This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Atheists Sue to Get Prayer, God Out of Obama's Swearing-In

Atheists Sue to Get Prayer, God Out of Obama's Swearing-In - Comments

Jaeran's Avatar Comment 1 by Jaeran

Eh, I agree with him of course, but I think Obama's only making a symbolic gesture. He doesn't seem all that religious; he's said that he grew up in a household that was pretty apathetic when it came to religion, and I have trouble believing that any intelligent person raised in such an atmosphere could bring his adult reasoning capabilities to bear and conclude that Christianity (or any religion) makes sense. If you read up on his prior political career, he's keen to adapt to any situation to get what he wants. Early stories of his trying direct tactics to bring about change end with him falling flat on his face, and he quickly learned the lessons of politics. I think he just wants to include as many people as possible (including crazy conservatives) so more people will get behind him and support the things he wants to do in office.

With a 76% approval rating recently, the same as Bush had after 9/11, he seems to be succeeding. I think his agenda largely meshes with what we here would consider important and appropriate.

Oh, and first.

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 20:50:00 UTC | #295201

Mango's Avatar Comment 2 by Mango

I applaud the lawsuit. "In God we Trust" also needs to be removed from American currency and "under God" stricken from the pledge of Allegiance. It's a very simple idea -- separate religion and government.

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 20:54:00 UTC | #295203

Rodger T's Avatar Comment 3 by Rodger T

Bloody hell.........militant atheists where did they come from?

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:04:00 UTC | #295212

mordacious1's Avatar Comment 4 by mordacious1

Is that you 8 ?

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:07:00 UTC | #295214

Rodger T's Avatar Comment 5 by Rodger T

Yep the atheist formerly known as 8teist.

Got sick of that moniker

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:09:00 UTC | #295215

Laurie Fraser's Avatar Comment 6 by Laurie Fraser

Rodger! You've finally come out of the closet. Good man!

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:12:00 UTC | #295217

mordacious1's Avatar Comment 7 by mordacious1

I think if you email Josh, he can repost your old comments under your new (or old) name.

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:13:00 UTC | #295218

Rodger T's Avatar Comment 8 by Rodger T

I`ll get a photo up as soon as I can figure out how to resize photos in iphoto.


New years resolution

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:14:00 UTC | #295219

mordacious1's Avatar Comment 9 by mordacious1

Hi Laurie

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:16:00 UTC | #295223

Laurie Fraser's Avatar Comment 10 by Laurie Fraser

I think you have to export them as a web-page, Rodger. Go to File, Export, and you can re-size there. It's a bugger of a way to go about it, but it's the only way I could find, unless anyone knows a better method with iMacs.

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:17:00 UTC | #295224

Laurie Fraser's Avatar Comment 11 by Laurie Fraser

Hey, Mord - you partying over there?

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:18:00 UTC | #295225

RichardPrins's Avatar Comment 12 by RichardPrins

If you'd like to be renamed, just ask a forum admin/moderator via a Private Message in the forum...

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:23:00 UTC | #295226

mordacious1's Avatar Comment 13 by mordacious1

Laurie

Well, I was saving the champagne for Jan 20, but the wife says no...she's not waiting. So we will be popping a cork in 2 1/2 hours. How did your party go?

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:30:00 UTC | #295231

SnowyDoc's Avatar Comment 14 by SnowyDoc

Rodger

Re-sizing photos for export from iPhoto

- Click on the photo you want to use.
- Select FILE -> EXPORT from the menu
(or press SHIFT-COMMAND-E)
- Select JPG or GIF or whatever format you wish
- Set size to CUSTOM, and you can then type in whatever size you wish.

Cheers!

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:38:00 UTC | #295232

Rodger T's Avatar Comment 15 by Rodger T

Thanks Doc ,I`ll give that a try

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:40:00 UTC | #295233

mordacious1's Avatar Comment 16 by mordacious1

Now, on topic.

This lawsuit will go nowhere, but someday one of them will...I just hope Scalia is a heavy smoker.

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:49:00 UTC | #295237

Laurie Fraser's Avatar Comment 17 by Laurie Fraser

Mord - a bloke should never wait to drink champagne, especially when a beautiful woman is suggesting it!

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 22:27:00 UTC | #295241

beanson's Avatar Comment 18 by beanson

... And anybody who looks at it carefully can see there's not much there," Walter said.



pretty much

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 23:08:00 UTC | #295245

jefft0's Avatar Comment 19 by jefft0

Does anyone know the status of Michael Newdow's suits against "under God" and "in God we trust"? The latest info on the following page says he is "waiting" until April 2008 to hear from the Appeals Court. Have they been dismissed?
http://www.restorethepledge.com/future.html

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 23:17:00 UTC | #295247

EraserGirl's Avatar Comment 20 by EraserGirl

and if we can get that done, we can roll back to the 50's and do away with the 'one nation under god' crap too.

the religious zealots have way too much sway in the US. it's pretty freaking scary.

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 23:36:00 UTC | #295250

stptrck75's Avatar Comment 21 by stptrck75

What can we do to make our voice heard? Seriously. Where can we be heard? Is it money only that will work? This is an important point in history. Let's make a stand.

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 23:48:00 UTC | #295252

mithraman's Avatar Comment 22 by mithraman

I'm behind this lawsuit 100%! I'm completely dedicated to getting religion out of government - so help me God!

Thu, 01 Jan 2009 00:09:00 UTC | #295254

Mayhemm's Avatar Comment 23 by Mayhemm

bluebird posted a better version of the story from CNN which can be found here

Thu, 01 Jan 2009 00:37:00 UTC | #295259

Dr Doctor's Avatar Comment 24 by Dr Doctor

It will be interesting to see how Obama plays this.

1. He could leave out the references, claiming that the impending lawsuit (weak excuse) should not be prejudices. But then he looks weak.

2. He could ignore the lawsuit, but then he looks like a non secularist.

That is, if he gets the choice. In the meantime will it make an important test case? If it fails, it could demonstrate quite how weak the voice of atheism is. There is something far more powerful in politics about the threat of action, rather than the action itself (until someone calls your bluff, of course) and this is how the religious lobby has for decades been able to influence policymakers.

Thu, 01 Jan 2009 00:46:00 UTC | #295261

justinesaracen's Avatar Comment 25 by justinesaracen

Re-sizing photos for export from iPhoto
- Click on the photo you want to use.
- Select FILE -> EXPORT from the menu
(or press SHIFT-COMMAND-E)
- Select JPG or GIF or whatever format you wish
- Set size to CUSTOM, and you can then type in whatever size you wish.


Thanks for this useful info. But NOW can you tell me how to set up a photo or icon in the comment box? I see no instructions in the posting guidelines and I have been posting off and on for months simply under a name. Sooo boring.

Thanks

Thu, 01 Jan 2009 01:29:00 UTC | #295266

epeeist's Avatar Comment 26 by epeeist

Comment #310076 by esuther:

Thanks for this useful info. But NOW can you tell me how to set up a photo or icon in the comment box? I see no instructions in the posting guidelines and I have been posting off and on for months simply under a name.
Go to the Forum and select User Control Panel. You will find a link on the left hand side marked Profile, select this then Edit Avatar

Thu, 01 Jan 2009 01:58:00 UTC | #295269

Steven Mading's Avatar Comment 27 by Steven Mading

The "under god" in the Pledge of Allegence, and the "So help me god" in the Presidential Oath of Office are two entirely different animals. In the case of the pledge the religious claim is in the official government-sponsored phrasing and therefore Micheal Newdow has a legitimate point. But in the case of the Oath of Office, the religious claim is NOT in the official government-sponsored phrasing and instead is just something presidents have historically chosen to add on their own every time, of their own free choosing. (A president who left it off would still have completed the the oath in every way that is legally binding by the laws of the US.)

That makes them vastly different situations, with regards to the first amendment.

Now, if when the Justice giving the oath says "repeat after me..." and speaks the lines for the president elect to repeat, and the *Justice* says "So help me god" at the end, as if it was part of the oath that was mandated, then THAT would be a problem. But historically the presidents have just added that part on their own without prompting.

Thu, 01 Jan 2009 02:08:00 UTC | #295273

Billy Sands's Avatar Comment 28 by Billy Sands

Good luck. Wonder how many fundies this will piss off. I expect the usal moronic bollocks from Robertson concerning tolerance at some point

Thu, 01 Jan 2009 04:01:00 UTC | #295314

Steve Zara's Avatar Comment 29 by Steve Zara

Comment #310124 by BillySands

"This is another example of militant atheist intolerance. For example, just because Rick Warren does not believe in evolution does not make his views unscientific, and his love for the gays shows through his attempts to reform them. You atheists don't care about tradition. America was founded by Christians. This only shows how strongly you followers of Dawkins hate God."

There. I thought I would save Robertson some time. I think that has the right amount of sneering and innaccuracy.

Thu, 01 Jan 2009 04:26:00 UTC | #295322

Billy Sands's Avatar Comment 30 by Billy Sands

Thanks Steve. It's just not the same without the broken fundamentalist record that is DR

Thu, 01 Jan 2009 04:30:00 UTC | #295323