recycbride said:
What is the name of your state? ohio I'm curious as to what your board members opinions are with respect to (a) the firing of Judge Moore and the 10 commandment issue and (b) the "under God" issue with the Pledge. I, myself, do not believe that the "God" referred to in the Pledge is any particular "God" to therefore the statement "under God" should be left in. I also do not believe that the Pledge is in anyway a form of prayer like some people are saying. Any takes on this? Just so you all know, I'm not a bible thumper--far from it.
Well, here a take on the pledge. The U.S. Supreme Court is going to have one helluva task when it decides Newdow since Newdow cites the U.S. Supreme Court case precedent through out their opinion.
You are taking the same position that the magistrate judge in Newdow v. U.S. Congress (the 9th circuit pledge case) took which is that ‘the ceremonial reference to God in the pledge does not convey endorsement of particular religious beliefs." The 9th circuit didn't agree and cited in its opinion a whole string of United States Supreme Court precedent which does not support the magistrate judge's conclusion. The following is only a very brief excerpt from that opinion but addresses a couple of your statements:
[4] In the context of the Pledge, the statement that the United States is a nation "under God" is an endorsement of religion. It is a profession of a religious belief, namely, a belief in monotheism. The recitation that ours is a nation ‘under God" is not a mere acknowledgment that many Americans believe in a deity. Nor is it merely descriptive of the undeniable historical significance of religion in the founding of the Republic. Rather, the phrase "one nation under God" in the context of the Pledge is normative. To recite the Pledge is not to describe the United States; instead, it is to swear allegiance to the values for which the flag stands: unity, indivisibility, liberty, justice, and--since 1954--monotheism. The text of the official Pledge, codified in federal law, impermissibly takes a position with respect to the purely religious question of the existence and identity of God. A profession that we are a nation "under God" is identical, for Establishment Clause purposes, to a profession that we are a nation "under Jesus," an "under Vishnu" a nation "under Zeus," or a nation "under not god," because none of the professions can be neutral with respect to religion. "[T]he government must pursue a course of complete neutrality toward religion." Wallace, 472 U.S. at 60. Furthermore, the school district's practice of teacher-led recitation of the Pledge aims to inculcate in students a respect for the ideals set forth in the Pledge, and thus amounts to state endorsement of a religious belief when it requires public school teachers to recite, and lead the recitation of, the current form of the Pledge.
The Supreme Court recognized and ideological nature of the Pledge in Barnette, 319 U.S. 624. There, the Court held unconstitutional a schooled district's wartime policy of punishing students who refused to recite the Pledge and salute the flag; Id. At 642. The Court noted that the school district was compelling the students "to declare a belief," id at 631, and "requir[ing] the individual to communicate by word and sign his acceptance of the political ideas [the flag]. . .bespeaks," id.at 633. "[T]he compulsory flag salute and pledge requires affirmation of a belief and an attitude of mind." Id. The Court emphasized that the political concepts articulated in the Pledge were idealistic, not descriptive; "‘[L]iberty and justice for all,' if it must be accepted as descriptive of the present order rather than an ideal, might to some seem an overstatement," Id, at 634n.14. The Court concluded that: "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or at their faith therein," Id, at 642.
[5] The Pledge, as currently codified, is an impermissible government endorsement of religion because it sends a message to unbelievers "that they are outsiders, not full members of the political community, and an accompanying message to adherents that they are insiders, favored member of the political community," Lynch, 465 U.S. at 688 (O'Conner,J., concurring). Justice Kennedy, in his dissent in Allegheny, agreed;
y statute, the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag describes the United States as ‘one nation under God.' To be sure, no one is obligated to recite this phrase,. . .but it borders on sophistry to suggest that the reasonable atheist would not feel less than a full member of the political community every time his fellow Americans recited, as part of their expression of patriotism and love for county, a phrase he believed to be false.