What a jerk this guy is!
Well, Madeleine Murray O'Hare died and someone had to pick up the torch.
I bet they DO throw this out, and pronto!
Posted on 01/13/2005 8:06:02 AM PST by Jay777
WASHINGTON The government says there have been prayers at presidential inaugurals for more than 200 years -- and that shouldn't change.
It's asking a federal court to throw out a lawsuit filed by atheist Michael Newdow, who's trying to bar the saying of a prayer at President Bush's inaugural.
Newdow is best known for trying to get courts to remove the "under God" reference from the Pledge of Allegiance.
He says using prayer in the inaugural is unconstitutional. But the government says it's been happening since 1789 and is widely accepted. A federal appeals panel threw out the same lawsuit last year.
(Excerpt) Read more at wric.com ...
I REALLY wish this guy would go away! For good!
Its an idiotic lawsuit. The President has freedom of speech and freedom of religion too.
Which naturally begs the question: why is it even being entertained now?
Ping!
His antics are actually a blessing in disguise since they sharply contrast the kook Leftist fringe against the actual mainstream of America.
If this jackwit didn't exist, we would have needed to invent him.
Help Protect the Inaugural Prayer!
Add your name to the group of 15,684 people who have already signed using the Internet!
http://www.aclj.net/entrance/enter.cfm?dn=1008&source=2036&CFID=557182&CFTOKEN=51107176
This guy cannot impose for or against a religion through government ruling. Foreignizing God from America is unconstitutional, end of story. "Unadvocacy" is unamerican. Dependence for the esteem of the self on others is unconstitutional, heck, his rights are derived from God.
It will be moot in a few days. This guy is just grandstanding. He filed his case too late to get a court order before the inaugural.
What a jerk this guy is!
Well, Madeleine Murray O'Hare died and someone had to pick up the torch.
I bet they DO throw this out, and pronto!
Angry little boy who likes to get his way.
God Bless
The Supreme Court has held that Atheism is a religion under the meaning of the First Amendment. What gies this character the right to try to force his religion on the rest of us?
And what does this say about the perverted, twisted, sick and deranged legal system? You have to ASK the courts to enforce the provision of the Constitution that says "nor prohibit the free exercise thereof"???
These deranged lawyers in black dresses are among the most twisted, sick, vile, and despicable trash in this country. "Oh puleeez Massa, canst a pra to ma god? oh puleeez massa, should i bow down ta ya now??"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re-Designed ANTI-DNC Web Portal at --->
http://www.noDNC.com
Since the courts have found that atheism qualifies as a religion under the First Amendment and since he is trying to ban the expression of other religions at the Inauguration (and in other government functions), wouldn't that mean that Newdow is trying to use the courts to impose a religious test for office? An atheist religious test, but a religious test nonetheless. That is explicitly banned by the Constitution.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
