A federal judge today refused to issue an injunction against religious references in next week’s inauguration, as the plantiffs (including Michael Newdow, the [where else?] Californian atheist who sued to have “in God we trust” removed from the pledge) were hoping. A short blurb on the story can be found on the Washington Post’s Web site.
Anyone think it was the wrong call? Is it a good thing to allow prayer in the inauguration a good thing, or does it blur the necessary line between church and state?
One of the comments on the Post’s site caught my eye: “Why do atheists think their lack of belief in God trumps free speech ? If they are so offended by the mention of God, hit the MUTE button on their TV’s. They have gone too far to eliminate God from our lives, why don’t they just move to a godless country, there are plenty to choose from.”
My problem with this quote? First, the “move to a godless country” comment (wrongly) assumes that the United States is a country that loves God. Second, if God isn’t in your life (or rather, if He’s not the chief end and desire of your life), then it’s no one’s fault but your own.
UPDATE: My third objection to this quote: If you’re a true follower in Christ, you should be praying that anyone who doesn’t believe what you believe moves next door, not to another country, so they can hear and see the gospel through your words, life, and love.