What Planet Is Michael Newdow From?
Michael Newdow, frothing-at-the-mouth, atheist moonbat is at it again. He's not bringing a suit against the Pledge. But he is going after God again, in a convoluted lawsuit against the government over "In God We Trust" on our money. (Anyone ever brought it up to him that, as a working professional, he collects a paycheck, and that he has no problem taking that money which offends him?) Hat-tip: Free Republic
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1521503/posts
SACRAMENTO, Calif. The atheist who's spent years trying to ban recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools says he'll file a new lawsuit this week.
Michael Newdow says he'll ask a federal court to order removal of the national motto "In God We Trust" from U-S coins and currency. He says it violates the religious rights of atheists who belong to his "First Amendment Church of True Science."
The church's "three suggestions" are "question, be honest and do what's right." Newdow says it wouldn't be right to take up a collection when the money says "In God We Trust."
Last year, the Supreme Court dismissed Newdow's lawsuit over the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance because he doesn't have custody of his daughter, in whose name the lawsuit was filed.
Newdow has resurrected that case by filing an identical lawsuit on behalf of two families.
Now, Mr. Newdow is certainly free to make an ass of himself; it is his First Amendment right. But in addition to that wonderful right, we have a couple more listed in the First Amendment. Ironically, the opening clause of the amendment speaks expressly about what irks Mr. Newdow.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Mr. Newdow needs to remember one little thing. The mere mention of "God" does not constitute a religion, or even recognizing a specific religion. "God" is the deity over a number of religions around the globe, and is mostly associated with some sort of Christian Church. As a Catholic, I'm keenly aware of God. I believe in Him. But our money isn't any sort of "prop" used in a church service I'm aware of. And just like the Pledge, it was enacted by Congress to honor the ideals of the founding of this nation.
The government isn't promoting religion--in general or otherwise. I don't feel the sudden urgency to go to church when I look at my coins, or my paper money. I don't feel any more faithful than anyone else with actual money in my pocket rather than plastic. On the flip side, his nutty argument is quite similar to his Pledge complaint. The difference is that this time he's not using his daughter. He's using others; quite possibly just-as-unhinged atheists in their own right. They're free to make an attempt at this comedy, but they'll lose.
From a legal standpoint, Congress created this, but it wasn't for a support for any one religion. It simply recognized the "Creator" that Thomas Jefferson referenced in the Declaration of Independence. They aren't supporting a religion of any sort. From a practical standpoint, is he expecting the US government to recall every piece of money across the nation? No, he just wants them to stop now. He's offended. He wants everyone to bow to the minority.
Yes, I said the minority. Well over 80% of this world believes in a higher being of some sort, with some name. Over 60% of that are people who call themselves "Christian." He is clearly in the minority. A democracy abides by the wishes of the majority. And I'm sure the majority would love to know which planet this nut comes from so we can send him home.
Mistress Pundit
Michael Newdow, frothing-at-the-mouth, atheist moonbat is at it again. He's not bringing a suit against the Pledge. But he is going after God again, in a convoluted lawsuit against the government over "In God We Trust" on our money. (Anyone ever brought it up to him that, as a working professional, he collects a paycheck, and that he has no problem taking that money which offends him?) Hat-tip: Free Republic
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1521503/posts
SACRAMENTO, Calif. The atheist who's spent years trying to ban recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools says he'll file a new lawsuit this week.
Michael Newdow says he'll ask a federal court to order removal of the national motto "In God We Trust" from U-S coins and currency. He says it violates the religious rights of atheists who belong to his "First Amendment Church of True Science."
The church's "three suggestions" are "question, be honest and do what's right." Newdow says it wouldn't be right to take up a collection when the money says "In God We Trust."
Last year, the Supreme Court dismissed Newdow's lawsuit over the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance because he doesn't have custody of his daughter, in whose name the lawsuit was filed.
Newdow has resurrected that case by filing an identical lawsuit on behalf of two families.
Now, Mr. Newdow is certainly free to make an ass of himself; it is his First Amendment right. But in addition to that wonderful right, we have a couple more listed in the First Amendment. Ironically, the opening clause of the amendment speaks expressly about what irks Mr. Newdow.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Mr. Newdow needs to remember one little thing. The mere mention of "God" does not constitute a religion, or even recognizing a specific religion. "God" is the deity over a number of religions around the globe, and is mostly associated with some sort of Christian Church. As a Catholic, I'm keenly aware of God. I believe in Him. But our money isn't any sort of "prop" used in a church service I'm aware of. And just like the Pledge, it was enacted by Congress to honor the ideals of the founding of this nation.
The government isn't promoting religion--in general or otherwise. I don't feel the sudden urgency to go to church when I look at my coins, or my paper money. I don't feel any more faithful than anyone else with actual money in my pocket rather than plastic. On the flip side, his nutty argument is quite similar to his Pledge complaint. The difference is that this time he's not using his daughter. He's using others; quite possibly just-as-unhinged atheists in their own right. They're free to make an attempt at this comedy, but they'll lose.
From a legal standpoint, Congress created this, but it wasn't for a support for any one religion. It simply recognized the "Creator" that Thomas Jefferson referenced in the Declaration of Independence. They aren't supporting a religion of any sort. From a practical standpoint, is he expecting the US government to recall every piece of money across the nation? No, he just wants them to stop now. He's offended. He wants everyone to bow to the minority.
Yes, I said the minority. Well over 80% of this world believes in a higher being of some sort, with some name. Over 60% of that are people who call themselves "Christian." He is clearly in the minority. A democracy abides by the wishes of the majority. And I'm sure the majority would love to know which planet this nut comes from so we can send him home.
Mistress Pundit
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 6:08 PM
1 Comments:
It's interesting that self proclaimed atheist Michael Newdow has a church! Yep, it's called First Amendment Church of True Science. I hope he doesn't get a tax exemption. Rawriter
Post a Comment
<< Home