Lawsuit seeks to take 'so help me God' out of inaugural

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

No, this man isn't a patriot, he's in opposition to choice. He is just the same as someone who would force someone by power of the government to follow his beliefs. In effect he replaces God with himself by using the power of the state. I can't abide that.

I disagree for a couple of reasons.

1. I strongly supported Newdow's earlier suit to remove the words, "under God" from the Pledge of Allegience because they impose the implied superiority of the Judeo-Christian deity on the otherwise secular pledge of loyalty to the nation, which is antithetical to the principle of separation of church and state that is at the foundation of our nation.

The words were not part of the Pledge as it was officially adopted. They were only added in 1954 at the urging of a number of religious organizations.

2. When spoken, the words screw up the musical - temporal cadance of the Pledge, which I find to be an otherwise much more lyically poetic and emotionally inspiring piece.

I believe Newdow is a patriot because he's willing to stand up and exercise his First Amendment right to freedom of speech and religious beliefs in the face of the public hostility to his Constitutionally valid point.

He does not advocate forcing others to conform to his beliefs. He advocates not allowing the religious beliefs of one group to be imposed on others in official government functions.

I believe including the reference to any deity in the Presidential oath of office is inappropriate because we are a secular nation, the United States of America, not the united theocracy of any one group's deity.

I would tend to agree if there was a mandate in which the President was obliged to use "under God". As it stands Obama can use that phrase, or under Allah, or omit them entirely. None of those actions force a state religion. He can say "under Xenu" if he wished, although no one imagines he would.

He has a choice.

Now someone comes along and decides he doesn't like that. He wishes to take the option from the President. Mentioning any deity isn't unconstitutional, however forcing others to follow one's sensibilities for OR against seems quite against the spirit in which the founders wrote our ruling document.

That's my opinion at least.