God and the Oath of Office

good points ghostmasseur, i agree with every single one you just made. what i am saying is that it comes down to respect. newdow's push for removal of God from everything is just as bad as some Christian groups trying to shove their beliefs down unbelievers' throats. it is perfectly fine to state your beliefs openly, whether they include a form of God or not, but i believe that there is a certain line of respect that should not be crossed. freedom of/from religion is based upon the foundation of "to each his own" without trying forcefully sway unlike people.

You know if you really don't like it you can travel back in time to 1950 Russia or anywhere else but here, because the VERY CONSTITUTION has God all over it. So that and other of our foundning fathers and founding documents are all God dependent! So if you hate it... they make jets now that can take you anywhere you want to go....

I am a special disabled veteran of the Gulf War Era, and I am an atheist (and a Libertarian). I don't mind if President Obama says a prayer publicly, as I believe he has every right to do so. However, I do have a huge problem with spending tax money on accommodating invocations by religious persons. It excludes me from the citizenry being addressed, and I think I have a right to be considered. I also don't think persons believing in a god should be running a country. My personal opinion is that people who believe in a god are somewhat insane; to me they believe in an imaginary man, the tooth fairy, the Easter bunny, and Santa Claus, all farces. Such people should not be allowed to drive cars, much less run a country or be in close proximity to nuclear weapons. We have such condemnation for the Iranian President as a religious zealot, but most Americans condemning Ahmadinejad don't see that we scorn atheists in our country the same way he scorns Jews in his. To me, keep your prayers privatized and out of public institutions; it's simple, don't pray in my schools, court houses, military, and I won't think in your church. Deal?

My hope is that the human race will eventually move beyond religion and be able to face life without blindly following stories of God and Jesus and Mohammed or whatever, all with as much credibility as fairy tales, so of course, I believe references to God are out of place in government. As an agnostic, I find references to God, whether in government or in private life, amusing. How normally rational people, who would be skeptical of claims made in an ad for some new cleaning product, can suspend all rationality and believe on faith alone that there is some diety running the milliions of galaxies and billions and billions of stars and planets and still have time and interest to listen to prayers about wanting a new car or a boob job is ludicrous to me. As Einstein said, the Bible, which was written by people between 30 and 70 years after the death of Jesus by people who never knew him, is a book of "childish stories." If you really look into the history of the how the Bible came to be and the results of research into Jesus and life in that part of the world at the time he lived, you find that Jesus was one of hundreds of people running around claiming to be the Messiah and Christianity was a minor sect until Roman Emperor Constantine several hundreds after Jesus' death made Christianity the official religion of Rome. After that, Christianity took off. Contstantine did it for purely political reasons, realizing that the tenants of Christianity were a good fit for his desire to consolidate power within his empire. IAnother interesting fact--there were many other books of the Bible that said many things that would shock today's believers. The early Catholic church made the decision as to which would become the Bible according to the story they wanted to sell to their followers. If you really look into it, rationally and with an open mind, you'll find there is a great deal to be skeptical about, whether it be the existence of God or that Jesus was his son or that he rose from the dead. It makes for a great story line, though, and the Catholic church knew that. Unfortunately, I think humans are a long way from giving up their superstitions and facing life as it is.

"People pray. Sometimes in public. Deal with it."

I like that, even though I'm a Christian who supports separation of church and state. Why? Because politics always corrupts true faith...always. There is no more dangerous scenario than operating on the assumption that God supports your political actions, or favors one group of believers over another.

As one wag has noted in the past, "Mixing religion and politics is like mixing ice cream and manure. You destroy the ice cream, but have no noticeable impact on the manure, which ends up none the worse for wear."

With that said, we should keep in mind that the Constitution doesn't promise to keep people from being exposed to religion, but only that it won't use its powers to favor one over the other. It promises freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. Big difference.

And with that thought in mind, any Christian should be comfortable with the ceremonies including a Muslim cleric, a Buddhist, a Rabbi, or whatever...anything less is hypocrisy, as another poster has already noted.

I'm Pagan, and I see no problem with anyone invoking whatever god they believe in when they feel the need to. People's main problem with this is that they view their religion as being the only correct religion. Let whoever is running or going to run the country pray to whoever they need to to find what they need! It's not your life and frankly none of your business, anyway. It's not like they're getting up there and reciting a sermon of eternal damnation! Presidents need all the help and support they can get, and if being able to call on whatever god they believe in allows them that much more pressure relief and level-headedness, then who are we to complicate matters? Give his beliefs the respect they deserve, especially if you're asking the same.

What I've yet to understand from an Atheist is, Why do you care what a person of religions does or belives in. You claim to not belive in anything, so tell me.. Why do you care. Obviously you do care or you'd just go about your Godless life and leave everyone else alone. Why would the words So Help Me God even concern you.. You have not God. Actually, nothing should bother you and you should not be allowed to even file a lawsuit about any kind of words, REMEMBER, YOU BELIVE IN NOTHING.. So actually, your lawsuit has no grounds.

Separation of church and state was intended to prevent the government from supporting and embracing a specific point of theological view. The model that was being avoided was the King of England being heavily influenced by the Church of England. The intent was to avoid a 'Church of America'. It was NOT intended to prevent religion from entering the 'public square'. It is laughable that atheists think any mention of God should be removed from public view so their sensibilities are not offended. As much as they try there is not 'Freedom FROM Religion', but 'Freedom OF Religion'. That includes elected officials! At it's core, it's about freedom of conscience which atheists are determined to deny from anyone who disagrees with them!!

I'm an Atheist and I don't think the problem is invoking "God" in oaths of office, pledges of allegiance, or coinage is in any way the problem. People have the right to practice any religious beliefs (including atheism) that they want, so if Obama (and many Americans) believe in God, he should say "so help me God". I recognize that I live in culture greatly influenced by Christianity. I celebrate Christmas, proudly say the Pledge of Allegiance, etc. and find this sterilization of religious practices in the name of political correctness to be offensive. Even Richard Dawkins recognizes the influence of religion on our literature and respects it.

The problem is religious fanatics crossing the line and imposing their beliefs on everyone else, esp. Islamic terrorist and evangelical Christians but including overly militant Atheist like Newdow. Another problem is that some people think lowly of atheist and will not elect an atheist president, etc. Being overly militant as Newdow is does not help the cause. It simply practices the sort of intolerance that we are opposing and makes people feel threatened by Atheist. Atheist activism has its place, but in respectful discourse educating the public on Atheism, combating religious fanaticism, and challenging anti-intellectual thought. Our aim should be to promote moderate religious practices and tolerance of atheism, not outlawing all religion.

It makes perfect sense for political leaders to keep their religious beliefs personal. Inserting one particular religious belief into our national ceremonies or on our currency is the government promoting one religion, even if it is the most popular one, over another. Not to mention the obvious fact that our political leaders use religion to manipulate us. Take that out of the equation and you take a lot of misused power out of their hands.

The Founding Fathers were very Religious men. Almost all attended church regularly, and relied on "Divine Providence" in the Declaration of Independence. By the way to the readerbelow ... they are not just words ... it's invoking the name of a higher power, and the belief that He has a hand in all things.

Do some research........seperation of church and state does not mean religion is not involved in government. It only means that the government wouldn't mandate that everyone practice a governmment controlled religion. That is the basis for the founding of this great country....England was forcing people to convert.......so they left. Everyone in this country is free to practice their own beliefs.......but that doesn't mean God is not part of our government. As for your suggestion to pray in private......freedom of speech allows me to pray publicly anywhere at anytime...read the Constitution!!!

Let's see. We have kicked God out of our schools and our government. There are those who want to remove "in God We Trust" from wherever it appears and "under God" from our Pledge of Allegience. Ok now. Let's ask Him to bless America.

Pandering to the tiny minority of atheists in this country would be absurd for someone who is being inaugurated as president of ALL the people of this country.

Separation of Church and State does not mean there should be a separation of State and God. Freedom of religion doesn't mean we should be free of religion, in fact, that idea promotes the embracing of religion and the value it provides to the American family. Mark Price, Sibley, MO

What ever happened to freedom of speech and freedom of religion? Some people may not want the President to use the words "so help me God" but doesn't the Constitution protect his right to do so?
A misunderstanding about the separation of church and state issue is that the people who founded our country meant that the government would not interfere with the church, and there would not be state run churches, such as they had in England. So they wanted the government to stay out of the church, but they were all for the church being involved in government, which you can tell from the writings of George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and Benjamin Franklin. And I have to wonder, where are those guys when you really need them?

He is going to need all the help he can get to lead us out of the messes that we currently are in I also believe that our country was founded on religious freedom, not freedom from religion. If he so chooses to say"so help me God", it should be his choice. The atheists are trying to take our rights away to practice freedom of religion. We are not trying to take their rights away of freedom to not choose religion.