomp and such of the ceremony. I think they are wrong to challenge tradition. Tradition is what keeps the faith in this nation.

[manu1959]

so help me god does not specify a religion....obama will also have his hand on a bible.....

also if they don't believe in a creator i assume they don't have any unalienable rights to allow them this freedom of speech...

[emmett]

so help me god does not specify a religion....obama will also have his hand on a bible.....

also if they don't believe in a creator i assume they don't have any unalienable rights to allow them this freedom of speech...



BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZT!!!!


Warning! Warning! Warning! Warning! Warning!


To have made this much sense in your post it should have been necessary to have utilized at least 50 words in your message, 2 links and several pictures!


I am extremely confused!!!!!

[Classact]

A cut and paste from a friend on another forum:

Yada Yada Yada. Nowhere does the constitution say that a state actor cannot mention God. For that matter the First Amendment is quite clear, Congress shall make no law, no where does it say the President, nor for that matter the Chief Justice.

If we are going to be a nation of laws, then lets be one, and follow the letter of the law. The Constitution quite clearly limits the power of Congress in the First Amendment, even if we apply the First Amendment to the states through the idea of incorporation, then it would only apply to the State Legislators and not to members of the executive or the judiciary.

I have grown tired of these and other trivial complaints of Mr Newdow. It is my understanding that their is also a lawsuit challenging the invocation at the inaugural based on the claim that by allowing a prayer to be said it is showing the support of religion over that of no religion.

If you don't like the prayer, don't listen. If you don't like the phrase So help me God plug your ears, but if Obama is going to be sworn in using a Bible, then what is the point of placing his hand on the Bible if he will not use the phrase So help me God.

[Abbey Marie]

These atheists would do well to read George Washington's farewell address, among many other statements made by our founding fathers. Many references to God, prayer, etc.

Unless of course they want to claim that Washington did not understand the meaning behind our Constitution, or behind what he more than any other fought for in the Revolutionary War.

What a joke.

[LiberalNation]

any other link, can't find this story elsewhere.

[emmett]

Today's quote: When the devil shows up with a truckload of promises, it's hard to walk away!

[5stringJeff]

If atheists can sue over the presence of a prayer, can theists sue over the abscence of a prayer?

[LiberalNation]

still waiting for a real source, i'll I came up with upon searching it was a suit against Bush's prayer that failed in court.

[5stringJeff]

still waiting for a real source, i'll I came up with upon searching it was a suit against Bush's prayer that failed in court.

Here's the Google News source. 171 stories when this link was posted.

http://news.google.com/?ned=us&nsrc=ig&ncl=1285455448&hl=en&topic=n

[LiberalNation]

thank ya, now i can post it elsewhere.

I was searching ingural prayer maybe that's why I didn't get a hit on the first few yahoo links.

[bullypulpit]

How will the messiah known as Obama deal with these nuts?

His buddies over at the Daily Kos agree with this court action. So far a majority of them feel

"Yes, it's about time someone pointed out the problem with allowing religion to play such a role in a government sponsored event"


Atheists Sue Over the Inauguration (with poll)
by WayBeyondSoccerMom
Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 02:39:37 PM PST

I was wondering when this was going to happen. With all the hoopla of Rick Warren delivering the invocation at the Obama inauguration, I figured the general idea of religion having a centerstage at the event would cause someone to sue.

Hemant Mehta, the Friendly Atheist, has a great blog about what's going on.

From Hemant's site:

Atheist Michael Newdow (of "Under God" fame) and several other atheists are suing government officials over the injection of religion into the presidential Inauguration.

The lawsuit is being filed today in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

WayBeyondSoccerMom's diary :: ::
Here's more from Hemant's blog:

Who is suing? Anyone and everyone, it seems.

Specifically:

MICHAEL NEWDOW; MEL LIPMAN; DAN BARKER AND ANNIE-LAURIE GAYLOR; MARIE CASTLE; HERB SILVERMAN; KIRK HORNBECK; CATHARINE LAMM; RICHARD WINGROVE; CHRISTOPHER ARNTZEN; JOHN STOLTENBERG; KATHERINE LACLAIR; LOUIS ALTMAN; "UNNAMED CHILDREN;" THE AMERICAN HUMANIST ASSOCIATION ("AHA"); THE FREEDOM FROM RELIGION FOUNDATION ("FFRF"); MINNESOTA ATHEISTS; ATHEISTS FOR HUMAN RIGHT[S] ("AFHR"); ATHEIST ALLIANCE INTERNATIONAL ("AAI"); NEW ORLEANS SECULAR HUMANIST ASSOCIATION ("NOSHA");

Why "unnamed children"? Because, according to Newdow, the public prayers amount to the "coercive imposition of religious dogma specifically denounced by the Supreme Court" in so many other similar court cases.

Who is being sued?

HON. JOHN ROBERTS, JR., CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE U.S. SUPREME COURT; PRESIDENTIAL INAUGURAL COMMITTEE ("PIC"); EMMETT BELIVEAU, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PIC; JOINT CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE ON INAUGURAL CEREMONIES ("JCCIC"); SENATOR DIANNE FEINSTEIN, CHAIRPERSON, JCCIC; ARMED FORCES INAUGURAL COMMITTEE ("AFIC"); MAJOR GENERAL RICHARD J. ROWE JR., CHAIRPERSON, AFIC; REV. RICK WARREN; REV. JOE LOWERY;

What do the plaintiffs want?

They want to stop "so help me God" from being said during this inauguration and all future ones. Same with the prayers — both the invocation and benediction.

They don’t want extra money, but they do want to "recover costs, expert witness fees, attorney fees," etc.

<snip>

A couple key reasons:

The addition of "so help me God" to the presidential oath of office (said by Chief Justice John Roberts) violates the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment.

The government-sponsored use of any clergy at all during the inauguration violates the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment
To be clear, this is not an attack on Rick Warren for his bigoted views. That’s a separate issue.

It’s a lawsuit against using religion at all in a presidential inauguration.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/12/29/17263/661/89/678260

Ya know you're committing blasphemy every time you and your fellow travelers refer to Obama as the "Messiah". As we ALL know, Jesus Christ was the one and only Messiah. :laugh2:

[PostmodernProphet]

Ya know you're committing blasphemy every time you and your fellow travelers refer to Obama as the "Messiah". As we ALL know, Jesus Christ was the one and only Messiah. :laugh2:

as opposed to idolatry?.......

[Psychoblues]

"Messiah" is a name oft used and invented for Obama by reichwingers, cowgirl.



as opposed to idolatry?.......

What kind of "idolatry" are you now commiting?!?!?!??!???!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?


HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[Classact]

If atheists can sue over the presence of a prayer, can theists sue over the abscence of a prayer?Let's see we live in a republic, that means of the people. The majority of the people believe in Christianity so the law and government reflects the values and morals of Christianity, hey, maybe that's why politicians want to identify with the most popular belief? So if atheists say no prayer, no words towards the basis of the republic why can a Muslim American demand Sharia Law if they find Christian law offends them?

[AllieBaba]

Not only that, but the separation of church and state is not a means by which to eliminate faith from politicians, or to stop lawmakers and leaders from referring to or using faith to guide them in their decisions.

The sole purpose of "separation of church and state" is to prevent the government from penalizing citizens for not following the state sanctioned religion. That's it. It's to make sure we have FREEDOM of religion, not to ELIMINATE religion. It's to make sure that anyone can speak their mind about faith and God and not suffer discrimination or persecution.

It's so our politicians CAN use a Bible and say a prayer, regardless of their faith, at inaguration.

People have just taken the whole concept of separation of church and state way beyond what it's supposed to be. It's supposed to protect religion, not squash it.

[Classact]

Not only that, but the separation of church and state is not a means by which to eliminate faith from politicians, or to stop lawmakers and leaders from referring to or using faith to guide them in their decisions.

The sole purpose of "separation of church and state" is to prevent the government from penalizing citizens for not following the state sanctioned religion. That's it. It's to make sure we have FREEDOM of religion, not to ELIMINATE religion. It's to make sure that anyone can speak their mind about faith and God and not suffer discrimination or persecution.

It's so our politicians CAN use a Bible and say a prayer, regardless of their faith, at inaguration.

People have just taken the whole concept of separation of church and state way beyond what it's supposed to be. It's supposed to protect religion, not squash it.The legal case is as stupid as me complaining that I hate jive rap music so all public rap music must be listened to with headphones so as not to upset me.

[krisy]

Not only that, but the separation of church and state is not a means by which to eliminate faith from politicians, or to stop lawmakers and leaders from referring to or using faith to guide them in their decisions.

The sole purpose of "separation of church and state" is to prevent the government from penalizing citizens for not following the state sanctioned religion. That's it. It's to make sure we have FREEDOM of religion, not to ELIMINATE religion. It's to make sure that anyone can speak their mind about faith and God and not suffer discrimination or persecution.

It's so our politicians CAN use a Bible and say a prayer, regardless of their faith, at inaguration.

People have just taken the whole concept of separation of church and state way beyond what it's supposed to be. It's supposed to protect religion, not squash it.


You couldn't have said that better :thumb:

[red states rule]

Ya know you're committing blasphemy every time you and your fellow travelers refer to Obama as the "Messiah". As we ALL know, Jesus Christ was the one and only Messiah. :laugh2:

and to the liberal media, Obama is the second coming

[red states rule]

"Messiah" is a name oft used and invented for Obama by reichwingers, cowgirl.




What kind of "idolatry" are you now commiting?!?!?!??!???!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?


HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues



http://www.theobamaprayer.com/banner.jpg

Our Obama, who art from heaven, or Hawaii,
or Chicago, or possibly Kenya,
Liberal be thy name,
Thy presidency come,
Thy will be done,
On Earth, as it is in San Francisco.
Give us this day our daily handouts.
And forgive us our individualism,
As we forgive those who don't properly inflate their tires.
And lead us not into the Clintons,
But deliver us from McCain
For thine is the kingdom,
and the power, and the glory,
for two full terms.

http://www.theobamaprayer.com/

[PostmodernProphet]

What kind of "idolatry" are you now commiting?
I've set you up in Satan's place.......