To the great surprise of most Americans, on June 26, 2002, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court
of Appeals in California decided that presence of the words, "under God", in the
Pledge of Allegiance constitutes the establishment of a national religion. The ruling
came as a surprise because this is such an obviously incorrect conclusion. But
this is exactly what you can expect when liberal Democrat judges rule. Liberal
Democrats oppose public display of the Ten Commandments, prayer in school, and
any mention of God in public places — even in the Pledge of Allegiance. This
is why it is vitally important to vote wisely, especially when voting for someone who
will have the power to appoint judges.
Included at the bottom is a reference section with some reference material
about the Pledge of Allegiance and the "separation of church and
state". This page is sure to grow rapidly, so please check back often for
more material on this subject.
Unlike most other pages on this web site, the newest information
is at the bottom of this page.
Oklahoma Bill Would
Require Pledge of Allegiance in Schools. Oklahoma legislators, fighting against political correctness and initiating a
battle for traditional American values, will consider various bills implementing a shift toward those traditional values when they return
to the Capitol on Feb. 3. One bill offered by Republican Sen. Rob Standridge of Norman, would require Oklahoma's public
elementary schools to recite the Pledge of Allegiance every day.
Massachusetts
School Issues Permission Slips for Pledge of Allegiance. The principal of a public school in Brookline, Mass.,
is asking parents to fill out permission slips before their children can participate in a weekly recitation of the Pledge of
Allegiance. Gerardo Martinez, the principal of The Devotion School, informed parents that the school would begin
reciting the pledge in January over the public address system.
Court
upholds NH law allowing pledge in school. A federal appeals court has upheld the constitutionality of
the Pledge of Allegiance in New Hampshire public schools. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the First Circuit ruled unanimously Friday [11/12/2010] in affirming the 2009 dismissal of a lawsuit that a national
group of atheists and agnostics filed against the Hanover and Dresden school districts.
Pledge of Allegiance Ruled Unconstitutional:
In a 2-to-1 decision, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a 1954 Act of Congress that inserted the phrase
"under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, and ruled the pledge should not be recited in public schools.
Court Censors Pledge of
Allegiance: The left-wing federal appeals court in San Francisco, upset over the phrase "under
God," claims that the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional and may not be recited in government
schools. Reaction nationwide is furious.
Outrageous Pledge Of Allegiance Decision Shows
Need For Conservative Judges! "The judges on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco
have taken complete leave of their senses," said Traditional Values Coalition Chairman Rev. Louis P. Sheldon
today. [6/26/2002] "By declaring that the words 'under God' in the Pledge of Allegiance are
unconstitutional, these robed tyrants have shown just how important it is for us to have conservative judges
appointed to the federal bench — and how important the November elections are!"
FRC Blasts 9th Circuit Decision on Pledge
of Allegiance: Family Research Council President Ken Connor today blasted
the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision to omit the words "under God" from
the Pledge of Allegiance. "We believe the 9th Circuit is clearly out of step with
the people of this country and the history of its founding," Connor said. "The
ruling represents another attempt to secularize a country born out of
religious liberty."
Is God a Part of U.S. History? How could
this happen? That is the question that many people are asking in the aftermath of the 9th Circuit
Court of Appeals ruling declaring the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional because it contains the phrase
"under God." This is beginning to be another unifying, defining moment in our country. The
outcry has been loud and clear, from President Bush, to the halls of Congress and to the classic "common man
and woman" across this land.
Keep the Pledge of Allegiance
Intact. As our nation battles terrorism — at home and abroad — there is a
very real threat that millions of students in the U.S. will no longer have an opportunity to express their
patriotism by voluntarily reciting the Pledge of Allegiance with the phrase "one nation under God."
Senate Pledges Allegiance Under
God: The Senate cemented its unanimous vote to condemn a federal court ruling against the
Pledge of Allegiance with a Thursday morning [6/27/2002] recitation of the Pledge, preceded by their
daily morning prayer.
One nation, under who?
On the eve of our great national birthday party and in the aftermath of September 11, when millions of us
turned to God and prayed for forgiveness of individual and corporate sins and asked for His protection against
future attacks, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco has inflicted on this nation what many
will conclude is a greater injury than that caused by the terrorists.
ACU's Keene Calls for Impeachment of
Judges Who Ruled Pledge Unconstitutional: American Conservative Union Chairman David Keene ripped
today's 9th Circuit Court ruling that the pledge of allegiance was unconstitutional due to the inclusion
of the phrase "under God" and called for the impeachment of the two judges who came up with such a ridiculous
opinion regarding the separation of church and state.
Civic Education? A San
Francisco federal judge's decision to ban recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance on the grounds that it is an
unconditional endorsement of religion is the logical culmination of a decades-long erosion of the notion of
civic education.
Lawmakers, Bush Defiant Toward Ruling on
Pledge: Even though a judge in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has effectively nixed
his vote in the controversial ruling on the Pledge of Allegiance, reaction continues to reverberate through
the hallowed halls of Washington, D.C.
One
Nation, Under Siege by Establishment Clause Revisionism: The road that led us to this
historic decision has been extremely long and littered with lower court decisions on both sides of
the debate over the so-called "separation of church and state." To understand that debate and
the road not yet traveled, it is necessary to revisit the Founders' intent in drafting the
religious aspects of the First Amendment.
Defy the Order and Remove the
Judge: This week's ruling on the Pledge of Allegiance by 85-year-old Judge Alfred T. Goodwin
reminds us that as we age, our mental capacity diminishes. There seems to be no other explanation for
such a ridiculous ruling.
Pledge battle all about
dad? The 8-year-old at the center of last week's controversial court
ruling — which held that "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance is
unconstitutional — is a Christian who voluntarily submits to the classroom recitation of
the pledge, contrary to the claim made by her father, who filed the case saying the girl
was "injured" by the practice.
Pledge judge protested: The
federal appeals court judge who ruled "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional may have
found the outrage over his controversial decision hitting a little too close to home, as protesters gathered
outside his Pasadena, California, house for a rally.
Judge Objects to Staying of Pledge Decision:
One of the federal appellate judges who declared the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional said Monday that the court was
wrongly swayed by public criticism when it put the ruling on hold.
Pledge Ruling "Blew Up the Emotional
Dam": Less than two days after ruling the phrase "under God" violated the so-called
"establishment clause" of the First Amendment, a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of
Appeals issued a stay of its own ruling. Analysts now say the intensity of the public response to the
ruling is the result of unresolved emotions stemming from the September 11th terrorist attacks.
Pledge furor is evidence
of hostility to religion: By revealing so clearly the foam-at-the-mouth hostility to
religion that grips our elites, the 9th Circuit's "under God" decision is proving a Godsend,
although the two hapless judges in the majority would probably insist that we refer to it simply
as a "send." The decision was such a howler that even many of those whose mouths usually foam
decided to cringe instead. Not one U.S. senator could be found to support the ruling.
What
about "one nation"? Last week, members of Congress leapt to the defense of the
words "under God." They shouted the phrase on Capitol Hill and in front of every
available camera. But what about the two little words in the Pledge of Allegiance
that come right before "under God"? Who in Washington will rise in defense of "one
nation"? Despite their ostentatious displays of unified patriotism, both Democrat
and Republican lawmakers are pushing for treacherous bills that splinter the nation and
threaten our safety.
The Cost of Judicial
Tyranny: Reaction to the federal court ruling that the words "under God" in the
Pledge of Allegiance are unconstitutional has revealed not only a national consensus that the
decision is wrong, but a national disposition simply to defy it.
A Finding in Search of an
Argument: The key question that this decision raises is whether God is forbidden in America's
public life. Plenty of learned people have made the legal arguments that this is in fact "a nation under
God," and that the Judges in San Francisco are akin to idiots. Ordinary citizens, religious leaders, politicians,
and the national media have all condemned the decision. The President called it ridiculous.
Pledge
case to be reheard: Girl's Christianity is a potential factor in
arguments before the entire court.
The NEA & PTA are
Conspicuously Quiet on the "Pledge" Ruling: The leader of a Christian educators'
group says the actions of two large teachers' groups would indicate they don't believe America
is "one nation, under God." Apparently this would indicate they have no problem
with the ruling.
Pledge
mom fights to keep "under God": Breaking her silence, the mother of the
child involved in the Pledge of Allegiance case declares her 8-year-old daughter is a
practicing Christian who is not harmed by reciting "one nation under God," contrary to
what the girl's father argues in the controversial case.
Pledge allegiance to the
fraud: That entire case is a sham. In a conversation with one of my staff members on
Wednesday [7/10/2002], Rich Chaffin, pastor of the Laguna Calvary Chapel Church, verified that the young
girl actually attends Sunday school at his church and loves the Lord Jesus Christ. The little girl's
mother is a Sunday school teacher there. Furthermore, the girl's mother, Sandra Banning, has sent a
statement to members of Congress that spells out the conniving of this father in the high-profile case.
Two Nations Under God:
The fundamental issue is the question of whether the First Amendment, which declares that "Congress shall make
no law respecting an establishment of religion, nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof," is a mandate for
tolerance of religious pluralism or a mandate for the active obliteration of religion from public life.
Recent Revelations May Put Pledge Case In
Jeopardy: The credibility of the Pledge of Allegiance case brought by a California atheist is
coming under increasing skepticism. And a Christian activist in the Golden State says there may be a
conflict of interest involving one of the judges who ruled the Pledge, in its current form, is
unconstitutional.
Keep the Pledge: On June 25th, 2002, the
9th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals ruled that the Pledge of Allegiance is "unconstitutional" and
cannot be recited in public schools because it contains the words "under God." This
unbelievable and absurd ruling is yet another salvo from activist judges more interested in making
their own law rather than following the Constitution.
One Nation Under Blank: "If the
court were writing a parody, rather than deciding an actual case, it could hardly have produced a
more provocative holding than striking down the Pledge of Allegiance while this country
is at war.
Constitutional
Amendment to protect Pledge officially underway: A major effort is
underway to protect the Pledge of Allegiance and the national motto through a
proposed new Constitutional amendment. The effort was announced yesterday [7/25/2002] on
Capitol Hill by Congressman Chip Pickering of Mississippi.
Two Cities Still Don't Say the
Pledge: Elected officials in Alpine, Utah pledge allegiance -- but solely to a higher power.
Tradition is Mayor Phil Barker's explanation for Alpine's pledgeless meetings. As a former councilman and
now mayor, he says Alpine always has opened meetings with only a prayer, though he notes there is an American
flag in the council chambers.
"Under
God" isn't the establishment of religion: I think the words "under God" in
the Pledge of Allegiance express an extremely important point, both about our historical
understanding of the source of our rights, and about the limits to the kind of loyalty
oath that a government can demand.
Church,
state and the pledge of allegiance: If there is a more confusing area of
constitutional law than church-and-state, I hope I won't have to write about it anytime
soon. Because the courts have confused this subject almost beyond discussion, clouding
over even the simplest terms. Like church and state.
The Indivisible
Pledge: If Congressman Jim McDermott thinks the "Under God" part of
the Pledge should be stricken, why wouldn't he stick to his guns and just say so?
Judicial
Houdinis: When judges use "legerdemain," "slight-of-hand" and "obfuscation" to
describe a ruling by their fellow judges, it's a clue that the "dissenting opinion"
isn't boring.
Just barely
under God: A five-member majority of the Supreme Court, presumably sensitive
to the public outrage that would greet such a controversial decision in a presidential
election year, refused to rule on the question of whether the Constitution allows public
school students to voluntarily utter the words "under God" in the Pledge of
Allegiance. The justices reversed the anti-Pledge ruling of a lower court
on technical grounds, leaving for another day the underlying issue.
Punting on the pledge:
Liberals discover judicial restraint and join a unanimous Supreme Court in deciding ... to decide another
day ... on the politically volatile issue of the Pledge of Allegiance.
The
Pledge of Allegiance Decision: Imprudently Standing on a Technicality. The
majority's clear goal was a pre-determined and result-driven end, rather than serving the
means of logical and rigorous legal analysis. Thus, the jurisprudential support for
the new rule they would announce was really beside the point. The majority simply
had to pull together enough past precedent to conjure up the illusion that the Pledge
decision had some basis in law and fact.
Pledge of Allegiance Victory!
The Pacific Legal Foundation hails a Supreme Court decision that says "No" to judicial activism.
Supremes
Sans Scalia Hear Pledge of Allegiance Case. The Court's opinion in Elk
Grove Unified School District v. Newdow will answer two questions: 1. Whether
Michael Newdow has standing to challenge as unconstitutional the school district's
policy. If the answer is "no," the ruling will vacate the 9th Circuit ruling
and the policy will remain in force. If the Court rules that he does have
standing, it will address the second question. 2. Whether the policy is
unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment made applicable
to the states through the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment. The
standing issue involves whether Newdow has suffered a "sufficient injury"
to bring the case at all.
Pledge of Allegiance Recited Intact as
Schools Reopen This Fall. As public schools begin the 2004-05 academic year, teachers
and principals are free to lead millions of children in recitation of the "one nation under God"
version of the Pledge of Allegiance that the nation's political leaders adopted in 1954. In
June, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed a ruling by the San Francisco-based Ninth U.S. Circuit Court
of Appeals, which said teacher-led recitation of the Pledge containing the "under God" reference
was an unconstitutional establishment of religion. Those two words were added to the Pledge at
the height of the Cold War in order to contrast U.S. devotion to religion with godless communism.
House Passes
Pledge Protection Act. In a vote of 247 to 173, the House Thursday [9/23/2004] passed a bill that
would prevent all courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, from ruling on whether the words "under God" in the
Pledge of Allegiance case violate the Constitution.
Those who put up decorations make
society better. Among the most foolish ideas to emanate from the foolish '60s is that what you
feel in your heart is more important than what you publicly express. According to this thinking, to cite
one example, patriotism is a feeling, not a flag displayed on national holidays. On the contrary, such
displays are derided as "flag waving," which has been rendered a pejorative term. … That is why many of
us want the Pledge of Allegiance with the words "under God" said in schools every day. … Public
expressions of societal values are crucial to keeping those values alive.
Iconoclast
Michael Newdow is on the Warpath Again. Michael Newdow, the lawyer/doc who exploited
his daughter, of whom he did not have physical custody and who was herself a Christian, to fight
the inclusion of "God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, is targeting another long-established tradition.
Squeezing
the Lemon: It's been said that "no man's life, liberty, or property are safe
while the legislature is in session." Such sentiments are equally applicable to the
U.S. Supreme Court. The upcoming decision of the court in two Ten Commandments cases
provides it with the opportunity to prove the sentiments more true or more false.
SCOTUS Commandments
Cases Offer Chance to Address Flawed "Lemon Test". When the U.S. Supreme
Court considers the constitutionality of Ten Commandments displays, as expected later
this year, more than that question will be at stake. One constitutional attorney
says the justices' basic comparison against the Establishment Clause — called
the "Lemon test" — might also be on the block.
Law Center Files Brief in Supreme Court Showdown
Over Ten Commandments. With little over a month before the United States Supreme Court is set to
hear oral arguments on whether public displays of the Ten Commandments are constitutional, the Thomas More Law
Center announced today [1/27/2005] that it has filed a "friend of the court brief" in the case of Van Orden v.
Perry supporting the right of Texas to display the historically significant monument.
Impeach Judicial Lawbreakers. We all
remember Michael Newdow, aptly named "America's least favorite atheist" by Time Magazine. The man had the
hubris to charge that our Pledge of Allegiance was an unconstitutional government endorsement of religion, due
to the inclusion of the phrase, "under God." While it is unremarkable that a wannabe Perry Mason would
allege anything to argue before our nation's highest court, the fact that Newdow got as far as he did is
nothing less than an outrage.
Judge
Narrows Pledge of Allegiance Lawsuit. An atheist who convinced a federal
appeals court three years ago that the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance are
unconstitutional returned to court Monday [7/18/2005] and made his case a second time.
The latest: "Under God"
Undermined … Again — Atheist Finds Another Friendly Federal Judge. One
of the defendants in an atheist's lawsuit to have the Pledge of Allegiance removed from public
school classrooms says it will immediately appeal a California judge's decision that recitation
of the patriotic oath is unconstitutional.
Newdow strikes again Judge
Rules Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional. A federal judge in California Wednesday
[9/14/2005] ruled that reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools is unconstitutional. The
case was brought by two families represented by Michael Newdow, an atheist whose case before the
U.S. Supreme Court was thrown out because it was brought on his daughter's behalf and he did not
have custody of her.
3 suspended for not standing for Pledge of
Allegiance. Three small-town eighth-graders in Minnesota were suspended by their principal for not standing
Thursday morning [5/8/2008] for the Pledge of Allegiance, violating a district policy that the principal now says may
soon be reworded to protect free speech rights.
Kicking God further
out the door. U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton's decision that a California "school
district's policy and practice of teacher-led recitation of the Pledge violates the Establishment
Clause," provides a timely illustration of judicial activism at work.
Related material:
The information about the Ten Commandments, the National Motto, and the Separation of
Church and State can be found
on this page.
Temptation averted: no
"Lord's Prayer" at Woodbine. Woodbine [Iowa] High School was the center of attention
Sunday over whether "The Lord's Prayer" would find its way into its graduation ceremony. In
the end, the song didn't. School officials, graduates and the community abided by a federal
judge's decision to ban the song following a lawsuit by two sophomore choir members from an
atheist family.
Flashback: Dr Pepper
Skips "Under God" On Patriotic Cans: The Dr Pepper/Seven Up soft-drink company is
under fire for skipping the phrase "under God" in a partial quotation of the Pledge of Allegiance
on its "patriot can." The graphic design of the can, created "to show the world that we are
a united nation of people who place a high value upon freedom" according to the company, includes
an artist's rendering of the Statue of Liberty and the phrase "One Nation ... Indivisible."
Note:
Seven months later, the Dr. Pepper story was
reported on the WEWS web site as if
it had just happened.
One
Nation Under the State? While most Americans are familiar with the Pledge,
relatively few know much about its origins or why Congress modified it. Most media accounts
of the 1954 Pledge alteration focus on the fact that Congress in passing
the measure was seeking to distinguish the American system from that of Soviet
Communism. This description is true, but inadequate.
Teach the Ten
Commandments. While focusing on private school development and expansion, lets also
push hard to teach about the Bible in public schools, as groups like the Bible Literacy Project and
Bible in the Schools have done. We should stipulate that, as part of their "core knowledge,"
all children should know what the Ten Commandments are (and also where the 50 states are).
Why One Nation Under
God Matters: "One nation under God" is the chief cornerstone of our liberty. If
we expect to remain a people without Kings or a State to worship; and a people ruled by fixed laws
which protect inalienable rights; and a people who are, each of us, equal before that
law — we had better make up our minds that "one nation under God" is not offensive, not
unconstitutional, and not unnecessary, but essential for believers and unbelievers alike.
Sheltered
From the State: In separating church and state the Founder's intent was not to
protect the federal government from religion, but to protect religion from the federal
government.
Why
the Pledge of Allegiance Is, Must and Will Stay Constitutional: Our
Pledge of Allegiance is not a prayer nor a pledge to God — it is a pledge of
loyalty to America! To Pledge Allegiance is to state your personal
commitment to our nation and its traditions and principles of governance.
Thousands
join support of Pledge: An online conservative organization has announced
that more than 174,000 people have joined its amicus brief filed with the U.S. Supreme
Court that supports the constitutionality of "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance.
House backs shielding
'pledge' from courts. Legislation to bar federal courts from ruling on constitutional issues
arising from the Pledge of Allegiance, including the "one nation, under God" reference, passed the
House [7/19/2006] after lawmakers argued that the pledge is linked to the nation's spiritual history.
Pledge Allegiance to
the ACLU. The Pledge of Allegiance is doing irreparable harm to the minds and hearts of America's
schoolchildren. So alleges an ACLU lawsuit against the State of Colorado for its new law requiring the
daily recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools. This time, it isn't just about "One
Nation Under God." Now, the American Civil Liberties Union wants to get rid of the whole pledge.
Students must remember 'God' in Texas
pledge. Texas students will have four more words to remember when they head back to class this
month and begin reciting the state's pledge of allegiance. This year's Legislature added the phrase "one
state under God" to the pledge, which is part of a required morning ritual in Texas public schools along with
the pledge to the U.S. flag and a moment of silence.
Colorado Students Walk Out During Pledge,
Recite Own Version. About 50 Boulder High School students walked out of class Thursday
[9/27/2007] to protest the daily reading of the Pledge of Allegiance and recited their own version,
omitting "one nation, under God." The students say the phrase violates the constitutional
separation of church and state.
Note to Colorado students: There is
no "constitutional separation of church and state" because such a phrase is not in the Constitution.
You might want to tell your classmates, because your teacher probably won't mention this technicality.
Debate on Pledge of Allegiance in
Vermont town. No one's sure when daily recitations of the Pledge of Allegiance fell by the wayside
at Woodbury Elementary School. But efforts to restore them have erupted into a bitter dispute in this tiny
(pop. 810) Vermont town, with school officials blocking the exercise from classrooms amid concerns that it
holds nonparticipating children up to scorn. Supporters say the classroom is the place for it, and the
disagreement has fueled an increasingly acrimonious debate.
Massachusetts
Judge Affirms "Under God" in Pledge of Allegiance. A Massachusetts judge has ruled against an atheist couple who sued the
school district where their children go to school, seeking to have the words "under God" struck from the Pledge of Allegiance, which is
voluntarily recited by students in the district. The couple, who were represented by the American Humanist Association (AHA), argued
that the God-affirming phrase amounts to a "religious truth" that violates their own atheist non-belief.
The Editor says...
If it is a truth, why go out of your way to suppress it?
To the great surprise of most Americans, on June 26, 2002, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court
of Appeals in California decided that presence of the words, "under God", in the
Pledge of Allegiance constitutes the establishment of a national religion. The ruling
came as a surprise because this is such an obviously incorrect conclusion. But
this is exactly what you can expect when liberal Democrat judges rule. Liberal
Democrats oppose public display of the Ten Commandments, prayer in school, and
any mention of God in public places — even in the Pledge of Allegiance. This
is why it is vitally important to vote wisely, especially when voting for someone who
will have the power to appoint judges. 