Atheists Sue Over Inaugural Prayer

(AP)

Michael A. Newdow, who led the failed charge to get the words "under God" out of the Pledge of Allegiance, is now heading an effort to keep religion out of President-elect Barack Obama's swearing in.

Newdow's group, consisting of 18 individuals and 10 smaller groups, has sued "Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., several officials in charge of inaugural festivities, the Rev. Joseph E. Lowery and megachurch pastor Rick Warren" in U.S. District Court, the Washington Post reports.

Lowery has been asked to deliver the benediction at the ceremony, while Warren is the transition team's (controversial) choice to deliver the invocation; Roberts is set to administer the oath of office. The oath traditionally includes the phrase "so help me God," which the athiest group wants stricken.

---

Click Here For All Of CBSNews.com's Special Inauguration Coverage

---

Newdow brought similar suits four and eight years ago to keep references to God and prayer out of President Bush's inaugurals. They were unsuccessful.

The lawsuit argues that the prayers and religious references "are completely exclusionary, showing absolute disrespect to Plaintiffs and others of similar religious views, who explicitly reject the purely religious claims that will be endorsed, i.e., (a) there exists a God, and (b) the United States government should pay homage to that God."

Scott Walter, executive director of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, dismissed the suit as a "publicity stunt."

[j_mcdonald-2009]

takeback2: I think you need to calm down a bit. We''re not going anywhere, and you should get used to that. Telling people to shut up or leave might be the norm in Iran, but not here. It only makes you look desperate.

[j_mcdonald-2009]

nikosk11: "When atheists go on the attack against ''God'' all they really accomplish is to validate the very same existance of that ''God''."

So when they deny the existance of Thor, they''re really saying he exists? Same for Zeus? And Mithrades? You might want to read the philosophical literature on meaning and reference.

[mytoosense]

And exactly how many lives were slaughtered by the hands of the godless Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, etc.?

Posted by Credibility2 at 12:59 PM : Dec 31, 2008

Hitler was a Roman Catholic .

[mytoosense]

As an Atheist, I think this suit is going too far.

However it sickens me to hear that an Evangelical is invited to speak at the event. A radical Muslim would not be any worse.

[amrt5016]

Newdow''''s logic and his arguments are irrational. I find liver and onions to be offensive, but if a new president wanted to serve it at his/her inaugural ball, I wouldn''''t have to eat it, would I?
Posted by raflin0010 at 08:56 AM : Jan 02, 2009

And that is fine for lovers of liver and onions. Is it all right for the rest to go hungry or bring their own meals? In any case, what about constitutional issues that forbid favoring a religion? This is not just about Obama and Warren. They can pray together on their own without public money.

[nikosk11]

And exactly how many lives were slaughtered by the hands of the godless Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, etc.?

Posted by Credibility2 at 12:59 PM : Dec 31, 2008

And "God" allowed Herod to butcher 5,000 baby boys. At least that is what your bible sez.

[nikosk11]

I personally don''t believe in that "God" myth, but just for the sake of the argument: When atheists go on the attack against "God" all they really accomplish is to validate the very same existance of that "God"

[lordsuntzu]

what is atheism?

no god or attack god ideology?

[toolmangler-2009]

Now you are stepping on ''MY'' rights Newdow. I believe in GOD and since he says he does also, I want him to swear to me under the name of GOD with his hand on a Bible that he will uphold this country''s rights and safety

[endurorob]

Michael A. Newdow is showing complete disrespect for Christians, who greatly outnumber atheists. If Mr. Newdow does not like what is being said, he does not have to watch the swearing in ceremony.

Posted by judyann915

Obama is represetnig the Country during the inauguration and having the clergy there to speak give the impression that the government supports a specific religion which flys in the face of seperation of church and state.