To those bemoaning the presence of the divine in the inauguration

[stupidicus]

187. which again, is meaningless

I'm still waiting for you to post something any reasonably well educated atheist doesn't know about inaugurations, which is why your effort here follows the pattern I noted -- an admonition likely generated by who the criticism involved/was directed at, not over the substance of the objections from the atheists here in isolation from that.

The idea that you know something about past inaugurations in terms of their content that the average politically educated atheist -- like those around here -- doesn't, while amusing, could also be a little insulting when accompanied with the "sit down and shut-up" element that would seem to have accompanied it, as evidenced by the content and obvious intent and meaning of your final comment.

Nice lecture though, even if was common knowledge most junior high/high schoolers are likely somewhat familiar with.