Posted on 01/14/2009 6:20:32 PM PST by TaraP
WASHINGTON – President-elect Barack Obama wants to conclude his inaugural oath with the words "so help me God," but a group of atheists is asking a federal judge to stop him.
California atheist Michael Newdow sued Chief Justice John Roberts in federal court for an injunction barring the use of those words in the inaugural oath.
Newdow and other atheists and agnostics also want to stop the use of prayers during the inaugural celebration.
Newdow, who lost a Supreme Court battle to get the words "under God" taken out of the Pledge of Allegiance, has failed in similar challenges to the use of religious words and prayers at President George W. Bush's inaugurations.
Roberts' attorney Jeffrey P. Minear filed a document in Newdow's lawsuit saying that Obama wants the words "so help me God" included in his oath of office.
The Justice Department and attorneys general from all 50 states have filed motions at the federal court asking for the lawsuit to be thrown
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Newdow should tell his boss Satan that soon he will be thrown out of office....
To a very warm climate!
I'm an atheist, and this clymer doesn't speak for me. It's no skin off my keister one way or another. Pray away if you think it will help.
Hell, Obama will probably need it.
Strike’n at the nonexistent.
Like swing’in at a Nolan Ryan fast ball with you’re eyes closed.
Too late. The States’ Attorney Generals said God is a go.
I don’t think God is invited....instead, I think the new administration only wants to use His branding.
Well, under the current Supreme Court tests for the establishment clause, they have a point. Fortunately Sandra Day O’Conner is no longer on the court, so perhaps the Supreme Court can come up with better rules.
You know what to do.
How about “So help me, Malcolm and Che.” ?
Why did U.S. attorneys even bother to respond to Newdow? the SCOTUS has no jurisdiction whatsoever in this case. Roberts should have rejected it immediately on that basis alone. Amendment 1’s reference to religion deals ONLY with Congress, not the President.
Taking God out of the inaugural speech is dangerous, imo.
May those that love us, love us.
To those that don’t love us, may God turn their hearts.
If He cannot turn their hearts, may he turn their ankles...
So we may recognize them by their limping.
(Sure hope Barry doesn’t develope a limp.)
These dipsticks are really asking the courts to prohibit free speech and freedom of religion. That is what this really comes down to.
Anyone who claims that "Under God" in the Pledge or "So help me God" in the oath of office establish "monotheism" is completely ignorant or a liar (or both).
Most deists and agnostics would be comfortable saying both, as a theistic god is not required for belief in a creator.
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.