He’s at it again. Michael Newdow is suing yet again to prove that he hates God, at least the God of the Bible.
“Michael A. Newdow, who led the failed charge to get the words “under God” out of the Pledge of Allegiance, is now heading an effort to keep religion out of President-elect Barack Obama’s swearing in.
Newdow’s group, consisting of 18 individuals and 10 smaller groups, has sued “Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., several officials in charge of inaugural festivities, the Rev. Joseph E. Lowery and megachurch pastor Rick Warren” in U.S. District Court, the Washington Post reports.
Lowery has been asked to deliver the benediction at the ceremony, while Warren is the transition team’s (controversial) choice to deliver the invocation; Roberts is set to administer the oath of office. The oath traditionally includes the phrase “so help me God,” which the athiest group wants stricken.
Newdow brought similar suits four and eight years ago to keep references to God and prayer out of President Bush’s inaugurals. They were unsuccessful.”
I’ve always found atheists amusing. Especially the modern variety. If Newdow really believe in his convictions he would make his opposition more broad. You know, he could go sue to have the any reference to Allah removed from Islamic Mosques in America, or pick on the Buddhists, but as many of his ilk he won’t because it’s simple an opposition to the God of the Bible.
That should tell Christians all they need to know this man.
3 Responses
Fighting Tactical With A Losing Strategy | Comments from Left Field
January 1st, 2009 at 4:25 pm
1[...] one, outcome: to further alienate atheists from our fellow citizens and provide fuel to low-IQ religious bigots. [...]
bobxxxx
January 2nd, 2009 at 12:19 am
2“You know, he could go sue to have the any reference to Allah removed from Islamic Mosques in America”
You misunderstand what Michael Newdow is trying to do. He’s trying to get Christian theocrats to respect the Establishment Clause. What goes on in a mosque or a church has nothing to do with the Establishment Clause. The idea is to keep religion completely separate from our secular government. Michael Newdow does not have a problem with what people do in their own houses of worship.
MacRanger
January 2nd, 2009 at 1:46 am
3No, you don’t understand. The government isn’t “establishing” anything. Every President from Washington to Bush took the oath of office – “Under God”, and so – as the courts have found the use of it legal and not a violation of said “clause”. There is no basis in fact or law or in the constitution – which uses religion/belief in God in it’s tenants that we are a secular nation. That is a fabrication.
Michael Newdow simply has a problem.
RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI
Leave a reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Top Stories in the Blogosphere News
Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac. Starting at just $149.95 with free shipping.
The Commander in Chief at Work!
News
Reading List
Most Popular Posts