Lynn v. Sekulow

Purging Religious References: If at First You Don't Succeed . . .

Friday October 16, 2009

Barry, you pose an interesting question.  I believe that end of life decisions should be made primarily between an individual and that individual's family and trusted advisors, including spiritual counselors.  An individual should certainly be able to consult his physician, if the individual so chooses.  I would imagine that most health care plans would cover an annual physical exam during which a person could consult with his physician. 

 

I do think it is inappropriate for the government to give physicians an incentive to initiate this conversation and mandate what should be covered in the counseling.  That could all too easily lead to a scenario where the federal government makes care decisions based on life expectancy.

 

And, now from the category... if at first you don't succeed, try, try again.  That's exactly what Michael Newdow, an atheist, and his fellow plaintiffs are doing - this time in a federal appeals court - this time appealing a lower court decision that dismissed their lawsuit challenging prayers offered at the presidential inauguration - including the phrase used in the oath, "So help me God."

Barry, this is the latest chapter in a relentless crusade to purge all religious references and observances from American public life.  He failed in his latest attempt in January when a federal district court dismissed the lawsuit and refused to block the inaugural prayer saying the plaintiffs lacked standing because they failed to show harm that would result from the prayers taking place. 

 

We filed an amicus brief at the time and argued that Newdow's suit "must not be permitted to move forward" noting that references to God at inaugurations date back to the very origins of this country.  Our brief recognized that references to God at inaugurations date back to the very origins of this country.

 

According to the brief:  "In his first inaugural address, President Washington proclaimed that 'no people can be bound to knowledge and adore the Invisible Hand which conducts the affairs of men more than those of the United States,' because 'every step by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency.'  Inaugural Addresses of the Presidents of the United States, S. Doc. No. 10, 101st Cong., 1st Sess. 2 (1989).  Thus, the Inauguration of the man who was 'first in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen,' was blessed with an invocation of Divine Aid by the very Chief Executive.  Every subsequent Inaugural has likewise afforded the Chief Executive the opportunity to expressly invoke Divine Aid, or to acknowledge the working of the Divine Hands in the enterprise that is this great Nation."

 

The latest appeal from Newdow is taking place in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia and in an amicus brief just filed with the appeals court we urge that the lower court decision be upheld and argue the challenge lacks legal standing.

 

We see no reason why the federal appeals court will not reach the same and proper conclusion as did the federal district court. 

 

Barry, I'm all for persistence and standing up for your position in court, but this continuing legal challenge is without merit.  By our count, this is the 9th lawsuit filed by Newdow over the years - his third suit challenging presidential inaugural prayer.

 

While it is certainly within his right to continue this flawed legal strategy, to me it's clear that he's wasted untold judicial resources - resources that are clearly needed in cases involving real threats to American liberties.

 

To subscribe to "Lynn v. Sekulow" click here.

 

 

Advertisement
Comments
Mr. Incredible
October 29, 2009 2:35 AM

Your Name
October 20, 2009 10:06 PM
Well they know who they are, Nicholas. You sound a bit bitter. Yes, people can where a white suit, but it does not make them good people.
-----------------------------------------------------------
If I wanna be a "good people," what kind-a people do I gotta be? What's passing? What, 70%? 80%? Do you grade on a curve?

God says that when His Son makes one Righteous, one wears white raiment.

So, are you sayin' that God doesn't know what He's talking about?

Mr. Incredible
October 29, 2009 2:36 AM


What's good enough to be "good people"?

Jimmy Changa and Stripper Wife, Shimmy
October 29, 2009 2:46 AM


we just wana say that mr incredible is wondrful. he should call himsef mr wonderful becuzz he is.

Joe Mamma
October 29, 2009 2:48 AM


i agree with jimmy and shimmy changa!

Mr. Incredible
November 4, 2009 11:15 AM


Would "God dammit!" and "Oh, my God!" also be purged so we don't have-ta listen to them??

Read All Comments

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Please type the text you see in the box below to verify your post and help us prevent spam. You have a limited time to type - you may wish to compose your comment in a separate document and paste it here upon completion.

Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Advertisement

Search This Blog

feed icon Subscribe

RSS Feed

Receive updates from Lynn v. Sekulow

About Lynn v. Sekulow

Lynn v. Sekulow is an ongoing debate blog--a blogalogue--about how big (or little) a role faith and religion should play in American politics and government, featuring the two leading voices of the church/state battle: American Center for Law & Justice Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow and Americans United for Separation of Church and State Executive Director Rev. Barry W. Lynn.

Please note that in discussing political issues, candidates’ positions and political party statements, the Rev. Barry Lynn and Jay Sekulow are offering analysis in their individual capacities as lawyers and commentators. They are not speaking on behalf of Americans United for Separation for Church and State or for the American Center for Law & Justice. Those organizations do not endorse or oppose candidates for public office. Nothing contained in this dialogue should be construed as the positions of the respective organizations.

About the Authors

Rev. Barry W. Lynn
Executive Director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, a nonprofit educational organization that defends religious liberty by opposing government interference in religion
» Posts by Rev. Barry W. Lynn
Jay Sekulow
Chief Counsel for the American Center for Law & Justice (ACLJ), a law firm and educational organization focused on protecting religious freedom, American families, and human life.
» Posts by Jay Sekulow
More »

Advertisement

Advertisement


About Beliefnet

Our mission is to help people like you find, and walk, a spiritual path that will bring comfort, hope, clarity, strength, and happiness. More about Beliefnet.

Legal

Copyright © Beliefnet, Inc. and/or its licensors. All rights reserved. Use of this site is subject to Terms of Service and to our Privacy Policy. Constructed by Beliefnet.

Advertisement

Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.