The simple answer is, Prayers do not belong...period, end of story...

I don't know about you but I got the heebe jeegees when pastor was saying them prayers

Do any of these phoney polititians even believe in god? It's soooo creepy when everyone bows their head down and remains quiet while some "person of god" leads them in prayer...Just shows you just how far right the whole shebang really is...All the phony service to god...can't get elected without it..

...The freemasons started this nation with their deist and enlightenment principles....we have come a long way since then...What ever happened to the separation of church and state idea? Had enough light already?

Prayers, and cities on hills don't go well with breadlines and brutal occupations...GAZA will not be forgotten...Long live the palestinians!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If it's God's country, why did he let the Rethugnicans screw it up so badly?

If God has blessed us so, why do almost 50 million not have the medical coverage necessary to take care of themselves?

If God loves all of us, why do millions in this country go to bed hungry or undernourished and maybe go to sleep under an overpass or on a storm grate?

If we are the free moral agents that the Jewish/Christian/Muslim theologians claim we are, why can same sex marriages be allowed?

If our 'Christian' nation follows the book and believes in stewardship, why do we use the air , water and land like a toilet for toxic wastes and pollution?

If our nation is made up of people who give more than lip service to a loving God, why is all of this plus the hate mongering that exists toward people of color, LGBT people and others tolerated or allowed?

If God has made us free, why can't many of us join a Union without being targeted for dismissal by our employer on trumped up charges?

If God truly loves America, why doesn't he fix it himself?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Watching the Inauguration was like watching GodTV. I don't care what other people believe...can't they just shut up about it for a little while?

I'm a second generation atheist and I don't run around telling everyone how they need to develop a personal understanding that there is no higher power that is going to save them from anything. I don't do it. Why? Because it is rude. And it is my belief, not anyone else's.

I am confident I will see a woman president in my lifetime. I am hopeful I will see a GLBT president in my lifetime. I am a little hopeful I will see a non-Christian president in my lifetime. I have no hope we will see an atheist president in my lifetime. Atheists are reviled.

I have so much hope for Obama, but I will always be disappointed by the lengths to which he found it necessary to focus on religion in the Inauguration.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Regardless of religious beliefs or lack thereof, I'm glad that our nation's politics are no longer dominated by people who love war, rampant military spending, cluster bombs, landmines, the death penalty, torture, denial of life-saving condoms and clean syringes and needles, and denial of health insurance to poor children, yet tell us they're pro-life. This macabre cult of violence flourishes amongst conservative Christians.

I'm an American academic intensive-care physician in Dhaka, Bangladesh. The ICU I run is filled with severely malnourished, critically ill infants from the slums of Dhaka. We lose several babies a week due to lack of ventilators to support their breathing for a few days as a result of Bush's ban on US funds to organizations that perform abortions. A satellite facility of ours provides this service to incredibly poor women to keep them from dying as a result of botched abortions by village quacks or from bringing more children into the world to starve to death, and this means I can't get ventilators.

These religious conservatives might be pro-embryo and pro-fetus, but it's Kafkaesque for them to call themselves pro-life. Let them come here and explain to a grieving family that their baby had to die to uphold the sanctity of life.

Instead of harassing scared, vulnerable women walking into clinics, let them hold bake sales and buy seeds and clay pots so the slum-dwelling families we serve can grow some vegetables. Instead of holding expensive banquets in hotels, let them buy some equipment for our hospital.

Then just maybe I'd agree that they're really pro-life.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...to god everywhere.

And, yes,it was disappointing to see the long-awaited inauguration of Obama have so many mentions of the supernatural.



-c-

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

....of any government founded on genocide, that has continually practiced genocide since its inception, and is dedicated to continuing genocide, must begin with a prayer to the God of War for the success of the current genocide(s).

Don't be fooled by the name(s) of the War God(s), the language of the prayer(s), or any irrelevancies thrown in.

The mandatory invocation is a solemn ritual that has traditionally been used for thousands of years of religious strife throughout the world, for the purpose of warding off peace.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Atheist's - chill out.. no one asked that you believe in anything. This has been a tradition that has taken place as long as we have been electing Presidents.

First, the nation is not an Atheist's nation. Most of the nation believes in a god..And 15% of the nation are Atheist's?????? sounds questionable!

Second it's predominately a Christian nation or a nation of Christians - did anyone pick up the "Our Father".

Thank you Obama for not breaking with tradition.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I believe in charity. I believe in justice; I believe in do unto others as you would wish done unto you; i believe in honesty; I believe there are good people who do bad things and bad people who do good things.
I am a believer.

I thought perhaps I was being over critical when I too got the Heebe Jeeve's at the continual reference to God. I sat with some 300 people watching the inaugeration. I was probably the only one that was uneasy with our dependance on the supernatural.

If our government, our country, is guided by "God", then perhaps it is time to try something else.

If the salvation of our country is dependant not on the human endeaver, but on the spiritual, then truly we are doomed.

The invocation was an affront to all non-Christians throughout the world. How are we going to "lead" if our basic belief is that 70 or 80 Percent of the world should apologize and ask forgiveness for not following the teachings of Jesus?
I believe that the Jesus had the right idea with regard to how people should treat other people. I do not necessarily believe he had it right when he subjugated his humanity to the spiritual.
I am a little tired of athelet's thanking God for "HIS" help in defeating that obviously evil athelete on the other team.
I fervently wish for President OBama to succeed in bringing honesty and accountability back to our government. I fervently wish ur government to truly understand and respect the dreams and desires of the Billions of human beings that inhabit this planet.
So Help Me God.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm not American, so didn't want to criticise this momentous moment, but THANK YOU Greta for this opinion. Obviously the whole world is delighted at the progressiveness of the USA voters who have elected Obama into office, but the whole world, like any given town or city in the USA, is home to a wide variety of religions and spiritualities; in the spirit of democracy and tolerance I was amazed and dismayed at how much "God" featured in the ceremony. God who? Surely it would have been possible to broaden the base very easily without losing the spiritual aspect. The constant reference to the Christian God was exclusionary and disrespectful.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

overall I was impressed with Obama's Inaugural speech and am delighted with his actions of the first couple of days. However, it seems that the christians of America get pushier every year. I wish Barack would leave his religious beliefs out of his speeches but he is a 'Centrist' and will continue to make appeals to the dumbed-down masses, whatever their color or ethnicity. What I can't understand is how someone as intelligent as our new President can buy into that SHIT!

It was extremely distasteful to have to listen to that ignorant, fat, pompous, bigoted, Con Man Rick Warren. What a despicable person he is!

I have been an atheist for close to 55 years now, since about 16, and proud of it. One of the reasons I moved abroad was to get away from the hordes of stupid Americans that feel compelled to "spread the word (misery)" yet can't even make a factual argument for their misplaced beliefs.

I don't put up with their b.s. anymore! Shame our country can't demand more 'separation of church & state'! I don't really care what they practice in private but don't get pushy about god or jesus (or mohammed)in my space!!!

Paul in Thailand (with the non-pushy Buddhists)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Before the Australian elections in November 2007 the now Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, foreshadowed ominously that as Prime Minister he would get his guidance from the Bible. Not from the people, not from the great liberating traditions of the Enlightenment and the scientific revolution, but from the Bible. The electors had no choice but to elect him because the alternative was the serial liar and war criminal John Howard. Rudd has been true to his word. He has attacked Internet freedom on the pretext of pornography, with upcoming laws that will make normal (non-porno) use of the Internet subject to controls that have been rivalled only in police states like Burma and China. He has made an ass of himself with a self-righteous attack on a harmless painting that one would have expected from the mouth of Nikita Khrushchov. He promised to get the Australian troops out of Iraq. There are still Australian troops in Iraq although many have left and instead the force in Afghanistan has been bolstered to free America to keep more troops in Iraq. The Australian Navy still helps menace Iraq’s shores. Rudd promised to dismantle draconic anti-worker legislation brought on by Howard but it is still there under other names. He has so grovelled to the thieving banks in this contrived “financial crisis” that even Malcolm Turnbull - a merchant banker and leader of the Liberal (Tory) Opposition - has been able to take him to task for selling out the Australian people to keep the wealthy bankers wealthy. He has just upped Australian diplomatic representation in the Vatican from part time to full time. What is sad is that this is in one of the most unreligious countries in the world. He’s not a bad as Tony Bliar, I’ll give him that, but he is of the same “New Labour” tradition.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What an uplifting! I sat in a happy and wonderful audience, listening with joy and hope to the inaugeration. Good people all.
Yet, i felt almost embarrased when I cringed at the continued "plea" for "God's" inspiration and devotion.
NOw, because of this Alternet posting, I realize I am not alone.
P.S. "tradition" is the crutch of ignorance

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This administration are planning to orchestrate another 9-11 attack and massacre of civilians in US and possibly Israel.

HEre is part of the equation=

The great need for more secrure footing (genocides) in the Middle Eastern Islamic nations.
+
The outcry of the world at the injustice of the invasions and occupations.
+
The reason Obama couldnt have been a more "innocent" type figure.
(It's all the same status quo with a human face.)
+
The worst part of all is the masacre of GAZAN CIVILIANS which will probably be their alibi for "revenge terrorism". (We know Israel would do anything unless there were not BIG WELFARE BUCKS involved)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm not an atheist, but I am disturbed, on a continual basis, about how much religion has seeped into our government. When did the separation of church and state begin to be ignored? There was way too much prayer in these otherwise inspiring and patriotic inaugural events.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

thank you, thank you, thank you. your piece said everything i've been wanting, dying, to say since the address. i'm so tired of having god, who is usually a christian one, shoved down my throat. you nailed it in your article.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

While I concur that atheists are indeed among the most marginalized of groups in the US, the idea that Warren's invocation or Lowery's benediction somehow tarnished the ceremony seems a little ludicrous. I don't identify with any organized religion nor do I believe in any specific being, I'm more of an existentialist. However, the inauguration process, despite it's symbolic significance, is icing on the cake compared to what's actually written in the constitution (Whether the president stands out in the cold, takes the oath and dances or not, as of 12:00PM Tuesday, he was the president).

I wasn't happy about Rick Warren's selection and I did not pray with him on the mall; but I did respect the right for our president to select him as well as the right for believers to engage in prayer. Don't get me wrong I understand the church and state argument and I am a heavy proponent. I just think there are bigger fish to fry than the semantics of a ceremony. That's just my opinion.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Since such atheism is negative, it's not easy to see which God atheists are objecting to, but it often sounds as if it's the old man in the sky, beloved of the Religious Right in the USA. Not many people outside the USA believe in him anyway and I doubt the Pope does.
Is it perhaps the Light Within that the Quakers tell us about? Do atheists have proof that nothing like that can possibly exist, ever? The Hindu Brahman? But the atheist God, science, now believes that the world is much as the Hindus said many centuries ago. What of the Prime Mover who has re-appeared with the study of macro-physics? The root problem is that atheism is grossly unscientific, because it ignores evolution and the eventual appearance of much more sophisticated creatures than ourselves, who will perceive and understand vastly more complex ideas than humans can. Atheists are just repeating a foolish "what I can't see isn't there mantra" and they can't see further than their own noses.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Life is just full of these little disappointments; get over it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

am continually upset with the religious tone in every aspect of our government. Almost every politician has to add "God bless America" at the end of their speeches. If they are going to mention God, then why be so arrogant and elitist about it....how about they start saying "God bless the whole world and every being that resides in it". But more importantly, I want to know what happened to the seperation of church and state. Our forefathers, specifically, put that in the Constitution to keep this from happening. I don't care if you are a Christian or not, or a Buddhist, a Muslim, a Jew, or any other faith; but that all belongs in your personal life, not on the public stage of government.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As I listened to Warner's speech, watched our elected officials sit in on a church ceremony and observed many Christian overtones throughout the day I couldn't help but be distracted by the nagging question of "Where is the separation of Church and State"? And I can honestly say it bothers me. I do not begrudge those who wish to celebrate their beliefs in private but as history and current events have clearly shown, combining religion with politics makes for nasty outcomes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

While I don't really think we're going to fall into some Xian totalitarian state, Attwoods Handmaids Tale still freaks me out.

Be vigilent. Fight Xian incursions, mock it frequently, ignore it at our peril.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

To those of you who don't believe in god, or, better said, believe there is no god - you're not alone - not by a longshot. I do agree, however, that one must choose, on hisser own, what beliefs s/he will abide by. Most importantly, however, one can maintain hisser beliefs as fervently as s/he cares to but do not thrust those beliefs on others. Like many issues in life ( inter alia pro-choice, LGBT status, same gender marriage (after all, love and caring are, well, love and caring)), religion is an individual choice. I submit that religion is a creature of mankind to salve the angst generated by that which is unknown and, most likely, not knowable. E.g., I personally don't care (though am very interested) how this planet, or I, for that matter, came into being - the fact that it and I coexist is enough and what's important is how I conduct myself in the brief time I'm here. I believe 'values' can be instilled without the detriment of the mystical baggage of religion. In any event, it matters not. There are those who believe (I've read there are hundreds if not thousands of different religions/sects/etc. with concurring and contrasting beliefs - go figure!), those who don't and some undefinable group in between.

I have great hopes for the new administration notwithstanding the injection of 'religion' in our everyday lives - I guess it's reflective of the majority who think differently from us 'non-believers'. Just wish the Pres (I considered him Pres notwithstanding CJ Roberts' misquoting/misadministering the Oath of Office - that's another issue - cf. Article II and Amendment XX - US Constitution) would have used the term 'atheists' and get the word out that we do exist and have a 'rightful' title.

Be well

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the sooner humans turn their efforts and treasure toward each other's benefit instead of a delusional, magical buddy in the sky, the sooner we can really call ourselves "civilized". The mayhem caused by people's gods is abhorrent and hypocritical - enough already. The Founders got it right - keep your religion to yourself. P.S. great article.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Written like a true patriot, Greta!
I, too, was delighted to hear President Obama include "non-believers" in his inaugural speech.
This is a very good and welcome sign.
Invoking god all over the place was way too much for me, and it should be way too much for anybody who truly believes in a necessary separation of religion from government.
As to just staying silent, that will only keep the superstitions alive. We must expose the lies, the inconsistencies and the dangers of religion.
As all struggles for equality, the struggle for reason against superstition is not going to come in one day. But the enlightenment, the illumination of the minds over traditions which by their very existence cause harm, this is going to come one day, IF we remain vocal. Never keep silent on this subject again.
Thank you for this article, and for inspiring me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Because WORDS have created every nation, every religion, and every child on earth, therefore we must choose our words wisely.
.
Today, we speak the language, salute the flag, and worship the stone that we were told to, using mere words, and now, so to, what words we tell children will create their future.
.
The Latin language contains 17,621 words TOTAL. If you have ever tried translating one language into another, then you know what the Romans did when they invented the Old and New testaments. We must be careful what we worship.
.
Adults and Children, alike, need to be reminded that the words they choose will create their future.
.
To defend their province from the WORDS of others, children around the world are being trained to hate and murder. For there to be peace in the world, we must stop attacking ourselves. We are not cannibals. We are not nations, and We are not religions, We are Humanity.
.
Religions PROCLAIM that I am a ''heathen'', but I know of only ONE tiny earth, inside ONE tiny galaxy, inside in ONE tiny universe... and so, whatever ''God'' there is, that ''God'' is not a religion. Religions can not create galaxies. These tiny, feuding religions are not qualified to tell me who created this universe, and my life.
.
I am here to FEED the future of Life... not to EAT IT.
.
I will only defend the Earth, and I defend the Earth from these CANNIBAL religions, raising their CANNIBAL armies.
.
I am HUMANITY. This is our ONLY Earth, and it is up to us to prevent religions and their national armies from consuming it in their war against Life, Truth, and whatever God.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

At the least, this is a large part of our national tradition. When non-believers object, it is widely perceived as peevish, like the spoiled child who demands that the group does everything his/her own way.

Of course Christianity itself has no connection with government. Our policies are often in direct contradiction to Christ's teachings. Our government has a solid record of being war mongers, not peace keepers. Americans in general accept that we annually hand out billions of dollars of welfare to the rich, yet found it intolerable that we "wasted" 6% of the federal budget on women and children in poverty. One "inconvenient truth" is that Jesus spoke quite clearly against materialism, and materialism is the fuel the drives this country. The list goes on. When
believers say, "God bless America," we aren't saying that we think we're special -- we're praying for God's help.

With that said, religion is still, in spite of our shortcomings, and certainly in spite of a hypocritical government, a core part of who and what most of us are. Demands that we take God out of public life is perceived as oppressive -- more government restrictions.

We've seen a sort of knee-jerk reaction to any public mention of God, and the perception of the "Get God out of public life" call is one of an effort to drive religion underground, to be acknowledged only in private, to ban the traditions that are so important to so many.

Still, if you would want to move toward removing any expression of faith/spirituality from (for example) public ceremonies, it's self-defeating to declare that because some don't believe, God should be censored out of the public discussion. I would suggest focusing discussions on the hypocrisy shown by a government that expresses a belief in God while passing policies that directly contradict the teachings of the Bible.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Now get back in your pen, buy stuff, pay your credit card bills, and let the important people get back to their business. Maybe you need to go sing and chant 'Jesus' for a few hours so you don't forget who's in charge.
What a world of morons this is.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thanks for your well written article. It is with hugh disappointment that once again we begin with a God agenda for our country. Our Judeo-Christain-Islamic world will be the ruin of us all, believers and non-believers. I am not sure what I believe in, but I am sure I do not believe in the God which has been pervasive in our government since we came to these shores. In the name of this God we destroyed nearly 60 million indigenous people. This same God found it ok to kill and enslave Africans for decades. Through out history this same God lead us in Crusades to kill and destroy others. If most Americans knew the true history of our country they would call it a lie. Bush lead the last crusade with his invasion of Irag. It sickens me to think that we may have been fooled again by the ruling elite of this country and Obama is just another puppet with "God" pulling the strings.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The performance (albeit by stellar virtuoso musicians) of "'Tis the Gift to Be Simple" done up into a Juilliard composition major's capstone project.

Where else but in America? :-(

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Whenever my religious friends begin to talk about their beliefs I like to share a favorite quote from historian Stephen Henry Roberts:

"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,you will understand why I dismiss yours."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I have a difficult time with the Christian religion's darker side: the side that justified slavery, the anti GLBT, the so called Pro-Life hypocrisy that protects the fetus but not the death row inmate or the soldier on the battlefield.

However, I do recall that Dr. King called for civil rights, an end to the Vietnam War and help for the poor in God's name. I also know that every great democratic movement for change in this country was made by Christians. I've marched with Christians in many peace and Gay rights marches.

The author has much in common with many Christians. Indeed, he probably gained his sense of social justice from Christians who fought/fight for love, compassion, justice and hope throughout the world. My point is embrace what's good about Christianity because angry atheists turn me off just as much as the Christian right.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yes, we are supposed to have a separation of Church and State, but like after 9/11, when the Bush spinmeisters opined if you weren't flying the flag and calling for the death of Osama Bin Laden, you were in bed with terrorism, I look at this inauguration as the new president and his advisors not wanting to look too secular, after all the attacks on Obama's religious beliefs (e.g., ignorant references to Obama as a Muslim).

Picking Rick Warren to placate the Conservatives was pathetic. I am disappointed that Obama chose to allow this sleazy homophobe to the podium (and he turned out to be much worse than I would have imagined).

I think the Obama administration was 'making sure' the religious right could not accuse Obama of not being a Christian.

I, too, was nauseated by the interminable prayers and references to God that day. I think Obama figured it was a necessary evil, but frankly, I think it is high time to get God out of government, and cast off all the religious creepiness that Bush and Co. brought into the White House!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How ironic that the author of this piece has the last name, "Christian." As a 30+ year health care provider, I have watched many people die. In all those years, I have only seen one person, (even those who claimed to be atheists) who when they realized the end was near, didn't call out the name "God", and ask for mercy and/or help. Just some anecdotal information.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I've lived for long periods in two semi-theocracies (Israel and England) and as egregious as I found that, at least I was not constantly bombarded by all this god, god, god American chatter. Thank you god for letting me run fast. Please god make my curtains match my drapes. God guided my oscar-winning performance. Europeans are mystified by the American concept of a god who actively looks after the tiniest details.

Jon Stewart had it right when he wondered why Obama didn't think god heard him the first 20 times. Thanks for this Greta!

Sue Katz
Visit my blog Consenting Adult: www.suekatz.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

AMEN!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I have concluded, for what it is worth (perhaps nothing), that all religionists who "believe" in a deity and most who believe in an afterlife lie on a spectrum. At one extreme are the intensely mentally ill (delusional psychotics) who usually must be medicated and institutionalized. At the other extreme are the totally brainwashed who need to be deprogrammed (and often are, after rescuing from a cult). In between are all the other religionists, True Believers, etc. who partake of differing degrees of schizotypal and indoctrinational irrationalities.

Unfortunately, if the author's numbers are right, 85% of Americans are either slightly mad or heavily propagandized and THEY control the country. And they control US. And until our numbers climb higher, we will continue to suffer from their metaphysical whims and abusive impositions.

We need a counter-propaganda machine, community outreach, an alternative to the boy and girl scouts programs. There are more unbelievers already in America than all the Buddhists, muslims, and jews put together (less than 5%). We need to organize and financially support our reason over their superstitions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

God was included because Obama chose to include God. When you are elected President you get to make decisions like that. If you don't like it vote for an atheist.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There is a lot I like about the information on Alternet. A lot I appreciate reading and understanding. But one thing I've noticed is the lack of tolerence. The author claims God didn't belong in our country's inaugeral celebration, and I am tolerant of her opinion. It would be lovely if she, and many of you, would show tolerance of the belief in a greater power as a guiding force in millions of people's lives. Tolerence, tolerence, tolerence. Prayer was no threat to those who don't believe. And belief doesn't mean you hand over all your decisions to God. It doesn't matter if I embrace everything that was said or not, it only matters that the words spoken appealed to a great many of those who were taking part. If you can't embrace the idea of a Divine energy then you could at least embrace respecting the fact that for millions in this country God's energy IS a guiding light on their paths. If you want to complain, then focus your complaints where it belongs - on religious dogma. THAT is what brings a great deal of grief into people's lives, NOT believing in God. That's my 2c.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Rather than claim the references to god should be stricken for us atheists, maybe we should try an approach that is more inclusive. All of these references to a god were not references to Roman gods, or Greek gods, or Norse gods, or Hindu gods. They were all references to The Christian god.

Not just for atheists, but for all those people who believe in a god but the the Christian god, these references should cease. They should cease just because of honoring others - atheists and non-Christians. If I were a Muslim I would be offended at these remarks. They definitely weren't made towards a Muslim god.

It just makes sense and is nothing short of consideration to not include all these remarks about the Christian god.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A message that I received from some indigenous Americans notes in part:
...Obama slipped a subtle comment into his inauguration “mind control” speech ... When Obama defined America as a nation of “Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus and non-believers”, he deliberately left out Indigenous peoples. We have our value systems. We have our knowledge. He sneaked in the intention to ignore us when he said that “the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve”. To Americans the word “tribe” means the Ongwehonwe. We are the caretakers and trustees of the lands and resources of the world which the New World Order NWO or One World “Government” must steal to control the world. ... Colonial “band or tribal councils” will be put in charge of indigenous people where possible such as Iraq and Afghanistan. Other Indigenous peoples will be “eliminated” or ignored. It looks like this program will be run by the United Nations ... on behalf of the NWO war mongers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

lied us into war in Iraq.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Listening to Warren's "prayer" was like listening to Hitler speak of love and compassion for Jews. What a fucking hypocrite! Religion and politics are identical . . . tell the people what they want to hear and then do the opposite.
I had high hopes for the Obama administration, but his choice of Warren and Tuesday's religious God-fest was very disheartening. Let's hope that it stops there and it's back to reality to tackle these problems facing us without relying on the help of any deity. Bush supposedly did "God's will" and look where that got us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

These idiots keep fighting to remove my right to Religion and remove God from things and they wonder WHY we are in the current condition we are! What a bunch of MORONS!

RT
Online Privacy when it Counts

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

First, the writing of the article was childish. Adults do not write using words like "icky" and "ew". It reeks of middle school immaturity.

Second, nothing that happened in the inauguration violated our Constitution. No law was passed that established a religion, and nothing was done to inhibit the free expression of religion. In fact, it looks to me like many here would like to squelch President Obama's free exercise of religion. Did he somehow lose his rights as a citizen because he was elected to the office of president?

I share much of the discomfort expressed at the overwhelming religiosity of the inauguration. I felt my skin crawl a little as Rick Warren's prattled on. I even pictured God looking down at Mr. Warren and saying "Move on already, we've got the picture." But disagreement and discomfort is a far cry from the anti-religious vitriol in these comments.

Have many of you had negative experiences with religion? Have religious people treated you badly or rejected you? I am sorry if that has been your experience. I even understand because I have had the same experience, but it is a grave mistake to allow this kind of bitterness and anger to poison the well.

Should we stone Christians or burn them at the stake as we used to do with witches? Should we use all means necessary to extirpate religion from the face of the earth leaving only the intelligent and enlightened to rule?

Or do we need to learn to live together, each giving the other the space they need to live as they believe best? This question isn't just for the angry atheists, but the self-righteous, finger pointing religious types as well.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There are 1.1 billion of us who are the enlightened ists. If we could just kill the 2.1 billion Christians and the 1.5 billion Muslims we would be the majority. Then in the US we can apply the values we have learned because we are what we learn. Funny though the values that we have learned come out of the Judeo-Christian tradition. If those mystics would just stop believing in God then the Judeo-Christian values could rule the land not because there is a god but because we are enlightened. The nerve of the mystic majority to think that they have the right to pursue happiness in this land, and just because they have always been the majority to believe that they have the right to follow their mystic traditions. After we kill all the believers we can live on a planet where no one kills anyone, damn that commandment. We can have healthcare for everyone because we are our brother’s keepers, damn that Jesus. After we kill all the believers do you think we will evolve and stop talking and acting like they do? Why do we do that anyway? How long will it be before we start teaching our children the values and traditions of the nonbelievers? We can not suffer the children to backslide into believers. The mystics say that the flush will be known by the works of the flush, but in our minds we know that we are different from the believers. If the mystics would get out of the way we could act like them only we would be masters of the universe. Damn sounds a lot like what the mystics believe the master deceiver said to Eve. Those foolish believers just have too much time on their side.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It seems that as a presidential candidate you have to be religious. You have to attend church. You have to have prayer breakfasts. You have to swear to God when you take the oath. Obama at least made a reference to non-believers. You have to have prayers at your inauguration. Warren's prayer was awful. Rev Lowery was much better, more humanistic and funny. Every four years someone tries to get the religion out of the inauguration but they always fail. I would like to see it toned down. Hopefully, at some point that will happen.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If you want to live in a nation under God then go to Iran or Saudi Arabia or Sudan.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...and could you pass me some of that blood and body of christ please. I haven't eaten today.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I might be the ONLY ONE who doesn't stand for the Pledge of Allegiance at the local Democratic group's monthly meetings. We're not one nation under God, and I can't figure out why the head of the Dems even thought this was a good idea to start the POLITICAL meetings with something I haven't agreed with since I left the sixth grade. It's no wonder why, even though I was elected to be a delegate at the caucus, I never hear from the Dem leadership about when the meetings are.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oh Lord, where you been? We've been callin and pleadin for your gracious mercy. How long must we call? Are you too old and deaf? Are you suffering with Alzheimer's or somethin like it by now? Or was their something I said in my prayers that offended you?
Have our praises not been big enough?
Are you just too High and Mighty to hear our little voices?
In the words of Bugs Bunny: "Hey, what's up, Doc?"?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

gaudy and ostentatious display of crap I have ever seen. Are we now and forever cursed with the constant pouring of religion all over us like syrup; it really is sickening.
These disgusting displays represent nothing more than then Show Biz; I thought one's faith was between them and their higher power, what ever it is called. The truly faithful have no need to flaunt their beliefs; what was seen by millions of people on the great day was: Churchianity, in one form or another.
I'm so glad that my mind is not corrupted by these creeps; the only reason for the existence of all this mumbo jumbo is so men, usually white, can control their chattel!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Our Founding Fathers SAW the DIVERSE HUMANITY HERE in the new world and created a HAVEN FROM the various lies, wars, fears, slavery and persecution of the OLD WORLD's kings and priests.
.
Don't let the divisions from the ancient world become rooted here.
.
It is not our fault what language we speak, what flag we salute or what stone god we worship. It was done to us by the worshipers of the fabricated words written by ancient, barbaric LIARS to turn Human children into obedient slaves.
.
In Truth, Life is Alive on earth to FEED the future of Creation, not to EAT IT to feed these greedy empires.
.
The Truth, whetever it is , is the SAME for EVERY living thing that has EVER existed on earth. The ONLY difference between religions , and the ONLY difference between their national armies of ENFORCEMENT, are their LIES. LIES that no father on earth wants INFLICTED upon their beloved children.
.
The ATTACKERS of Creation CREATE the DEFENDERS of Creation.
.
To remain in power over their SLAVES and continue to exist in this reality created by truth, these religions, fabricated of mans words, must FORBID the knowledge of Truth, and must curse, condemn, vilify and MURDER every source of conflicting lies, and every source of TRUTH.
.
The religions that curse you, are cursing God.
YOU are the Creation, they are but inventions made of LIES.
.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

“True to thee, O God, and true to our native land."



As long as there are absurd people who have a sense of entitle regarding the recognition of their religious beliefs in the US, politicians will have to humor them and pretend to be good Christians. In the mean time there is a serious problem with the descendants of European colonists and genocidal slave mongers declaring themselves “natives”. The natives were mostly murdered or relegated to reservations to lives of poverty and hopelessness, to declare the current masses as natives, is to turn a blind eye to the crimes against them and to rewrite history.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ok, a bit tongue-in-cheek there in the title, but the point is that so much of this god stuff is there for little other reason than to appease the massive Christian influence in this country. It's pure crap. They said it all, so now the Christians can feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

My only real concern is whether this President really believes in imaginary friends!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It says so right on the dollar bill! Hell, you can't trust the Federal Reserve, so you might as well put your faith in the supernatural.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

O.K. - first and foremost, I'm just so thrilled to be rid of George W. Bush, who is dumber than a sack of hammers. Won't it be grand to have a president who can actually speak in entire sentences and use verbs properly?

I'm just glad the crackpot religious fanatics which ran the Bush/Cheney/Rove Crime regime are out of office. But clearly, Obama is so
lily-livered and gutless - he's trying to make overtures to religious extremists. The Christian minister Obama invited to give the convocation actually doesn't want to deny gay and lesbians civil rights - but he DOES oppose same gender marriage. I suppose that is still an improvement over Jerry Falwell who thought homosexuals should burn in hell-fire? A slight improvement, but not by much.

The bottom line is Obama was never a Progressive Democrat - he's always been a "Centrist Corporate Democrat". For all of his campaign promises about "bringing change" to Washington - he stacked his Cabinet and all his administrations appointments with about 65% of Clinton loyalists/insiders and Wall Street wheeler-dealers. So Obama's administration is very much entrenched in the Old Guard Establishment. For cryin' out loud he KEPT that fuckwit crypto-fascist Robert Gates as Secretary of Defense. Obama's Secretary of Agriculture is a groupie for corporate agribusiness GMO genetically engineered crops and Corporate Welfare Farm Bill.

So we can't expect Obama to support a secular movement in government.

BTW - most of the atheists I've met are just as fanatic, rigid, dogmatic and doctrinaire as the other extreme - the Bible thumper Fundamentalists....simply two extremes who are equally closed minded. I've rarely met an atheist who was remotely tolerant towards people who believe in God.

Me personally, I don't belong to any organized religion and I'm definitely NOT a Christian. I do believe there is some sort of higher power, but I'm not a church goer - I'm pretty easy going, tolerant, open minded. I don't in any way have strong religious beliefs and I don't worship or pray - but even when I discussed in a very MILD way that I believe in some sort of spiritual beliefs - I nearly got a shellacking from rabid, foaming at the mouth atheists.

I've yet to meet an atheist whose behavior was any different in their fanaticism - the same kind of behavior from the Religious Right born again fanatics.

Frankly, I'm sick of BOTH the atheists and the religious fanatics - two different sides of the same kind of hidebound dogma and rigid thinking.

At least Obama will probably abolish those horrid "Faith Based Charities" which get our tax dollars. At least Obama will defend abortion rights and federally funded birth control. I still view Obama as a very pallid Democrat who has zero interest in prosecuting Bush/Cheney/Rove Crime Regime for their genocidal crimes against humanity, legalizing sexual torture and destroying the Constitution.

Now all the atheists have their trousers in a twist about the mention of "God" in the Inaugural Address - good grief, our economy is in ruins, the polar ice caps are melting, 33% of Americans have no health insurance and our kids can't read. There are more important critical issues at stake than the mention of "God" on Inaugural addresses.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm an "atheist" by Christian standards who believes in God. Of course there is a God. There’s got to be.... something out there (or in there) that connects the dots, our reason for being, (whatever that might be), a first cause, something to ponder. God is Nature. There you go. But that's about all I know about "him" or "her" or whatever you want to call "it". And I must say, I have no problem praying to this God, being touched, moved, inspired by this God, my God, or even seeing “it” show up on a dollar bill or being sworn to under oath. I “trust” in my God. I really do, however little I know about "it". I have no choice.

What I deeply resent, however, is when my God is assumed to be the same as the Judeo-Christian God which, in my humble opinion, is nothing but a child's fairy tale, totally made up, totally incredulous, totally hypocritical and totally insulting to my intelligence. Anyone who believes, actually believes in the biblical god, the god who is described in the old and new testaments, really, seriously believes in this crap, is, in my humble opinion, an idiot, with their head wedged well up their ass, blinded by the dogma and the tradition, in denial, brainwashed and deluded. So, you god fearing biblical ones or wannabes, afraid to open your eyes, keep it to yourself, out of my face, out of public schools and public buildings and inaugurations.

That’s fair isn’t it? Don’t we all have a right to believe in whatever we want? A right to not have to listen to someone else’s belief and faith in a public setting? That it’s “traditional” is beside the point and does not make it right. It’s traditional nonsense.

How about a deal? I won't bother you with my God if you don't bother me with yours. And for the last 60 years of my life, you've been bothering the piss out of me and troubling me with yours. Keep it to yourself. Deal or no deal????

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No one is obliged to change his or her beliefs, or the expression thereof, to meet your comfort level.

Get over yourself and go do something.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I don't have time to read all the comments that I'm sure support the mythological novel written by dozens of parables and stories passed down over hundreds of years that for some reason is where all knowledge comes from....I just have to say that as I found it unbelieveably inappropriate to have the LORD"S PRAYER read into the record, that it is profoundly refreshing to at least see one article somewhere that points out all this skygod nonsense out for what it is. Try getting through ONE day without some reference to god, be it a winning football game, a typhoon or a "Miracle on the Hudson." There is NO freedom from religion no matter how much we can point out that we now know where the sun goes every day, where air comes from, or why animals reproduce. This country as are so many others are in the dark ages and apparently no amount of education or information is going to change it. To have someone basically say "come over to our side and see the light before you're all ripped asounder by our god as we march into hell for a heavenly cause" and babble on and on and on and on at the inauguration of a president supposedly (yeah, right, In God We Trust: All Others Pay Cash!) presiding over everyone "regardless of race, color creed" as long as you believe in some sort of sky-god, is just breath taking. But, not unusual. Business as usual in the new dawn of America. Which, by the way, god had nothing to do with. PS Oh, and let's see if my post gets in without a Capital G.... for god....otherwise I will be hit by lightening as I write......pooFSMork.brrrruuuuuzzz.......

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Your views, like those of any constituency that is in the minority, are not unreasonable but are sometimes impractical.
The inauguration is a ceremony, an excercise in which many "ceremonial" things are done. Millions of people watched and listened, hoping to be inspired, to believe that a critical mass of people could be motivated for the common good.
If it happens that 85% of the population believes in a higher being, then is it unreasonable that a speech should specifically target them? That in this specific case, might be better to motivate 85% than 15%?

However, all of that being said, I'd be incensed if every cabinet meeting started with a prayer. Cabinet meetings aren't ceremony, they are governance and should be secular.

I strongly feel that the co-mingling of religion and politics, as the basis of public policy decisions, should be avoided at all costs. I think the results of this approach are well known, and are certainly not all-inclusive, and not just to your 15% minority.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yes, every president is OUR servant, or as Whitman put it: "an agent for pay." I hope we never again elect someone so insecure and mentally aberrant that he relies on advice directly from God! (That should give us the chills, except that it seemed like another concocted lie of Karl Rove's.) I'd rather elect an Atheist than a Fundamentalist--unless it's a dogmatic Atheist like Sam Harris. Dogmatic Atheism reminds me of Soviet Communism or the Great Terror in the French Revolution, when they made Reason into a goddess, which was of course entirely irrational. Ecumenism that includes Atheists is something to respect. It's dogmatism I don't like, and Obama made it clear that he isn't one. Even Deist-Agnostic presidents like Jefferson and Lincoln invoked the name of God, although they were thinking of their inclusive Deist God. I couldn't stand Rick Warren's prayer either, and proselytizing for Christianity was inexcusable. But I dearly loved Dr Lowery's entirely ecumenical benediction and was astonished at Ms. Christina's objection to "Thou, who has by thy might / Led us into the light," etc. Where does the James Weldon Johnson hymn, which she at least recognized as the Negro National Anthem, mention Jesus? It's about as ecumenical as any hymn could be, and I expect most Americans thought it was very appropriate at this inauguration. As soon as I recognized it, which was almost immediately, my hair stood on end!

I'm a Unitarian Universalist and Humanist. While I have firm convictions, I like hearing other people's, and I've enjoyed friendships with lots people--including Atheists. But . . sadly, Atheists are ignorant of much that gives me a thrill. People who find religion irrelevant, boring or irritating miss out on--or, like this writer, are irritated by--so many of those "frissons" of recognition we get when we recognize something familiar. There are just too many famous rhetorical, oratorical, metaphoric, and literary references taken from the Bible or famous religious leaders like Francis of Assisi and John Bunyan. Bunyan's THE PILGRIM'S PROGRESS is loaded with familiar titles and common metaphors like "vanity fair", "the slough of despond", "house beautiful", and so on.

Back in the 1940s when I was just a little girl, when a Broadway play, "The Voice of the Turtle," came out, someone took a series of exit polls and found that more than half the play-goers exiting the theater had no idea where the title came from--a Bible verse. I didn't either, but I was a small child and Sunday School teachers considered the SONG OF SONGS off limits to little kids. It's a controversial book, sensual and passionate, which, according to British scholar Dr Schofield, probably was an ancient Jewish royal wedding liturgy. The news article made me take down the Bible--(wasn't easy to find, since my Protestant parents weren't Bible readers)--then read the whole chapter. Glad I did. I didn't understand most of it, but the poetry was gorgeous--and there it was: "...the voice of the turtle is heard in this land", which I learned later meant turtle-dove. Fairly recently, the two finest novels of one of my favorite writers, Octavia Butler's THE PARABLE OF THE SOWER and THE PARABLE OF THE TALENTS, bear titles from the gospels. If you hadn't read Jesus' parables you wouldn't get it, since the titles are ironical. The irony is that throughout both books Butler's heroine, a strong black woman, turns away from Christianity and invents her own new religion resembling Process Theology.

After a long life of reading, I've found that it's much more educational and broadening--and fun--to read everything from as many points of view as possible, and try to put yourself inside the mind of the writer. With me, the only ones that irritate are the dogmatic true believer proselytizers, whetever their beliefs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Upon re-reading the article I noticed that the "g" for god was capitalized throughout. But, I then realized, "this is an article entitled "an atheist's view..." Atheism actually legitimizes the argument by stating that there is a disbelief in the supernatural supreme being that makes up the theist's belief system. Well, stop it. Be a secular humanist instead. This actually takes it one step further....you simply say, "it's not that I don't believe there isn't a god....I don't accept the premise in order to negate it." See? Just try and get someone that has a faith in a skygod to argue their premise without the use of their novel or parables or burning bushes or other delusional visions. Can't be done. A must read for everyone: "the God Delusion," by Richard Dawkins. Come into the light.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We should listen to this whining fallen-away Jewess Greta - and cave into each and every special interest group that wants to stake a claim on some square mile of America now that the Republiscum Party has been sent back to their homnetowns with poo on their faces ?

What's next - Biker Chicks With No Underwear wanting to ban BVD sales at Sears ?

Get a grip, people - we have a Christian tradition in these United States, and just because we aren't going to let the evangelical taliban Baptists call the shots anymore when it comes to our national agenda, we are not going to, overnight, wipe God off of everyone's lips and forbid prayerful observances to mark momentous occasions.


Greta should go back to shul and study up on tolerance - something they obviously missed at her yeshiva.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

My thanks to Greta Christina for the effort to introduce to the public psyche a perspective that has traditionally been ignored.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It should be noted that Democrats always suffer from the religious as to their degree of zeal. FDR, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, Clinton, and now Obama make a big point of posing with ministers and having their church attendance widely reported on. Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan, Bush 41 and Bush 43, however, despite their continual references to God and their widespread support among Christians were not noted for their attendance at church services.
That's show biz!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Apart from inaugural tradition, President Obama is a Christian. He believes in God. He chose a pastor to speak who also ... believes in God.

Imagine that.

The writer of this article doesn't like a Christian President talking about God.

It wasn't her inauguration -- or yours.

Tell you what -- when YOU get elected President you can cut out all the God crap.

OK?

Now...get to work.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Right on, Greta! From where I was standing that morning, in the San Francisco Civic Center, watching the inauguration with a few thousand other happy San Francsicans, I heard murmurs of "But I'm an Atheist," all around me. I also couldn't help but notice that, aside from one crumb thrown to Jews, it was a Christian invocation. What about us Other Believers? There are more and more pagans like me in this country. Better yet, let's have REAL seperation from Church and State and leave it ALL out -- god(s), goddesses, and lack of same.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

He has made it very clear in his speech that faith will play a big role in the new society.

The difference between him and his successors is in his definition of faith. Instead of a closed, pro-Christian agenda, he believes that each American has the right to define their own faith, and that faith is important to the future of our country, whether that faith is a monotheistic one or something more subtle.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What about polytheists? Pantheists? Pagans?
Jesus was just one prophet among many.
Religion is just another plague on the planet and mixing it with politics results in toxic spew.
Ugh. Liberty, equality, justice ... these we need desperately. Religion and god we do not need.
SR

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

15% of a population of over 300 million is, indeed, a lot of people...yet unbelievers remain a minority. For the majority of Americans who are self-professing Christians, prayers are not objectionable. If, in the future, a prayer were to be imposed on a non-believing president, then that would certainly be wrong. That's not the case. Obama is free to have someone pray for his presidency and the country, as well as to swear on the Holy Bible...in short, to practice the faith that most Americans share. If you do not tolerate religiosity, then put it on mute until the religious "mumbo jumbo" has ceased.

In the sense that we can are accustomed to saying that, say, California is a blue state (even though there certainly are Republican Californians, we may comfortably say that this is a Christian nation (despite the presence of non-Christians and non-believers).

It attests to the political skill of intolerant atheists that they have been able to convince many that these inaugural traditions somehow violate the separation of church and state. In a reality, you (the minority) attempt to violate our constitutional right to practice our faith.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

~~~~~~

There is separation of church and state in the US Constitution.

if he was gloritying his short haircut, it would be offensive to people who have long hair..

If he was glorifying his race over any other, it would be offensive to other races.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Even if one believes in a higher intelligence, greater spirit, or whatever one wants to call the possibility of existence beyond our universe, the seemingly endless prayer this and prayer that at the inauguration seemed out of place and ridiculous, for a couple of reasons:

Whatever happened to the idea of the separation of church and state? The religion called up at the inauguration, no matter what lip-service was paid to others, was solely the christian religion. This is one reason why our Founding Fathers kept religion out of government as much as possible: the inclusion of one excludes all of the others – all 100+ religions that exist in the rest of the world. And, in christianity, God is always referred to as the misogynistic "He," symbolically ignoring one-half of the human population.

What makes anyone think that God is a Big Daddy In the Sky – which is how he/she/it is conceived in christian prayer? In fact, God would have no gender because male and female are delineated for the purpose of reproduction, something most likely not necessary in the spiritual world.

In fact, none of us, no religion, has ANY concrete proof of just WHAT is the spiritual plane of existence. The dirty little secret of all religions is that in this regard, they are all GUESSING.

For this reason (and the Founding Fathers understood this), religion should be kept as a deeply personal matter, because each person's understanding of it is different and just as valid as the next person's, including those who believe in no God at all. We are all just guessing; no one who finds out ever lives to tell the tale to the rest of us.

The fact that prayer after prayer after prayer seemed so important for the inauguration comes dangerously close to superstition; that, somehow, all of it was necessary to bring luck to the presidency. In fact, it was the new administration bending to a disturbing quasi-fundamentalist trend set in motion by the Bush administration, the fear being that if Obama's presidency didn't appear to be just as "holy as thou" as the last one, the public would abandon it. This last motive is very much of this earth, and country, and is not spiritual in conception at all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Those who believe(think? can they?) that, when you're dead you're in a better place are not securely touching the ground.

I am ALIVE.
It is a MUCH better place than dead.
In fact, it's a GREAT place.

Attempting to converse and/or be heard by imaginary beings is neurotic mental masturbation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Your rationale has me bewildered...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

n/t

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Every time I hear rhis jingoistic remark, I remind myself that there is probably no hope of excising the phrase from political speech, but in the absence of Reason, I would settle for "May America be worthy of God's blessing". There was a moment when I thought Obama might say it this way, but no, we got the full God-clout over our heads.
Good article.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Brilliant! Thanks for capturing the infurating thoughts going through my mind at each reference to God in the ceremnoy. For Obama's 2nd term, we must all work for a truly secular celebration!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As an Atheist let me give you a little scriptural advice. The Bible consists of 2 so-called testaments. The Hebrew Scriptures and the New Testament. In the OT swearing was fairly common. It was done only by men because it was a "phallic oath." It says, politely, that "he put his hand on his thigh."

In the New Testament the main character is Jesus of Nazareth. His most important address is the Sermon on the Mount [from memory see Matthew 5 and Luke 6] and if you look into it you will find that Jesus said "Swear not at all!" Period.

So what is everybody doing swearing on the Bible?

I would have loved to see Obama merely affirm, which, if you read the constitution, is all he needed to do.

Yours faithlessly,

Rick

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Greta from a fellow atheist. I was very happy to see that Obama included "nonbelievers" in his who's who of diverse peoples (I wouldn't have used that term, but it's a start.)

It's really pathetic: not only is God always a part of the picture, but Christianity is always part of the picture. I would have been happy to see a rabbi or imam up there with the reverend, the minister and the pastor, but I guess that was asking too much from the US.

Can you spell "separation of church and state"?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

OK. So... I'm an atheist, too... just being up front about that.

I'm going to take the fact that Obama DID mention non-believers as a good sign.

I'm not going to suggest that, because George H. W. Bush (at least) once suggested that I shouldn't be considered an American, and now I got a single-phrase mention from the new President, I should be grateful. It's not like that. Anyone agreeing with the GHWB is simply (like GHWB) an idiot who does not understand the Bill of Rights.

But we KNOW that much of the country is not particularly open-minded about atheists, non-believers, etc. Being mentioned in the inaugural address is a huge first step toward closing that gap, and Obama took that step willingly. All of the invocation and benediction crap was meaningless to me, and probably was to most non-believers (at least to the extent that it was about asking some imaginary being for his blessings, etc.). I could have done without all that... and I wouldn't have needed to have anything else fill that space. Maybe more singing by Aretha Franklin. It's the religious people that need that stuff, though, and we're not going to have a revolution in reason and simply wipe all of their psychological needs away with the wave of a wand. That would be really big change, and that sort of stuff doesn't usually happen overnight.

It will be great when we don't pander to such nonsense in our public and governmental activities. Right now, we're at the other end of the spectrum. Black people had a very long fight for their civil rights (and that's still ongoing). We don't seriously think we're going to just have the world we want dropped in our laps, do we?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

but this is, um, Alternet. I just spent the past five minutes responding to incendiary remarks, and quite frankly,I think that we largely believe the same thing: we are all liberals (or else are trolls going on a left-leaning site,) and for the most part we support Obama. Those are two key things we have in common.

We don't have to act like kindergarteners making comments that will clearly get a rise out of someone or show clear lack of respect. I think we're all adults (at least, we're mature enough to be reading the news,) so if we could remember the Golden Rule and treat others as we would want to be treated, we'll all do just fine. No one needs to get into a huff just because an atheist exercises freedom of speech, just as we do not have to get bent out of shape if a Republican exercises freedom of speech. Obama's administration is making a priority of listening to the opposing views and engendering dialogue. If the Prez of the US can do it, why can't we do it on an online blog site?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I've heard it said, and I've also experienced the phenomenon, that the difference between religious people and non-religious people is that we non-religious people really don't care what you believe. That's tolerance.

Tolerance does not have to mean accepting the proliferation of religious speak in our political arena. It does not mean that a non-believer must think a concrete belief in a supernatural being and the dogma surrounding it is as valid as admitting that we cannot know.

Knowing and believing are two very different things. Most Christians seem to think they know rather than believe. One Christian friend told me that sometimes you believe something so strongly you can say you know.

The entire Christian faith, along with Judaism and Islam, is based upon contradictions, speculation, and a willingness to suspend rationality. That's fine, and I am quite tolerant of it. I never attempt to convince my religious friends that they need to question their beliefs.

However, I've had any number of my religious friends express dismay at my agnosticism. One co-worker, whom I like very, very much, once asked me why I don't believe. I told her that, among other things, I just don't think it's logical or coherent, and I can't see anything more convincing about the stories in the Bible than the Greek, Roman, or Norse myths. Her response was, "Well, maybe someday you will come to believe."

When I told her this would never happen, she said, "Oh, never say never."

It never occurred to her that this might be offensive, or that my saying, "Maybe someday you will come to your senses and realize how absurd this all is" (which I did not!) would be highly rude and might very well result in her saying, "That will never happen."

I have a Christian niece and nephew. I asked them if they think I will go to hell if I don't believe in their religion. They said that, in keeping with their faith, they must admit they do! So I asked if they really think my father, who was a hardcore atheist, is now in hell. That one brought them up short, and my nephew said he couldn't speak for the state of my dad's soul when he died. Apparently it was difficult for him to imagine this wonderful, kind, loving man in a state of agony for eternity. Funny how that works when it's someone who is already "damned" rather than someone they think might come to see the light.

There is a certain ugliness to the convictions of some Christians who claim the rest of us will be eternally tortured for our beliefs. (I used to think all Christians believed the rest of humanity would go to hell, but I've recently learned that not all Christians, including Obama, have the same misguided notions of the afterlife.)

I have never, ever met an atheist or agnostic who thought Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Wiccans, or any other religious believers would be punished for their views. We might think these people are delusional or that their beliefs beggar rationality, but we don't think it makes them inherently evil.

And for all the religious posters who said we should vote in an atheist if we want a non-religious inauguration, remember this: as an agnostic, I am willing to vote for a Christian, a Muslim, or a devotee of the Flying Spaghetti Monster if I think he or will be a reasonable, just, and competant leader. But the vast majority of religious citizens out there would sooner vote for a known criminal than a righteous, upstanding, intelligent non-believer with an impeccable reputation. Some have actually said they'd vote for gay Christian rather than an atheist. (I'd vote for a qualified gay person in an instant.)

Any self-righteous blathering about how we non-believers need to be more tolerant is pretty absurd.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

“The national government will maintain and defend the foundations on which the power of our nation rests. It will offer strong protection to Christianity as the very basis of our collective morality. Today Christians stand at the head of our country. We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit. We want to burn out all the recent immoral developments in literature, in the theatre, and in the press — in short, we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered into our whole life and culture as a result of Liberal excess during the past years.”
.
.
.
.
— Adolph Hitler - Taken from The Speeches of Adolph Hitler, 1922-1939, Vol. 1,
Michael Hakeem, Ph.D. (London, Oxford University Press, 1942), pp. 871-872.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The more they refer to it, the more banal their belief in their Santa Jesus and Sky-Daddy becomes, so I don't have a problem w/ it. A lot of atheists don't understand that believers need to constantly convince themselves of the existence of god and continuously affirm their devotion to him. It's really pathetic. I feel pity for people whose lives are so miserable that the only thing that they have going for them is belief in the supernatural. Given the fact that the number of unbelievers in this country continues to increase and outpace the growth of religion, I'm hopeful that in the future most of our citizens will learn to embrace reality.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

1. does not pay taxes
2. receives tax money to spread their propaganda thanks to bush's faith based nonsense
3. can own property
4. holds presidential debates

Organized religion has become a special status in our government and society which entitles them to special privlidges the rest of us who actually pay taxes do not get.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I wouldn't mind the "God" stuff so much if it weren't made to sound like some supernatural force entirely above and disconnected from human actions and behaviors. It's us, people! We need to straighten ourselves out, not rely on some eternal deity! Even if you're a Christian, how can you read in your Bible that "God created man in his image" and still believe yourself eternally inferior? It's like having children and never having them grow up and become independent! As the new envoy to the Middle East said (I paraphrase) "Conflicts are created by people...continued by people...and can be solved by people." The only "Armageddon" is what we allow to happen.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hi-
Someone else may have already posted on this, and I agree that it would be great if we could have a true separation of church and state, but. . .

When Reverend Lowery spoke the words:
"Thou, who has by thy might
Led us into the light,
Keep us forever on the path, we pray.
Lest our feet stray from the places, our God, where we met thee;
Lest, our heart drunk with the wine of the world, we forget thee
Shadowed beneath Thy hand,
May we forever stand
True to thee, O God, and true to our native land."

he was quoting from the third verse of The Negro National Anthem (Lift Every Voice and Sing), and was connecting the present moment of the inauguration to the long struggle for Civil Rights in the United States.

Here's the wikipedia entry for the history of Lift Every Voice and Sing:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lift_Every_Voice_and_Sing

I'm a white agnostic, and I was moved to tears when I heard Reverend Lowery start to recite these lines. It is a powerful and important song in the history of our country, and was absolutely appropriate for quotation at the swearing in of our country's first black President.

Michele

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yes, Obama said the word "non-believers" in his speech. He said, quote:

"For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus — and non-believers."

Yeah and the way he said it, and afterthought, sticking out like a sore thumb... it felt like a slap in the face. Everyone else has a name, we're just "nons".... Others.

It wasn't nice at all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

this is the exact reaction I had watching the inauguration--whatever happened to separation of church and state? Rick Warren is a clown.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I like Obama and I did want to watch all the hoopla of the ignaugaration,...but after awhile I'd had it!...granted he aknowledged the existance of non-believers which is more than I could say for not to many others,but over and over,god this god that,god in my face...normally I'm pretty cool about people and their beliefs....you like magic thats fine...keep it to yourself just as keep your sexual preferences to yourself!....this was smack in my face and I was pissed ...so I turned it off!...who needs it?..Religion and gods =the root of whats bad in this world!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It has no place in the inauguration of our nation's highest-ranking civil servant. Period.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Waaaay back in the day, the word atheist was used in reference to Christians and others who believed in a single god - or monotheists or a-theists. You were the minority then and the whole idea of a single god was thought to be rather simplistic. The rest of us believe in a pantheon of gods, polytheists. How Atheist came to mean not believing in any god I don't know.

Me, I'm a good old fashioned Pagan.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I have news for all you"Freedom From Religion" advocates. The constitution says absolutely nothing about separation of church and state. It says that Congress shall have no power to establish a state religion or to prohibit free religious exercise in the country. Therefore, it has no power to prohibit a president from having prayers at his swearing-in, if the president chooses to do so.

The not so recent political corretness frenzy has gone so far to promote a tyranny of the MINORITY that the majority of people in the country seem really too intimidated to do anything about it. However political correctness is NOT mandated by the constitution. Nor is freedom from religion.If it is mandated by anyone, it is a highly politicized supreme court.

When I went to public schools, we had prayers, and anyone who did not want to pray did not. No intimidation, no glares. We also said the pledge of alleigence, first without "under God," which was not added till 1954, and then WITH "under God." No one who didn't say that was excluded in any way.

The Jewish kids used to disappear a few times a year for excused absences to observe their religious holidays, and the rest of us reacted only by being jealous that they got "theirs" and "ours" too. But that is kid stuff. We remained friends aleways and forgot about the petty things in teh between times.

So, if those who don't want prayer don't want to HEAR prayers, the remote mute button works very well.

In this same vein, let's talk a bit about displays of religious symbols on public property at Christmas! There, I've said it! I hear a lot of protests about these displays, no matter the religious holiday to which they pertain. This, even though there is no constitutional prohibition of PROMOTING religion. However, I think fair's fair. If atheists do not wish to view these displays, fair enough. But I strongly belive they must make a tradoff and NOT be allowed to take the time off from work during this Christmas period. After all, without Christmas, no matter what you think, none of us would get these vacations.

So, let's live and let live and stop with the protests and whining about everything that upsets our little phyches.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I am not an Atheist, but completely agree with your article.

I am Pagan. Polytheists were not mentioned at all. So, does that mean we are lumped in with the Believers even though we believe something all-together different from Christians?

It did fill me with a little hope, though, that he mentioned non-believers in his speech, but...I am of the thought pattern that if you are going to invoke one, all need to be included. ALL.

So, my message to President Obama...

Do some research Mr President, there is more than monotheism out there and if you are going to be inclusive, that means ALL of us.

It would be even better if there were NONE.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Well, whether you believe in God or not, most Americans do, and President Obama obviously does, and at his inauguration, obviously he wanted to reference the beliefs he would be drawing on for strength and comfort as he faces the daunting tasks ahead of him. Good for him, and more power to him.

There have been religious references and prayers in American ceremonial life since there's been an America. We are not a 'Christian nation' in the sense that religious right wing dominionists believe, but we are, by and large, a nation of Christians, or rather, a nation of believers. It does not infringe upon your Constitutional rights one bit to have a few prayers at an inauguration. No religion is being established - a man who is about to take on a huge task is asking for help from his God. If you're offended, use the mute button or put your fingers in your ears and hum.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I agree with the premise of the article, and believe there is no genuine religious freedom so long as religion colors any product or event of state. However, I always note another aspect of these prayer-laden government events-- hypocrisy.

If our politicians actually believed any of the religious hype they so piously observe in public, would we have the government we have? Obviously not. Of course, the same goes for religious leaders, or any individual, who puts forth a saintly public persona and whose real lives are the antithesis of the values they supposedly uphold. Moreover, it is my experience that those who most forcefully, and publicly, project themselves as the keepers of 'religious values' are inevitably the worst offenders.

As much as it is wrong to interject religion into civic events, I'm not sure but what the glaring hypocrisy is more difficult to witness.

As regards inclusion of "non-believers", in any real sense, the one bit of hope, perhaps, is that Obama's mother was an atheist, his father an agnostic, and his grandparents, though I've not read of their individual personal beliefs, did move increasing toward more liberal religion during their lives, eventually joining a Unitarian Universalist congregation. So, he was raised in a family who were not of such a solely Christian oriented religious bent as he apparently chose to adopt later in life. And the 'brand' of Church of Christ he eventually joined is far more liberal than its staid counterpart of similar name. Whether Obama's conversion was actual or for political survival, he certainly comes to office with an entirely different perspective of "non-believers" than any of his predecessors.

That being the case, I have to think he would have to have at least some level of empathy for how his own beloved mother would been regarded by the current standards of exclusion afforded atheists.

Uniquely, as compared to those before him, he clearly comes to office with the certain knowledge that atheists are equally as moral and ethical citizens as his Christian friends of latter years.

So maybe, just maybe, there is some hope on the horizon for us all-- religious and non-religious alike, as we would all benefit from removing that chasm from our civic lives.

However, if any hope looms on the horizon, look for any change to come in his second term-- any genuine, overt, recognition of "non-believers" as equal citizens would be political suicide. Sadly, we all know that much is true.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

atheism and theism are two sides of the same coin.

What has belief or disbelief to do with the scientific attitude one should hold to any given subject: whether something is true or not.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I thought that this short piece spoke to the question raised by the article. The original is at:

http://thedartmouth.com/2009/01/21/news/religion/print/
___________________

Prof. discusses evolution of religion
By Michael Coburn, The Dartmouth Staff
Published on Wednesday, January 21, 2009

Tufts professor Daniel Dennett advocated studying religion as a “natural phenomanon” in his Tuesday lecture.

Tufts professor Daniel Dennett advocated studying religion as a “natural phenomanon” in his Tuesday lecture.

Religion owes its continued existence not to God, but to a form of evolution, Tufts University professor Daniel Dennett said at the Hardigg Family Fund Lecture held this Tuesday in Dartmouth Hall. Dennett, co-director of Tufts’ Center for Cognitive Studies, advocated studying religion as a “natural phenomenon” and compared religious ideas to viruses, which thrive by replicating and passing themselves from one generation to the next.

Dennett said religions are “brilliantly designed products,” but that the presence of religion does not prove God’s existence: A design does not necessarily mean there is a designer, he said.

Religion is a type of “meme,” an idea passed from person to person that evolves much like a virus, Dennett said. Viruses, like memes, are not alive, but still develop according to the laws of natural selection, he said.

“If survival of the fittest has any validity as a slogan, then the Bible seems a fit candidate for the accolade of the fittest of the texts,” he said.

Memes can cause people to act against their evolutionary interests, Dennett said, much like some parasites that drive their hosts to be eaten by predators so that the virus can use the predator as a new host. Religion and other memes have inspired people to die for their beliefs even though such actions may decrease an individual’s chances of long-term survival, Dennett said.

Religious memes have adapted in order to survive, according to Dennett. Some religious tenets, including the belief that humans should not question God, are defensive mechanisms to ensure that the meme is not challenged, he said.

Religion also benefits believers, he said, by fortifying their convictions and providing a powerful “placebo effect.” Dennett compared religion to the magic feather in the movie Dumbo, for example. Dumbo always had the ability to fly, but only the feather gave him the courage to do so.

“There is no good reason to believe in Zeus, Poseidon or Allah,” he said. “But there are good reasons to say you do.”

Dennett said he believes faith in God has harmed humanity by protecting destructive movements such as Islamic terrorism and threatening the scientific world view.

“Remember that Dumbo threw away his own crutch,” he said. “I think it is time to grow up.”

Atheists who defend religion because of the social good they believe it provides — not religious fundamentalists — are the greatest impediment to the atheist movement, Dennett said. Many atheists are afraid to admit their atheism, he said, and some choose to describe themselves as agnostics because of a perceived stigma against those who do not believe in God.

Despite resistance from both secularists and fundamentalists, the world is becoming increasingly secular, Dennett said. He predicted that within the next few generations, religion will have lost its perceived dominance. Religion may become more of community organization without a set creed or something practiced by a minority — like smoking — that is looked down on by most people, he said.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You have a lot of good points. I personally certainly do believe in separation of church and state, which, most certainly has not been attained, today. But I think it must always be borne in mind that Obama is a politician. And in politics, at least American politics, being "secular", regardless of what you really believe, will ensure that you lose popularity points.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I too was put off by the non-believers epithet as the only alternative to the organized religions mentioned, since I believe in the god that resides in us all and has been co-opted by most organized religions. It's so beautifully simple. Jesus, Mohammed, and the patriarchs were trying to help us find our spirituality but they ended up saying, "You guys need me for that," which we don't.

Atheists are people who have rejected this cooptation but haven't asked the questions that lead us to discover the god in ourselves. To me the struggle back to the progressive values we've lost in the latter part of the 20th century, culminating in the mess we have today, will be very much a spiritual one, and I didn't mind the references to God in either prayer, which were fairly ecumenical. We must separate church (meaning Christianity) and state, of course, but church and spirituality are two very different things. The god in us all desires the peace, justice, and equal opportunity that those of us who elected Obama are working for.

Furthermore, Obama is not only the leader of us enlightened progressives. Though I was initially upset by his invitation to Rick Warren (and by the manipulation that omitted the gay bishop's "balancing" invocation to an earlier event), in retrospect the Warren prayer seems to have been a masterful stroke. It was for the guys that didn't vote for him. He is bringing us together as best he can. Meet thy brethren and try to love them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Look guys, I have to disagree with this authors conclusions. I say that man has had religion for, well, 100,000k yrs or over? It will never go away and I'm not sure I would want it to considering the role it performs by setting our social moral compass. We're stuck with it folks.

Think of it as a tradition instead of religion if that makes you feel better. To give a greeting like Merry Christmas is a way to bond, makes you feel like people care and strengthens societal bonds. To not say it is considered rude and shows a lack of caring and diminishes the strength of an oath.

I think, since you care about it so much, that a better way to go may be for the government to include all the religions instead of singling out Christianity. That way the standards of a secular government aren't breached and no single group will enjoy favoritism from the government.

Guess what, we'll quickly be back to Happy Holidays!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Greta Christina speaks for me -- speaks eloquently as any bard to express an anger and bitterness that is mine too.

And I am not even an atheist.

I am however an agnostic, very much so.

I borrow from a long-ago Mohawk ancestor the aboriginal practice -- relentlessly suppressed by Christian missionaries and anthropologists -- of forthrightly acknowledging that god is a question: "Great Holy Mystery."

I inherit from my Northern European ancestors -- Brython and Goidel and Tuatha de Danaan; Caledonian and Cymru and Norse -- the strong intuition that (if indeed there is any deity at all), she is a goddess not a god, and she brought the universe into being not by the ultimately unnatural and definitively misogynistic act of "creation" but by demonstrating that the vastness of space, the cosmos, is the divine womb: "in the beginning was the mother and she gave birth."

Blessed with military service that took me to Korea, showed me a glimpse of the breathtaking serenity behind the eyes of Buddhist monks and thus introduced me to the way of Zen, I regard the opening lines of Lao Tzu‘s Tao Te Ching as the most profound statement of metaphysics ever shaped by human consciousness: “The Tao that can be named/is not the true Tao.”

Born in New York, in what at the time (1940) was the greatest city on Earth, I have nevertheless lived about half my life in rural America -- some of it very deep country indeed -- and because I am not so benumbed by civilization I reject the evidence of my senses, I cannot doubt the existence of spirits even as I recognize they are beyond definition: another dimension of Great Holy Mystery -- truth or delusion or metaphor or some paradoxical synergy combining all three and perhaps more still.

But mostly I am offended to the very core of my being by the malevolent presumptuousness and vicious misogyny implicit in all “god he” constructions: they evoke my genetic memory of indescribably agonized screams and the dreadfully porcine scent of roasting flesh: their Father who art burning our Mother…

Nevertheless having lived in the South, where omnipresent Christian oppression is acknowledged in the unofficial title of the Ku Klux Klan (“the Saturday Night Men’s Bible-study Class”) -- and having lived too in the rural Pacific Northwest, where the Bible-thump vigilantes were a constant threat to all but the most skillfully armed communards of the Back-to-the-Land Movement and to this day persecute non-Christians by trashing our gardens and hanging dead cats on our doors (“Organic is Satanic/Environmental means Of The Devil”) -- I recognize an infinitely ugly truth about the United States few dare utter: this land is not my land or Greta Christina‘s land; it is god’s land, claimed for god four centuries ago, savagely purged of the ungodly, owned and operated ever since by god’s anointed ruling class, and now (precisely as god’s domination of the inauguration so vividly demonstrates), it is already by definition a theocracy.

Indeed it could be no other way: while Europe retains its blessedly pagan roots -- the 3,000 year history of pagan Westernesse that the usurping Christians deny and suppress -- the cultural totality here pre-Columbus has been meticulously exterminated. Thus there is nothing to ameliorate the relentless progression from Abrahamic core-doctrines to capitalism -- and from capitalism to theocracy and fascism -- a process as logically predictable (and as unstoppable) as the progression from moral imbecility to genocide.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Jesus is very clear in Matthew 6 that public prayers such as those at the inauguration are not the way to go. He says go in your closet and close the door until you feel like forgiving others and that the Father already knows your needs. The Lord's Prayer is there too.

Separation of church and state has been upheld in our government over and over. See the Treaty of Tripoli and court cases that have used that language. We just have to educate the masses about the history!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

One of the reasons that the Antiwar forces in this country are so stalled is the presence of too much praying and worship of 'nonviolence in the abstract by liberal churches. Much of their piety goes to merely maintain their own organizational control over local 'Peace' groups and steer them into mainly just voting for the Democratic Party.

So many are holding up religious ideals in these groups and yet blocking any real secular participation in broader coalitions. They shun those who do not accept their religiosity 100 PLUS% in a manner that is often reminiscent of how some local nut group corner church might operate with any power issues of their own. They then represent themselves to the media as being the only valid antiwar voices, and activey block real organization to build a mass movement, rather than just funded affiliates to the more liberal churches.

Most of these religious groupings posing as being "Peace' groups are totally anti-democratically run internally and manage their affairs just like a small church might. The core clique are often retired/ semi-retired clergy of some sort, too, who make membership contingent on how much tithing is made to their 'Peace/ Justice' grouping.

It is really a mess out here with the constant focus on poorly camouflaged religion as being the end all and be all of what 'Peace' should constitute. Instead of 'No Justice, No Peace' we get a let's hobnob with power and try to convince them to convert! And we have a totally stalled national Antiwar Movement.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

During the election process there were many questions being raised on the internet. Is he really born in America? Is he maybe a Muslim?

He followed protocol, and I have huge respect for him for doing that!

As a lapsed Methodist, sometime Buddhist, but mainly atheist, I think the principal is the same? Lead a good and kindly life, respect others, respect peace, and help when you can?

I think the US has chosen a fine President. I look forward to seeing if my beliefs hold true.

Sent by a Welsh person in Namibia!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

When he announced to the entire world that God spoke to him and had told him to invade Iraq to liberate the people. Where was the 15% back then? Not even a wimper. I admit that it had nothing to do with God or religion. It had to do with a president who was crazy. And everyone just shut up. I spoke up about it and had no takers. I'm not an athiest. It's one thing to choose your fights carefully, but to me that was a disasterous thing to ignore. Where was all the rage back then? ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm not an atheist, but I couldn't agree more. It has always grossed me out how some "Christians" feel entitled to shove their beliefs down our throats.

I hasten to say these are not real Christians.

Just for fun, try to imagine how they'd howl if a non-Christian President started spewing his/her beliefs at the Inauguration. I might enjoy seeing that.

Have You Told a Republican He's a Screw-Up Today?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And the sign I made and carried said

"Why doesn't Pro Life Mean Anti-Killing?"

I got a lot of compliments.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A homosexual or a atheist? As for a homosexual atheist, the sun will burn out before that ever happens.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And I've never characterized myself as an atheist; I'm more of a non-denominational pagan. I don't "worship" anything; well, maybe the Constitution that defines my rights, duties, and privileges as a citizen of the United States. I am offended by continual enshrinement of religion as "tradition" in government practices and ceremonies. I am offended by the proselytizing that is forced upon me by the "free speech" of others - not that I deny their right to speak freely, but that I deny their right and ability to force me to endure their speech.

I didn't watch the inaugural ceremonies. Why, when I supported Mr. Obama's candidacy and am personally thrilled by his elevation to his current high office? Because we were all forewarned that religion would be prominent in those ceremonies. I cheated - I read the Cliff Notes (on AlterNet!).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

That was a phrase a Danish friend of mine used which captured my feelings towards those who feel they have to parade their "personal relationship" with a creator of the universe.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I have read that prior to the arrival of Europeans most Native American cultures had no concept of "wilderness," because they saw the human and the natural as coextensive. Surely it is possible to regard "supernatural" as a similarly fabricated notion that imposes distinction upon a world that, sensitively beheld, transcends such conceptualizing? That at least is the basis of my problem with pejoratively weighted terms such as "unbeliever" and "atheist." I'd like our public rituals and ceremonies to be secular yet spiritual, and for us to find or recuperate terms and metaphors that enable that. We might look to Walt Whitman for inspiration in grassrooting our transcendent communality: "Logic and sermons never convince,/The damp of the night drives deeper into my soul;" and "I depart as air, I shake my white locks at the runaway sun,/I effuse my flesh in eddies, and drift it in lacy jags./If you want me again look for me under your bootsoles.//You will hardly know who I am or what I mean,/But I shall be good health to you nevertheless,/And filter and fibre your blood." Whitman knew that the very idea of a nation state, of an enormous community that is more than the sum of its parts, requires a leap of faith. And that the natural world, inherently glorious in its very empiricism, might provide a better model for a democracy than anything on offer in European scriptures.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We don't run about in stinking robes, scratching at body lice because we never bathe. We have perfectly good explanations for most natural phenomona we observe every day, and some pretty good ones for many we CAN'T see, hear, smell, or feel. Most of us understand quite well that it's not necessary to invoke the blessing of some deity or another to obtain a favorable result for something that's nothing more or less than a function of cause and effect, and turns out pretty much the same every time. The fact that we're saturated with religion and religious symbolisms is that there's MONEY to be made by charlatans, whether religious or political, and we as a people are among the most ignorant and superstious in the "developed" world. We're at the same place in our social developement as the unwashed ignoramuses of thousands of years ago, and we have a crying need to "fit in" and be just like everybody else, even if they're half-wits.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I did my thesis on Emanuel Kant's interpretation of the moral law.
Like the Platonists he held that the moral law is like that of the forms; they alway existed
prior to any Gods or conscious agent. But we as individuals become aware of our responsibility as
part of maturing which is the difficult part.
When with each of us does it actually happen?
But if religious practice such as praying for discipline, compassion and mindfulness helps bring that about,then it is a good thing.
While it is possible to have all these virtues,
without god-bothering such as the Platonists
taught yet it becomes a matter of heart to seek help wherever it may come from; from the known and from the unknown.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The devil's second best trick was Constantine's Establishment of the Church; it corrupted the Church instantly. The separation of Church/religion and state's the best thing ever for the Church and for the religions, as much as for the state. No prayers at state occasions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If only we WERE a Christian nation! If only we DID follow the teachings of Christ! We would have no empire, no aggression against other countries, no poverty, no discrimination, no violence, and no hatred. No one would desire anything that anyone else had, because everyone would have what they needed to live, and anything else they wanted, someone would try to provide for them. There would be no public prayer because everyone would carry Christ around in their hearts and live his teachings in everything they did. There would be no proselytizing because there would be no need for it, no churches, because every individual American believer would be his own church. Atheists and agnostics would not only be tolerated, but genuinely, completely loved and provided for. No one would try to foist his ideas about God on anyone else, because everyone would be expected to form his own ideas, or no ideas, if that was his choice. If other countries were also this way, there would be no war, no aggression, and no armies.

But in point of fact, the United States is NOT a Christian country, never has been, and neither are any of the other countries. Would that we were!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I am as atheist as you can get. The Sisters of No Mercy helped this former Chief Altar Boy reach this enlightenment. I find others' belief in religious fantasies amusing and inexplicable. But does it matter? I see good people invoking god to justify their goodness and bad people invoking god to justify their badness. So god and his angels are basically irrelevant and harmless. It is like mulitplication by one. It is superfluous. Religion -- that is, fairy tales for adults -- will wither in time. Be patient.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If you don't believe in God, you definitely haven't been doing enough acid.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

At a time when the government was contemplating the addition of "In God We Trust" to its currency Andrew Carnegie, in conversation with his friend
Samuel Clemens, is said to have argued in support of the idea that "America IS a Christian country." Clemens's reputed response: "Why Carnegie...so is hell."

What about at every future inauguration the clergyman invited to give the invocation is required to retell that anecdote instead of delivering a prayer? Surely that's a compromise that both believers and unbelievers could live with???

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Grandioc, the point is how do you define success. As gandhi said when asked what he thought of western civilisation - "I think western civilisation would be a good idea".

Domination and success are 2 different concepts - dont mistake them as being the same thing.

It's not about europeans being evil, but you and nietzche are denying first nations people their history - you say that they dont exist, and their history is invalid. This is just another form of cultural genocide.

It is impossible to ignore that genocide of indigenous people occurred on north american soil, african soil, australian soil, new zealand soil, south american soil for so-called "success". It is a fact, deal with it. This also happened to the indigenous tribes of europe, mainly under the banner of christianity.

Indigenous means "first" - simple dictionary definition. As far as we know the "first nations" were the first people in the americas. Any talk of white skinned people being in the americas before the first nations people is pure speculation, mostly proposed by crazy "Atlantis-seeking" crusaders - nothing more.

Again, get a clue before you comment - your post was an incoherent ramble.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

During the "show", I assumed that the in-your-face Jesus-summoning came from the fact that Americans are afraid and unsure of the future, have spent the last 8 years being abused by a tyrannical appointed regime, and are simply DESPERATE..for anything, even a black man, to help them. These officials honestly have no idea if the proposed bailouts are going to work...they are making a trillion dollar gamble that it will. In times like these it is very tempting for humans to invoke magical thinking. A little jesus-magic will get us out of this mess...just pray about it. Never mind all the stupid things that the US did the last 8 years (not just the government). Ask for god's mercy and we'll behave, we promise. This was a simple case of magical thinking, which is very common, especially in grim times. And by the way, when they were singing, "he's got the whole world in his hands"...who where they referring to, God or Obama?

dboy

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Your bang on with this observation, I was absolutely sick to death with all the prayer's and G-d references by the time it was over. Have we learned nothing? Are we secular or not? Are we for "science at it's rightful place" or not?
G-d damn America!
We use G-d references like we use a door mat!
We dont own it! but we sure buy the BS

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I pledge allegiance to the Lord of the Christian states of America, and to the theocracy for which He stands, one nation, under God, with liberty and justice for just us. Amen

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You wake up in the morning
and all the gods have turned to statues.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bush did all he did directly inspired by God.
Actually, Jesus talks to him and he follows.
He must have gotten God's help to "achieve" such perfect disaster.
If Obama is going to get God's help to solve the cataclism left by Bush, is this the same God?
Or is there more than one? Or one with a multiple personality disorder? Or is God like the media and the lobbyists, who pander to whoever is on the seat?
An opportunistic God? How many Jesuses are out there?
I prefer to think that Obama is pretending to be more religious than he is. Faith is blind belief in an idea, right?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

with the writer. I wonder if it's even possible to have a prayer at a civic event such as this that doesn't offend or exclude.

Too often these invocations (as if God would need to be conjured forth magically) are imperious and lack common manners and awareness that others are listening.

The God of the Rev. Warren differs sharply from my own. I do not pray to a diety who intervenes into the course of physical events. And I resent being subject to what I consider to be bad theology.

And my own understanding of Jesus was that he was not someone who claimed to be "God," but he certainly advocated being a good, loving and respectful neighbor. Imposing one's beliefs upon others, not respecting the beliefs of others, and showing little sensitivity in a public prayer is not "loving one's neighbor." I think that Jesus would be embarrassed by such boorish behavior by some of his followers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Isn't it curious that people who feel marginalized via pomp and circumstance ... the atheists ... screech so loudly that those of us who are still listening want to say, "get on with your work and see a shrink." To athiest girl: yes, I find Rick Warren icky too. And Lowrey was indeed inspiring. But if you think the concept of higher power is going by the wayside because you don't believe in it. don't hold your breath. And since you've got bigger fish to fry on your freaky sex blog, write on sistah. But give the god battle a rest.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thank you, thank you, Greta! I've been silently stewing for days, waiting for someone to speak out, not wanting to take away from the joy of President Obama's inauguration. Not only do I have a general distaste (anger?) for the overarching use of God as the end-all and be-all of our country's existence, but I have a particular objection to Rick Warren's full-blown sermon based on evangelistic fundamentalism. It didn't just exclude atheists like you and me, it excluded everyone except believers in a certain brand of Christianity. Prior to the inauguration, the voice crying in the wilderness about Rick Warren was Wayne Beson of TruthWinsOut. I applaud him for forseeing the disaster that would result from allowing Warren to offer that prayer. The bottom line is, Let's put God back in the places of worship and let the people we've elected do the work of America!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thank you, Greta....for writing what you did and for stating it so well. Our problems require THINKING and cooperation to resolve, not more of the mindless, medieval paradigm that some all-powerful God is in charge and the nations are children in need of a Father's favor. We need to behave like grown-ups and insist that our elected leaders do the same.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I am a non-believer myself but I do not think we should take it all quite so bitterly.
Obama himself is a Christian and I felt no offense by him being sworn in a Bible and saying "so help me God" in his oath. He does believe God rules over him and in an event so important to him personally it would be rude and hypocritical to deny him his faith. But regardless of his faith I tire of hearing "God bless you" and the sort in speeches because he is addressing a wide audience of many faiths and no matter what is his views are that encourages the "Christian is right" attitude which should not be condoned by a official of country of religious freedom.
I did feel the public prayers were out of line and Rick Warren was a horrible choice of speaker. At least Rev. Joseph Lowrey had intelligent and inspiring things to say besides religious bantering. I think instead of including Christian speakers they should incorporate speakers of several faiths so the entire nation can feel included in inauguration fervor.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We have huge, disastrous, potentially civilization ending problems we simply have to solve if we are to survive as a species. Meanwhile, large groups of the population are busy wasting resources in a profligate manner, causing death and destruction on a massive scale in a violent, homicidal struggle over differences of opinion (which, ironically, appears to be centered around which group's god is more loving, peaceful and forgiving), while another sizeable portion of the population are enthusiastically cheering on the end of the world because of their belief that it represents some kind of victory for their god and salvation for them. Religion is literally going to be the death of us if we can't get more people to abandon it and live in the real world of science and find the answers we so desperately need.

We've all believed things that aren't proven to be true. The Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus, monsters under the bed, bad luck from walking under a ladder or black cats. Most of us recognize by the time we are in our early teens or sooner that these are just stories and have no basis in reality. Unfortunately, only a few of us include the stories about gods in that group and reject them along with the other stories. The reason for that is the fact that religious stories are taught regularly around the world as the truth. Imagine for a moment that there were places in every town across the country and around the world that held services dedicated to the truth of the Tooth Fairy - and they were tax exempt! It would be bad enough that they routinely and consistently taught unsubstantiated beliefs and opinions as truth…but tax exempt? That means I have to pay more in my tax dollars to support essential government services, because religious organizations DON’T…which means I’m effectively forced to support religions that I don’t agree with at all, on any level - and which in many cases actually threatens the survival of myself, family and friends because of their beliefs.

Now, remember that all of this is (from a factual perspective) is regarding OPINIONS. Not proof. Not facts. OPINION. You can call if faith or you can call it a belief system or God's Word...but it's unsubstantiated opinion. The "facts" offered to support it are nothing more than opinions and stories written by people...generations after the time in which they were supposed to have happened. You can believe them if you want...but that doesn't make them factually true. People also believed that the world was flat, the sun revolved around the earth, slavery was okay, people with epilepsy were “possessed”, women were unfit for education or having a profession (don’t even talk about being fit to vote!) - and any number of other unsubstantiated or outright wrong ideas. Belief does NOT equal proof…even if you believe it does.

People keep talking about being tolerant. As I said in a previous response to a post, I'll be tolerant of your beliefs if you will just shut up about them and leave the rest of us alone...but you never do. You insist you have the right and obligation to intrude them into my life by trying to convert or "save" me, insisting your views are the "truth" while my views are unworthy of discussion...and, by trying to pass laws that all of us will have to follow - based on your unsubstantiated, contradictory and largely hypocritical religious beliefs. Enough already.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You who say that there is no place for God in public speeches are right on target. However (and this is a big however), we live in a world where 85% of the listeners to a speech are religion oriented, and the inclusion of God gets their attention.
You are right that it is offensive, but it is offensive to us, the 15% who don't believe. The blacks waited more than 300 years to be recognized as equal human beings, and we went through 43 presidents before a black man was elected (perhaps a woman is next?).
While President Obama may not be an Athiest working to attract Christians, his beliefs are at least in the right direction.
As MLK told of his trip to the mountain top, I can tell you that the end of religion will take place. I won't see it, and most of you may not see it, but one day, a black woman president will speak to my great-grandchildren without invoking God.
The fear that was the basis of first gods, then religions, and then God, will one day be overcome. Just keep on encouraging your friends and relatives to be their own best Guru.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I don't have a problem w/ God ...if you do or don't believe in God.... But what the hell ever happened to seperation of church and state? If you want to throw a god in here or a god in there ok fine... but don't you think this was a bit extream? I'm ecstatic that Obama is in office and will admit that the expectations of him as a man, a president, a politican and that of his actions and decisions are very very high. All that religion just added insult to injury after the selection of the "right"ious rev Warren the Conman as the invocation speaker and the obvious action on HBO's part (or who ever the decider on that issue was) to omit Bishop's Robinson's opening speech. I guess we can assume that a gay man's God is not as big of a crowd pleaser as a con man's god. All gods are not created equal apparently!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Enough with all the god talk. It's well past time for a reality-based administration.

http://jackrabbitcafe.blogspot.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If Obama had not gone with his christian beliefs at this inauguration, someone would have been be-atching and griping about the fact that he left God OUT or would have used that to somehow "prove" he was a Muslim. It was HIS inauguration, we elected him, he could only go with his own conscience on that one. He simply ain't gonna be able to make everybody happy, so he's got to do what's right in his own mind. If YOU don't believe in the so-called 'fable' of God, then ignore it. I don't see how you can be complaining that loudly about something that, for you at least, doesn't exist. When you complain and try to beat others down and make them think they should be beholden to what you DON'T believe in, it says to me that you believe in God a lot more than you're willing to admit. Obama is a christian who says he believes in God, accept that as an American who knows he or she can't tell other people what they should or should not believe in, even if you don't accept the concept. To have left God "out" would have been just as bad and would have received three times the complaints from those who are inclined to believe he's some "Arab terrorist" or atheist, when he isn't. He had to choose and He went along with his own beliefs as he very well should have. What is that "invisible God" to you anyway? Unless you really do believe in Him and don't want to admit it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

He is a United States Federal Official and Head of State, not a U.S. servant. I beg to differ, but he's no one's "servant."

The White House is not a plantation and we and no one else are his Massa's. If we haven't had a problem with any president's beliefs before now, don't go singling out Obama.

Were you complaining about the past 43 presidents who all swore on Bibles and repeated the words "so help me God"?

Your atheism, then, applies only to YOU; it does not apply to the entire nation and you have no right to push your atheist beliefs off on anyone else.

Just because you advocate separation of church and state doesn't mean Obama, or any other government official, has to separate themselves personally from what they believe.

Also, Joe Biden also swore "so help me God"...where's your bellyaching about that?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How one set of nutcases thinks the President should kowtow to the other? He's going to do what he thinks best for all concerned on the national scene, not the personal ones.

Don't ask him to hide and conduct himself "as an atheist" because it would make YOU feel better.

I'd suggest we all keep our eyes on the ball (the future of this nation on the economy and our stance on war) and off other people's religions because no one is EVER going to agree on this, especially not in a nation where more than 90% of its citizens do believe in God or some form thereof.

If he has to kowtow to atheists, he has to kowtow to blacks and any and everyone else with a special interest in this nation. Obama manages to keep his eye on the ball and not be phased by the BS, we should all learn from that and press on to the issues that truly matter to the corporate whole.

'As if he hasn't said that 1,000,000 times already...'***rolls eyes***

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

America's founders wanted to insure religious and non-religious freedom. Creation is a mystery. Religion is more than an explantion of this mystery. Most of our societal rules are rooted in concepts and ideas that have their roots in religions. A majority of social reformers in the last 300 years encouraged Americans to treat people according principles that history attributes to religious people.

We are a nation founded on freedom to worship and not to worship. More importantly we have a right to dissent and to not conform for religious reasons. As long as the concept of a higher law exist, there will be room for dissent
Without this right we will loose our most fundamental freedom.

Chill people. Live and let live. Take what
is meaningful from 1-20-09 and leave what isn't.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I have to say I totally agree with you- and I am Catholic! While I have never gone as far as to say that we should take 'in God we trust' off our currency, or shouldn't be sworn in on the Bible, it has always irked me a bit. As a kid we learned all about the separation of church and state, and growing up going to a Catholic school, I never had the guts to question them on this. But I always wondered, how is this separate? With this inauguration, I too was overwhelmed with all the references. I was watching it in a room with a bunch of girls who differ in religious backgrounds- although mostly Christian- and I felt uncomfortable. I wondered how the speech made others feel? Especially with those whose religious views differed greatly from Obama's?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I grew up Christian and also learned about many other faiths. If it happens that religions might eventually be taught in public schools, we should demand that more than one brand of morality be taught, and should include the philosophy of non-theists, like Humanists and even those atheists who believe that religion is actually harmful to mental health.

What irks me the most is when religionists present their versions as both the only truth and appropriate for everyone, when it is clear that assumption, at least, is untrue.

Even the most rabid religionist has personal doubts that should not be ridiculed, either. Many religions are both widely believed and have a great deal of room and need for discussion and criticism.

No single religious system can be appropriate for every soul.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If this is a free country gay couples deserve the same rights as straight couples.

www.nsyfforum.com

NEVER SURRENDER YOUR FREEDOM

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I think the key to this is the fact that a democracy is all about rule of/by the majority. Therefore, the 15% who are likely to object to prayer at the inauguration of the president or swearing on the Bible, are technically the minority. The absolute diversity of religions represented in America which accept the concept of a higher power cannot in any way be construed as advocating a national religion. It is impossible to please everybody.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Let's say we vote for a Taoist president. Not being a Christian, he decides not to use any quotes from the Bible, but he chooses to have read a pretty section from the Tao Te Ching about virtue and fairness. He then takes his oath. On the Tao Te Ching.

And then here's the dilemma. I mean, its a nice work of religious literature, and perhaps you respect the teachings, but you don't necessarily believe it. You have mixed feelings.

1. You feel excluded. It's not your religion. It's not 'your' god. He doesn't address you. You feel like your beliefs don't really matter.
2. More importantly, you probably feel a little distrustful. He swore on the Tao Te Ching. As far as you, a Christian, are concerned, it's just as if he promised to uphold the roles of office on a loaf of bread. To you, it doesn't mean much. You don't trust the oath.

And that's how non-Christians feel. Just like to Taoist, he's fine to have his beliefs. He can go to mass or church or temple before the ceremony, or after, or have his religious leader attend and even play a role. He can wear a cross, or even bow down and pray on his own right before hand. I don't think anyone is against that.

The problem is that Christianity is so tied to the actual ceremony. He swears on the Bible. That means absolutely nothing to a non-Christian. We don't see it as sacred, so we don't see his promises as sacred, and it personally makes me feel uneasy.

Why not take the oath on the Constitution? Its something that all Americans can appreciate. It's more topical anyway. Of course the president can keep his religion. We're not being intolerant. But he's our president, too, and he needs to take an oath that every American can relate to.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Full of pomp and talk of the invisible sky monster.

I was not impressed by our Imperial ceremony thrown for Emperor Obama.

I think that much money and that much energy going into an irrelevant ceremony when the country is in dire straights shows just how screwed we are.

The fact that we had a few Religious Mystics there to bless the new Emperor with their magical powers didn't impress me either.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The importance of a vote!

A vote is the essence of democracy. That which denies the equality of our vote is a denial of democracy. Unfortunately, when we vote for any choice of government, we loose control of that vote because we have no way to determine that our vote was accepted, nor that it was properly applied. There is no way that we can follow our vote and know for sure that it was counted as we intended.
Can anyone honestly say they can find their vote in the thousands and millions of votes cast in any election? No, because once it leaves our hands every vote is mingled with everyone else’s vote and there is no way we can track it to its final destination of our choice.
This fact is no where more evident than in how the choice of president is made. The vote we cast for a president goes through at least three stages. The first is the ballot which is then combined with every other vote to select an elector for the Electoral College. Then the electors make the choice for us. But what is not generally known is that the Electoral College is seriously flawed.
The vote we cast is compromised the instant we vote because the way the EC is established is through the census which takes place every 10 years on the year ending in zero.
The census determines the number of EC votes assigned to each state every ten years to last for ten years before being adjusted. But the elections take place every four years. Thus we have a significant lack of coordination and compatibility which affects the vote value of every voter the instant their vote is cast.
The census takes 2 years to complete before it can be used to adjust the number of electors assigned to each state which means that the affect of any change will not be effective for at least two years from a year zero. Thus those voting in a year ending with zero will be voting on a population count of ten years before. This impacts the vote value of every state that has an increase in population because the number of EC votes is fixed for ten years and thus a state growing in population will have more people voting than was the expected count when the EC votes were assigned.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]