The head of an atheist group that has filed a lawsuit against prayer at Barack Obama's presidential inauguration says the government is picking a winner between "believers" and "those who don't believe" and subjecting atheists and agnostics to someone else's religious beliefs.
Dan Barker, co-president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, has joined with Michael Newdow, who fought to have the words "under God" removed from the Pledge of Allegiance, in a federal lawsuit seeking to enjoin the Presidential Inaugural Committee from sponsoring prayers at the official inauguration.
The 34-page legal complaint similarly seeks to enjoin Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, Jr., from adding the phrase "So help me God" to the presidential oath of office.
"We're hoping to stop prayer and religious rituals at governmental functions, especially at the inauguration," Barker told FOX News Radio.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2008/12/30/atheist-group-files-lawsuit-prayer-presidential-inauguration/Of course, since this is a Fox site, most of the comments are boilerplate Freeper hyperventilation, devoid of any thought or content. Although it doesn't hurt to make the point that the presidential oath of office is clearly specified in the Constitution, and does not include "so help me god" (even though the framers could have added that if they thought it was appropriate), I'm always a little ambivalent about whether unwinnable fights like these are worth spending time and resources and political capital on.