So I'm markedly curious about President Elect Obama's choice of Rick Warren to perform the invocation at the inauguration (wow, say that five times fast). It confounded me so much so that I thought "why not look up the rules that made him make the decision?" So I did...



... there aren't any, so it would seem. No, according to most sources, it would seem that the Constitution says nothing at all about the utilization of a bible or a pastor or priest or whatever to "swear in" a president. So it would then seem that the atheists are right; this whole deal is just a bunch of bullshit that is meant to clean the wounds of a beaten down right-wing and it would be a happier place were we to abolish the idea of a religious ceremony of any kind marking the beginning of a United States Presidency.



An interesting article in BeyondChron, a San Francisco online newspaper gave an interesting history of the process of swearing in, which I will cite here; author Tommi Avicolli-Mecca states:



"As an atheist I am offended that Christianity is being promoted at a state function. There’s no legal basis for its inclusion. The U.S. Constitution says nothing about a president using a bible in taking the oath of office. In fact, President John Quincy Adams used a law book, and Franklin Pierce and Theodore Roosevelt swore on no books at all. It’s not just presidents. In November, 2006, Minnesota U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison sparked national controversy when he chose the Quran as the book on which to lay his hand. The phrase 'so help me God' wasn’t even in the oath until President Franklin Roosevelt used it less than 100 years ago (though some claim it was Lincoln who first included it). The Constitution does not mention anything about a minister or other religious person giving an invocation or benediction during the swearing-in. It does forbid establishment of a state religion."



Gasp, I know.



It would seem that we have been duped, really, into thinking that we need to follow some sort of religious guidlines in order to have a viable leader. I agree whole-heartedly with the atheist idea of leaving the leadership of varied portions of the world to a more secular and worldly methodology; the person swears not by God, or Allah, or Vishnu, or whatever, but rather themself.



Goodness, how lucky do we have to be in order to get it right, you know?