EDITOR’S NOTEBOOK: It’s time for this nation’s majority to defend itself

EDITOR’S NOTEBOOK By Ruth Luse Stand up and voice your beliefs.

   If you ignore it, it will go away. Following that advice can, on occasion, keep people out of trouble. It also can make a problem worse. Some things and some people just won’t go away.
   I would like Michael Newdow — an atheist doctor and lawyer from Sacramento, Calif., best known for his unsuccessful attempt to the get the words "under God" removed from the Pledge of Allegiance — to go away. Last week, a U.S. District Court judge denied Mr. Newdow’s bid to bar the saying of a Christian prayer at yesterday’s presidential inauguration.
   (The Supreme Court dismissed his "under God" lawsuit on the grounds that he could not represent his 10-year-old daughter, who is in the custody of his ex-wife and believes in God. Mr. Newdow has renewed his effort to remove "under God" from the pledge. He has, according to a recent Washington Times report, filed a new suit in California federal court on behalf of eight other parents.)
   I know there still are many in this nation who would agree with me and perhaps it’s time for the nation to decide — in a national referendum perhaps — just where we stand on the issues Mr. Newdow unfortunately has brought to the forefront. I think it’s dangerous for us to ignore him and his ilk anymore.
   Like atheist Madalyn Murray O’Hair, who participated in the legal action that resulted in the U.S. Supreme Court decision pulling prayer and Bible reading out of public school classrooms in the 1960s, he is bent on destroying traditions that have been part of everyday life for many since the day this nation was born. What I’d like to know is what he plans to replace the traditions with.
   Mr. Newdow wanted to make it illegal for President George W. Bush to place his hand on a Bible while being sworn into office. He also objected to the opening and closing prayers that are a traditional part of the inauguration ceremony.
   According to the Washington Times report, Mr. Newdow said, in his Dec. 17 filing: "It is an offense of the highest magnitude that the leader of our nation — while swearing to uphold the Constitution — publicly violates that very document upon taking his oath of office … The demands of strict scrutiny have not been met, and defendants must be enjoined from their planned religious activities."
   The news report explains that the "Constitution does not require the new president to place his hand on a Bible while repeating the oath. The tradition has been kept since George Washington — with the exception of Theodore Roosevelt, who did not use a Bible when he took the oath after President William McKinley’s 1901 assassination."
   The Jan. 8 story quotes Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice (which supports attorneys in religious freedom cases and has filed a friend-of-the-court brief in support of inaugural prayer), as saying that Mr. Newdow’s efforts are "part of a march toward removing every vestige of religion from American public life … There is a progressive move toward secularism that we’ve got to combat pretty aggressively."
   The report goes on to say: "The argument in favor of prayer at the inauguration is based on the establishment of chaplains in Congress at its inception, before the Bill of Rights was passed prohibiting any ‘law respecting an establishment of religion.’
   "When the presence of chaplains in the Nebraska state Legislature was legally challenged in 1983 by Ernest Chambers, a Nebraska lawmaker, the Supreme Court ruled against him, saying the practice had a ‘special nook’ because it was a long-standing practice to have government-paid chaplains."
   Mr. Sekulow also stated: "The Supreme Court has given its constitutional blessing, so to speak … We should not lose our history and the religious underpinnings it is founded on."
   According to the Washington Times report, "Mr. Newdow states in his complaint that he ‘sincerely believes that there is no such thing as god, or God, or any supernatural force.’ On the contrary, he believes ‘supernatural’ is an oxymoron. ‘Thus, plaintiff denies the existence of God.’"
   The report concludes with: "The Rev. Louis P. Sheldon, chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition, said Mr. Newdow’s filing marks ‘the day we have been warning America would come . . . Mr. Newdow should be ashamed for seeking this injunction against his fellow citizens,’ he said. ‘We, as Americans, need to awaken and deal with these threats to religious liberty, cynically disguised as civil liberties defense."
   For me, this report — which was e-mailed to my address Jan. 10, was the last straw. I have wanted to speak out many times in the past, but chose not to do so, in fear, perhaps, of being vilified. I don’t care any longer. It’s time, I think, that those Americans who agree with me, stand up and tell the Mr. Newdows of this nation that he has every right to believe what he believes, but so do we, and in this nation, I think, the majority still rules. I hope that majority will defend itself before it’s too late!
   
Ruth Luse is managing editor of the Hopewell Valley News, a Packet publication.