>I think you're missing the point. It's not about loyalty, it's about Americans traditionally giving thanks to God. Thanksgiving, for example, and "inalienable rights from the Creator". And we've already had irreligious Presidents, they weren't forthcoming about it is all. It would be political suicide for a President to skip out on the breakfast; why would he or she do that unless militantly anti-religious? And we are no where near electing a militant, strident religios free person.

It wasn't about the breakfast per se - it was about The Family. That such a shady organization would reach so deep into the system, and stay there for so long, is downright scary. The breakfast is just the very visible tip of this iceberg.

My rhetorical question would better be phrased as "what would The Family do if American people elected a religion free president?".

>Look at your history - Thomas Jefferson, for one, had some very interesting views on religion.

I lived in Charlottesville for a few years - and got into the habit of listening to Jefferson Hour on NPR (benefits of telecommuting) so yep, I know what he meant.

>>There must be some serious holes in The Wall, if http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Family_(Christian_political_organization) is organizing the prayer breakfast since 1953. What if a religion free person was ever elected president, one which would be loyal to the country only, not to any narrower group of believers first? Would they still go on with it?