phlebas

Newdow has a copycat.

<a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/showcase/chi-020909atheist.story" target="_blank">Chicago atheist sues city to prevent 9/11 prayers</a>

I ate Pascal's Wafer

I think he's going to have a hard case with this one. The law, as I see it, prevents the government from endorsing a particular religion or belief (such as "under God" in the pledge). It also prevents government money from supporting religious groups, or religious functions. As I see it, prayers shouldn't be said over government funded loudspeakers during government endorsed events.

However, this appears to be a privately funded event on public property. It shouldn't be very different from, say, a prayer ring meeting in a town park, for example.

Also, while the mayor may be there, I don't see where the law prohibits public officials from displaying religious belief outside of their work, as long as those beliefs don't affect their jobs.

It seems to me like he has a really shaky case ahead of him. Dr. Newdow was attacking something that was obviously unconstitutional and still had problems. I honestly don't think Mr. Harris will get very far in this case.

Just my $.02.

-Nick, who thinks we should choose our battles carefully.