Atheists want God stricken from inaugural oath

[Untamed Waters]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090115/ap_on_go_ot/obama_under_god

Title was taken directly from news story.

The gist is some Atheists what "So help me God" taken away from President-Elect Obama's inauguration speech. Thoughts?

 

[black lincon]

they can want it all they want but until they become the majority in the nation and a good portion of congressmen and senators stop having to in some way pander to a religious right, it will never happen.

 

[xitel]

If Obama believes in God, then having him swear to God makes sense. If he didn't believe in God I would say yeah, don't make him say it, but when someone that believes in God says "so help me God", it means that if they don't keep their promise they'll be letting their god down.

 

[Hunde Des Krieg]

Oh, why can't they see that being bitchy like this makes people hate them. Like the PeTA effect.

 

[black lincon]

Oh, why can't they see that being bitchy like this makes people hate them. Like the PeTA effect.

Mind if I steal the term, "PeTA effect," that sounds like a great way to describe whinny protesters who only become less popular by protesting.

 

[Space Spoons]

It's a Christian nation, like it or not. It's not like anyone's forcing atheists to become practicing followers. If anything, it's honoring this nation's roots.

 

[SimuLord]

Personally I stopped being offended by the "god" stuff a long time ago, although I personally always pluralize it whenever circumstances require me to say an oath (as in "one nation, under gods" or "so help me gods") to reflect my own religious beliefs. Only the most bigoted stick-up-the-ass fundie types seem to mind.

 

[Reaperman Wompa]

Argue back that it's the right of a (insert religion) leader to ask their god for help, and that discriminating against someone to please them will not be allowed. An Atheist president can say whatever he likes in it's stead, but it should stay.

 

[PedroSteckecilo]

Frankly I don't care, it'd be nice but if the President is a Christian, and that's what he holds dear, then it should most assuredly be in the oath.

 

[RebelRising]

It doesn't freaking matter. If you are atheist or apatheist or agnostic or theist, Rick Warren isn't suddenly going to hypnotize all Americans over the TV into suppressing human rights. Just live and let live, as Obama is apparently a Christian. So let him do his Christian stuff at his own inauguration. If you disagree with his agenda, then ignore him; Im assume that's just as easily said as done, if people are actually attending for Obama.

That is all.

 

[Fightgarr]

I agree with xitel here. Its like how I would swear on the Great Dragon of Time. If I let it down then what the hell I am here for?

 

[Hunde Des Krieg]

Oh, why can't they see that being bitchy like this makes people hate them. Like the PeTA effect.

Mind if I steal the term, "PeTA effect," that sounds like a great way to describe whinny protesters who only become less popular by protesting.

Well it really applies when protesters or activists or whatever act all high and mighty and look down on others. Not whiny.

 

[Adam Jenson]

to the atheist in question. Get over yourself

 

[Untamed Waters]

to the atheist in question. Get over yourself

Hahaha... I'm sorry, I laughed at that.

 

[Brett Alex]

It's a Christian nation

Really? So all that stuff in the Constitution about being a secular nation is just filler then?

As to the OP, personally I really don't think it matters. As Obama is a christian then he is fine to say it, and if he wasn't, what does it matter? He's just sticking to tradition in that case.

 

[[Gavo]]

If the man is religious, let him do what he wants.

 

[Vinculi]

I don't mind either way, i think he should be allowed to swear on jenova if he wanted to.

I would only have an issue with it if there president-elect were a follower of another religion and still be expected to swear on god.

 

[Alex_P]

The Washington Post's little religion blog section very nicely covers the arguments for [http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/jon_meacham/2009/01/obamas_oath_to_us_and_to_god.html] and against [http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/sally_quinn/2009/01/oath_to_god_shows_contempt_for.html]. This is like only the third time ever that the Post's "On Faith" hasn't sucked really hard. Probably because you've got the actual editors posting stuff instead of leaving it all to Deepak Chopra.

The lawsuit is frivolous -- pretty much everyone agrees -- but I do think that "so help me God" is in poor taste.

-- Alex

 

[Sprogus]

Personally as an Athiest it doesn't bother me. It could be that I'm not American but still, America is a Christian nation as some have pointed out, and the majority of people will trust those that put themselves in God's mercy should they stuff up. It really isn't a big deal, plus what would they change it to? "Should I fail in my duties let the people of America lynch mob me"? It seems a bit wordy to me.

 

[PumpItUp]

Isn't the right to practice your religion enshrined in the US Constitution? And isn't the "So help me God" a practice of the Christian religion? If you answer yes to both of these questions, then the right to say "So help me God" is protected by the Constitution. And I just made bigoted atheists seem uncool, I mean, moreso than they already are.