For Radar:P

[Radar]

Very nice. If I tried to pull this off in America, I'd be attacked both in person and in the media.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by Radar

Very nice. If I tried to pull this off in America, I'd be attacked both in person and in the media.

Look, Paul -- that's probably less because of any ideas in here than your generally Michael Newdow tone. You know you'd come off like him.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

your generally Michael Newdow tone.

I didn't remember him either, so I Googled him. . .

Judge dismisses attempt to ban prayer from inauguration

Attempts by an atheist to bar religious prayer from next Tuesday's inauguration were dismissed by a judge in Washington, D. C., yesterday.

At a packed U. S. District Court, Judge Reggie Walton said the plaintiffs "lacked standing because they failed to articulate a concrete 'harm' that would result from the practices complained of."

The suit was filed by Michael Newdow, a physician from Sacramento, Calif., on behalf of various individuals and organizations, including the Freedom from Religion Foundation and the Atheist Alliance International.

Defendants included the Presidential Inaugural Committee (PIC), John Roberts, the U. S. Supreme Court Chief Justice and the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies. Dr. Newdow wanted to ensure the words "so help me God" did not form a part of Barack Obama's oath of office. The tradition is thought to date to the first inauguration of George Washington in 1789.

Got me wondering what the cellarites think of this. I know there is a large contingent of athiests/agnostics here.

[Phage0070]

Originally Posted by classicman

Got me wondering what the cellarites think of this.

The US treats religion from the standpoint of making sure free exercise is allowed, not removing every aspect of religion from the government. This means that the government will not establish an official religion, sponsor a specific religion with tax money, or prevent the free exercise of a religion. It does not prevent the mention of religion within oaths or other minor things like that. There is a valid argument that it prevents the construction of expensive monuments to fictional books with taxpayer money, but that is another issue.

I don't see any reason to change the oath.