The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia threw out a lawsuit that an atheist had brought against the government that challenged the use of an invocation and a benediction at the Presidential Inauguration.
The court decided it did not have the power to order a President-elect to remain silent at his own inauguration and that banning the prayers would amount to the same thing. This is a victory for the First Amendment against a frivolous lawsuit.
The plaintiff first came into the public eye when he challenged the government in court over the same issue four years ago when George W. Bush took office. Since then he's filed a lawsuit against the Pledge of Allegiance, claiming that the words "under God" violates the left-loved "separation of church and state" clause that the courts created and have upheld ever since.
That first case was thrown out by the U.S. Supreme Court because he did not have custody of his daughter, whom he claimed was victimized by the recital of the Pledge, and did not have the support of the mother (who has custody of their daughter and opposed the case.)
He recently re-filed the case without using his daughter as his pawn and with eight other families who support his cause.
That entire case with the Pledge came across as a man using his daughter to gain social brownie points for himself with his legal attack on the Pledge. That's very sad.
No comments:
Post a Comment