the whining here about religion being included in the inauguration

[longship]

96. But the religiosity is superfluous.

It is added on for the majority of our nation who are religious. I do not disagree that it has become tradition to wrap the inauguration of our presidents in religious garb, so to speak.

But what many of us see, and what maybe you do not see, is that the only necessity in doing this is to make people comfortable that they have elected yet another president who worships a god. That fact alone highlights to many in this country that they are the other, outsiders who will never be allowed to be part of the process. It is what Madison and Jefferson would label the tyranny of the majority.

As an atheist, I do not care whether my president is religious or not. I don't care whether he or she goes to church or what church. My president can pray to Yahweh, or to the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or the Buddhist floaty thing. It just doesn't bother me one bit whatever.

But all the prayers at the inaugural does bother me because a president should not use the office to display his religiosity to the world. His power comes not from god, but from our Constitution, which never once mentions god and specifically prohibits religious tests for office.

Now I admit that the prayers are probably not unconstitutional by today's standards. But to many people, they are a blatant demonstration that our government considers us outsiders. At least, four years ago, President Obama recognized us in his speech. I will take him at his word that we are still included in his thoughts. But I remain very uncomfortable with all the prayers in government, especially by the GOP, who take it to what I consider dangerous levels.

That latter issue is why some of us bring this topic up.

Please, if you want to discuss things rationally, it is best not to call names. That tactic is sophomoric and never goes anywhere good.

Thanks.