An atheist has lost bid to stop inauguration prayer, page 1

krt1967

posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 02:14 PM

link

After two lower courts had rejected Michael Newdow's bid to have prayer ban at President Bush's inauguration. Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist also denied his request to have the Supreme Court bar the prayer being said. U.S. District Judge John Bates also said the court had no authority to do so.

news.yahoo.com
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist denied Michael Newdow's claim that a prayer at Thursday's ceremony would violate the Constitution by forcing him to accept unwanted religious beliefs.

In so doing, Rehnquist also rejected Newdow's request to recuse himself from the case because he is scheduled to swear in Bush. Newdow had argued that Rehnquist had become a willing fixture in a government ceremony "infused with sectarian Christian religion" and thus had a conflict of interest.

Rehnquist's order came without comment.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

I'm pleased to see prayer will not be taken away in the president's inauguration ceremony. Prayer still means alot to People that have not forgotten God. If only more of us could group together and fight back to have his name reinstated in all the places it seems to have been erased.

[edit on 29-3-2005 by Spectre]

GradyPhilpott

posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 02:23 PM

link

'What I would like to know is why athiests are so offended by prayer and religion. Just how much inconvenience can it be to them to have to accommodate the other 95% of the populaton who believe that there is a higher power whom we can petition and pay homage. There's a backlash a-coming.

spacedoubt

posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 02:48 PM

link

Grady,

IT's not inconvenient at all.
Not ALL atheists are offended. Me for example.
And thats my religious choice.

Seems to me that this Newdow jerk is trying to
push HIS religious beliefs on the masses.
Hippocritical, if you ask me.