Blogger Template by Blogcrowds

Wednesday, September 14, 2005
Hm...not sure I agree with you, Scott. These are children we're talking about - can't trust that they understand the difference. And since reciting the pledge is mandatory (or is perceived by the student to be mandatory), I don't think the "under God" phrase should be in there. Seems like a pretty clear violation of the establishment clause. It's sort of the same reason that teachers in public schools can't teach religion in a mandatory course (and why "intelligent design" should NOT be taught in school) - they're an authority and a representative of the government, and school is mandatory - so you can't preach.

And really - how hard would it be to remove the words "under God"? Not hard. It flows just as well if you say "and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."


  1. Leila said...

    True dat! Screw Ike!

    6:11 PM  

  2. The Maharaja said...

    don't panic. The court will sit en banc and overturn the three-judge panel decision. even if that does not happen, the ruling only affects the states that are in that appellate jurisdiction. We, on the eastern and southern coasts, are not in that appellate jurisdiction...for now.

    7:31 AM  

Post a Comment