Atheists want God stricken from inaugural oath

[Shakespear]

This thread contains far too much hate.

I love you. No I'm not gay.

 

[MuffinKing42]

Your all not terrible smart are you? America is supposed to have state religion, hell the fuckin people that founded this country were exiled from their own because of religious persecution, also there is that whole..separation of church and state thing. That and the constitution and all that jazz was written by people who belong to the Freemason society, which was very open mind and was really "christian" In fact religion has done absolutely nothing to benefit this country.

 

[Shakespear]

Your all not terrible smart are you? America is supposed to have state religion, hell the fuckin people that founded this country were exiled from their own because of religious persecution, also there is that whole..separation of church and state thing. That and the constitution and all that jazz was written by people who belong to the Freemason society, which was very open mind and was really "christian" In fact religion has done absolutely nothing to benefit this country.

They, might have been Christian, but they knew what happens when you mix religion with pollitics. The proverbial oil and water, mate. It's been said on this very thread that it's a country of christians, not a christian country.

 

[sequio]

I don't understand how someone else taking an oath to a deity is an infringement on my rights? I've got 3 wiccans in my office with 1 of them as my superior, and they are sexy as hell (although 2 are a bit chubby). They tell me about the sex orgies they have in the forest for rituals while burning candles of the virgin mary on a tombstone. Strangely enough i'm not offended. Why? Because I don't really care what they believe as long as they can do their job. Obama has yet to show whether or not he can be a decent president. His oath isn't really a matter, just like when i say "holy shit" isn't an infringement on the rights of people who would think shit is holy.

 

[cuddly_tomato]

What the people outlined in the op are doing is unreasonable and is petty. Even most atheists posting here apparently think so.

Most people posting here can't understand the difference between an injunction to stop Obama from saying the words and an injunction against Roberts to stop him prompting Obama to say them.

-- Alex

The dude who is doing it is totally barking though. He has started up his own atheist "church" and has being suing everyone in sight who might have anything to do with possibly believing in god.

Obama saying "so help me god" is not going to kill anyone. It isn't going to spark WW3 or cause babies to start eating their pottys. But he has decided to spend the taxpayers money and start legal proceedings against someone else who might well want to say those words.

The man is a pillock. He is a bad example of atheism and the likes of him is the reason atheists are getting a reputation for intolerance and having a religious fervor all of their own.

 

[Easykill]

This thread contains far too much hate.

I love you. No I'm not gay.

Erm... Extremes are bad?

 

[cuddly_tomato]

Obama, just like everyone else in the United States, has the constitutionally protected right to practice whatever religion he so chooses.

Obama, just like every other Federal officer when acting in his capacity as a Federal officer, has the Constitutionally mandated duty to refrain from acting in a way that entangled government in religion. He doesn't give up all rights to practice his religion when acting as President, but he certainly gives up some.

This is about him getting Inaugurated, not how he spends his Sundays--you do realize that, don't you?

Frankly no.

There is no provision in the constitution that states religious practices have to be done privately. If the man is taking an oath it is right that he should take one before his god if he is religious. If this is offensive to some then they have the right to not vote for candidates who might be Christian in future. But if a Christian president they have then they have to just put up with it. Democracy isn't about getting what you want, it's about getting what the majority put their Xs too on ballot papers.

Maybe it is my Europeanness coming out here but what the hell is the big deal?

That people are trying to defend this on all the wrong grounds, like 'this is a Christian nation' or 'the First Amendment only applies to laws' or 'it's his Constitutional right to practice his religion' and not something like 'look, it's just ceremonial deism' or 'hey--it's more about our admiration for George Washington than any kind of religious issue'.

Exactly. So what's the big deal? The man might be religious, who cares? He is going to say 4 little words at a ceremony, he hasn't herded people up at gunpoint to attend church. Fight to have equal rights in the workplace and protection from getting fired, fight to have religious instruction removed from state run schools, fight to have evolution put into science books and taught to kids.

But don't fight because the President says "So help me god", because whether he means it or not it is his oath and therefore his business.

Seriously some atheists are going too far.

 

[Alex_P]

The dude who is doing it is totally barking though. He has started up his own atheist "church" and has being suing everyone in sight who might have anything to do with possibly believing in god.

And how does strawmanning all his arguments help the situation at all?

He's suing the government -- not "everyone in sight", the government -- for anything to do with believing in God. Because he says that's not the government's job.

I think his arguments are on the trivial side, but the rebuttals are pretty damn weak, too. All the courts have given us is "Oh, hey, all these references aren't really religious despite the fact that they were created with religious intent and the entire Republican Party goes howling mad about how people are trying to destroy religion every time they question a little thing like this". That's pure evasion and handwaving.

-- Alex

 

[Zani]

It diffidently should be removed, state and church should be separated from each other as much as possible.

 

[apeoflight]

I don't think church and state should be separated as much as possible. I believe that the separation is that a church should not run the government. I mean what happens when you take out all religion out of our constitution and our laws? It just totally collapses. I mean where is the line of good and evil of right and wrong without religion?

 

[cuddly_tomato]

What worse is that that people are going too far in criticising those atheists, trying to defend this on all the wrong grounds, like 'this is a Christian nation' or 'the First Amendment only applies to laws' or 'it's his Constitutional right to practice his religion' and not something like 'look, it's just ceremonial deism' or 'hey--it's more about our admiration for George Washington than any kind of religious issue'.

I disagree. This is a religious issue, and it is right it should be addressed as one. These kinds of atheists deserve to be criticised as harshly as those theists who want gay marriage outlawed or who want evolution to be taken out of schools. They are trying to shove their own particular belief system on other people.

Obama has a constitutionally protected right to say the words "so help me god" if he really means them. It really is that simple. No amount of fundamentalist atheists throwing their toys out of the cot is going to change Obamas own views on religion nor the role of the constitution in protecting peoples right to practice religion (or indeed forgo its practice if they so desire).

The dude who is doing it is totally barking though. He has started up his own atheist "church" and has being suing everyone in sight who might have anything to do with possibly believing in god.

And how does strawmanning all his arguments help the situation at all?

He's suing the government -- not "everyone in sight", the government -- for anything to do with believing in God. Because he says that's not the government's job.

I think his arguments are on the trivial side, but the rebuttals are pretty damn weak, too. All the courts have given us is "Oh, hey, all these references aren't really religious despite the fact that they were created with religious intent and the entire Republican Party goes howling mad about how people are trying to destroy religion every time they question a little thing like this". That's pure evasion and handwaving.

-- Alex

Seriously, having the word "god" on the dollar bill isn't going to fuck up planet earth anytime soon. There are bigger issues to get all pissy about, and the fact this man can even bring such ridiculous lawsuits, while at the same time creating his own little "church", speaks volumes about his character. And examination of the character behind this sorry business is warranted.

 

[antipunt]

God is supposed to be a symbol of everything good. Therefore, if a president looks to god or is inspired by god, to be a good president, you can't argue against that.

except for the fact that he sends anyone He doesn't like to eternal hell...

 

[antipunt]

What the hell? Whats with atheists and always pushing their beliefs on other people... I'm getting awfully tired of it

last time I remembered...it was the crazy Christian guy holding signs on my college campus...

 

[Alex_P]

That is the problem--what do you do with these bits of tradition that go back to a time when the idea of all Christians being equal was a ridiculously radical idea, and that if the Republican Party goes howling mad about this stuff had been born back in those times, they would have wanted to burn most of the Founding Fathers at the stake.

Well, a lot of these bits of tradition don't really go back to that, even. Oftentimes the unofficial versions go back to times when the nation was suffering -- "In God We Trust" was first added to some of our money around the time of the Civil War and Reconstruction, "so help me God" seems to have really only picked up after FDR uttered it during the Great Depression. And the official endorsements of stuff like this go back to the 50s, when people were seeing godless communists under every rock and convening special witch-hunt committees to ferret them out.

It's kinda like how the "patriotism" surge of the mid-"aughties" resulted in new attempts to "protect" stuff like the flag and the Pledge.

-- Alex

 

[apeoflight]

What the hell? Whats with atheists and always pushing their beliefs on other people... I'm getting awfully tired of it

last time I remembered...it was the crazy Christian guy holding signs on my college campus...

Yeah but what about all the atheists trying to stop us from celebrating christmas or easter in a public place? What about the atheists trying to strike god from the constitution and national anthem?



And its also not a theocracy because its not actually the church running the government. Anyone of US citizenship can run for office.