For those asking "what god has to do with it?", it is actually very simple. It is the concept of divine provedence. If you look at the declaration of independence it should jump out at you in one of the most often quoted parts:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
This is, I think most would agree, a principle of the most profound importance to our country, our constitution, and most importantly our individual rights and our freedom. This idea that our rights are granted by a higher power and are "unalienable".
Now lets be clear, I'm agnostic so I don't buy into religous texts as a basis for logical argument because I believe it presupposes the existance of god. But you cannot ignore that by removing entirely the concept of a higher power from the underlying principles that guide our government you are removing that which makes your rights "unalienable".
If you choose not to believe in god that is a personal decision. But when you deduce from that that the government should completely remove any relation to even a generic concept of a higher power then you necessarily remove the concept of divine provedence. You remove your gauruntee of unalienable rights and in it's place you say that you're willing to accept the word of your fellow man that by nothing but his strength of character and his promise you will trust him to honor your right to rights, the most fundamental right.
That concept of rights granted by men is EXACTLY what the founding fathers wanted to avoid because it is exactly that sort of government that they were rejecting as having been tried and proven untennable as way to have or produce a free society. How is it that a representative who serves you in your government which you control could be the one who grants to you the right to vote for them? It doesn't even make sense. The rights of others cannot and should not be gaurunteed by the promise of one man to abdicate his natural tendency for ambition (as all politicians have) so that we might retain our rights as a free people. That concept is sheer insanity, it's trusting the scoprion not to sting your back as you help him across the river.
This may seem like a simple issue of semantics to those who are professed athiests (ie it might seem like that is the case regardless), but that line of reasoning actually betrays an ignorance of what religion truly is. Honestly, I don't know how to properly explain it either so if you feel this way lets just agree to disagree.
With that said it is quite clear that "I believe in God and He is the Center of my Life." is not a principle I agree with. I would however say I very strongly agree with the other 8 principles. I think if people can agree with 8 of 9 it's clear there is plenty of common ground for the group to work from if they're willing to work from what unites them rather than bickering about what divides them.
PS - Glenn Beck is insane 