Comments on: Judge Says No to Atheists’ Inaugural Prayer Challenge

By: Curtis

Curtis — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 21:53:24 +0000

The constitution clearly specifies the oath the president must take:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Adding “So help me god” or “as much as I feel like” clearly change the meaning. Any changes to the oath would be unconstitutional.

By: Siamang

Siamang — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 19:31:16 +0000

Woody argues the case well.

“it doesn’t count as “religion” if it excludes only the non-religious.”

Great, clear phrasing of the issue.

By: Luther Weeks

Luther Weeks — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 18:42:34 +0000

No harm apparent, unless we give some other examples:

So help me Aila.

So help me Santa.

So help me Joseph Smith.

By: Schmeer

Schmeer — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 17:51:58 +0000

I think the harm in including phrases such as “So help me God” or “In God we trust” is also evident in the recent survey that found 53% of Americans unwilling to vote for an atheist presidential candidate. If a majority of the population sees “So help me God” as an official requirement for the office then of course they will see an atheist as an unfit candidate.

By: Woody Tanaka

Woody Tanaka — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 14:52:40 +0000

The root of this is the case law on so-called ceremonial deism (which seems to me to say that it doesn’t count as “religion” if it excludes only the non-religious.) Under that case law, this is the same as the money cases. Until that law is rejected, we’ll run into this same result over and over again. (I think the fact that the 9th didn’t abide by it in the Newdow pledge case was great, but given the facts — kids in school, mandatory recitation, a statute which was specifically passed for religious purposes — it was clearly an outlier.)

But putting that case law aside, I think that the correct distinction has to be between Roberts saying “so help me god” and Obama saying it. Obama is not acting in an official capacity when he says the words, he is acting as an individual. So if he wants to add “so help me god”, that is his right.

But Roberts is acting as a government official. I would draw the line at him saying “so help me god” because of that office. (The fact that Obama might ask Roberts to say it is irrelevant, in my mind, because he can no more abide by that wish constitutionally than he could choose on his own volition to include it.)

By: SASnSA

SASnSA — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 14:22:06 +0000

The harm as I see it is that Christians see things like this and the “In God we trust” on our money and “under God” in the pledge of allegiance as proof that this is a Christian nation, and as a reason to further ignore atheist arguments. Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t that the reason for the establishment clause?

By: PrimeNumbers

PrimeNumbers — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 12:34:13 +0000

And there’s no harm for blacks to sit at the back of the bus. And there’s no harm for Jews to wear a little badge, or gays for that matter.

By: Basic Atheist

Basic Atheist — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 09:52:25 +0000

Tampering with the oath is one thing, which I am against, but if Obama wants to include his own words afterwards, then it’s fine with me. Whatever makes him feel official.

By: Richard Wade

Richard Wade — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 06:53:28 +0000

Judge Walton is most likely a believer, he was most likely raised by believers, he was most likely educated by believers, and he was certainly placed on the bench in DC by a believer, George W. Wipes-His-Ass-With-The-First-Amendment Bush. He answers to believers personally, socially, professionally and politically. If he is derelict in his judicial duty by essentially shrugging his shoulders with such rationalizations as “Oh what’s the harm in a little prayer?” and “Hey, what can I do about it?” then his career is still upwardly mobile, maybe even toward the Supreme Court. He will be 60 next month.

On the other hand, Judge John E. Jones, who is 53, whose admirable integrity and judicial ethics brought forth a just, broad and sensible decision in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, who was also appointed by George W. W-H-A-W-T-F-A Bush, will probably not be promoted to any higher level in the Federal Court system.

By: Frivology » Blog Archive » So Help Me God’s Day in Court

Frivology » Blog Archive » So Help Me God’s Day in Court — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 06:30:42 +0000

[...] tip: Hemant at Friendly Atheist Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and [...]