Wednesday, March 24, 2004
CNN.com - Atheist argues against 'Under God' before high court - Mar 24, 2004
"Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist noted that Congress unanimously added the words 'under God' in the pledge in 1954. 'That doesn't sound divisive,' he said. 'That's only because no atheists can be elected to office,' Newdow responded. Some in the audience erupted in applause in the courtroom, and were threatened with expulsion by the chief justice."
Here's where I think I stand on this issue: if you don't want to say it, don't say it. If it means nothing to you, I'd rather you not use it as part of your oath. If integrity is at stake, shut up while everyone else says those two little meaningful words. But the right to not have to say them doesn't supercede the right to say them in the first place. Freedom of speech issues tend to overweigh freedom of/from religion issues, and this is a case where the majority of people, rightly or ignorantly, want the phrase to stay. It looks like a power-trip, taken up by a father who has none. Sad.
"The AP poll, conducted by Ipsos-Public Affairs, found college graduates were more likely than those who did not have a college degree to say the phrase 'under God' should be removed. Democrats and independents were more likely than Republicans to think the phrase should be taken out."