by J. Clifford C.
Member since:
February 25, 2007

Washington and Lincoln Support Keeping Religion Out of the Inauguration

January 02, 2009 02:00 AM EST (Updated: January 02, 2009 02:09 AM EST)
views: 129 | comments: 11
To watch video on Gather
you need the latest Macromedia Flash Player software.
Would you like to install it now?
If George Washington and Abraham Lincoln didn't need to violate the Constitution in order to shove religion into the Inauguration, why does Barack Obama need to do so?
link to this page
embed code
Bookmark this video:
Facebook
Twitter
Delicious
Buzz
More

Comments: 11

Carla G. Jan 2, 2009, 11:35am EST
You can please some of the people some of the time...

No matter what Obama does, he will upset some people. Some will think he doesn't have enough religion in his inauguration, others will feel that there is too much. Some will be happy with Rick Warren and some will not. He can't win.
Marilyn M. Jan 2, 2009, 1:21pm EST
If you believe that we all have the right to practice our religion, then you should allow that if Obama and other Presidents feel that it is necessary to have the words "so help me God" in the oath and to have pastors there and to have prayer, then that should be fine and dandy. We do have the right to practice religion, don't we? If it offends you to hear the words, then you have the choice to not listen.
J. Clifford C. Jan 2, 2009, 1:22pm EST
Carla, you're completely ignoring what the Constitution actually says. It doesn't say, "There shall be as much of a religious test for public office as makes people happy." It says, "There shall be NO religious test for public office.

Do you support the Constitution, Carla, or not? Do you only think that the Constitution should be enforced when it makes people happy?

Are you happy with Rick Warren and his radical agenda, Carla? Are you happy with the way that Rick Warren says that women are inferior beings who must be submissive to men? Does that make you happy?

Your comment, Carla, manages to avoid any of the actual content of the matter. You might as well say about Hitler that he made some people happy and some people unhappy. It's not a valid argument.
J. Clifford C. Jan 2, 2009, 1:26pm EST
Marilyn, we all have the right to practice religion as we see fit or not fit - AS INDIVIDUALS. No one has the right to use the power of government to support religion. That's the difference. Barack Obama is using the power of government to support religion in general, and Christian religion over non-Christian religion. It's blatantly unconstitutional - and therefore illegal. That's a bad start to any presidency, Democrat or Republican.

This ought to bother religious Americans as much as it bothers non-religious Americans. Having the President make decisions about which religious denominations are politically correct enough to be included in government events, and which religious denominations will be excluded, is damaging to the free expression of religion.
Carla G. Jan 2, 2009, 2:31pm EST
J. Clifford, Obama is a constitutional lawyer. It is not what he does in his inauguration that is important, as far as I am concerned. It is what he does in his policies and administration. I am all for freedom of religion and I am not a fan of Warren's. However, to me this is a small matter in the grand scheme of things, in my opinion.
J. Clifford C. Jan 2, 2009, 3:14pm EST
Carla, just as police officers can break the law, so constitutional lawyers are capable of violating the Constitution. Furthermore the Inauguration is a part of the Obama Administration. It is the first act of the Obama Administration, and a statement of the tone that the presidency will take.

I do not agree that it is a small matter when the President of the United States decides that he can disregard the Constitution when it is politically convenient to do so. Adherence to the Constitution must be absolute, or else the Constitution takes on the status of a mere guideline, instead of the highest law of the land. We just suffered 8 years under a President who disrespected the Constitution. We need to make sure that Obama does not go down that path - a path that is tempting to all presidents - Democrat or Republican.
Carla G. Jan 3, 2009, 11:20am EST
If you are going to compare Obama having Warren do a prayer at the inauguration with Bush and all he did to erode the Constitution to the detriment of the country and the world, then I'm going to exit this conversation, because there is no comparison.
J. Clifford C. Jan 3, 2009, 5:05pm EST
No, Carla, I can't compare that IN EXTENT, but yes, I can compare the two IN CHARACTER. Bush has had eight years in office as President. Obama hasn't. However, this is a very bad start to the Obama Administration, and one that takes away a measure of the good will he had earned. What comes after that, I can't judge yet, because it hasn't happened yet.
J. Clifford C. Jan 3, 2009, 5:06pm EST
It is worth noting, however, that as a Senator, Barack Obama helped Bush erode the Constitution, voting in favor of the FISA Amendments Act, for example.
C C. Jan 3, 2009, 8:43pm EST
interesting, thanks
Dagmara H. Jan 4, 2009, 6:44pm EST
I agree with C C

Join the Conversation
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Already a member? Sign in
top
 
Gather | Friends | Groups | Share
About Gather | Engagement Marketing | Make New Friends | Gather Points | Advertise on Gather | Gather Press | Privacy | Terms of Service | Community Guidelines
Books | Celebs | Entertainment | Family | Food | Health | Moms | Money | News | Politics | Spirituality | Sports | Travel | Writing
Version 16961, "Pacino"; Copyright © 2009 Gather Inc. All rights reserved.