Michael Newdow just got qwnt

[talinc]

Under God

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/11/AR2010031103038.html

Court upholds 'under God' in Pledge of Allegiance

The Associated Press
Thursday, March 11, 2010; 3:13 PM

SAN FRANCISCO -- A federal appeals court in San Francisco has ruled that the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance is constitutional.

In a 2-1 ruling, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel rejected arguments by Sacramento atheist Michael Newdow that the phrase violates the separation between church and state.

Newdow's previous lawsuit against the pledge in public schools reached the U.S. Supreme Court in 2004. But the high court said he didn't have the legal standing to make the challenge on behalf of his daughter.

So Newdow, who is a doctor and lawyer, filed a similar challenge on behalf of other parents who objected to their children being required to recite "under God."

In a separate ruling Thursday, the appeals court also upheld the use of the phrase "In God We Trust" on coins and currency.

[Reed]

I think the pledge should include the words "motherland" and "blood".

[Snakeeyes]

God bless the appeal process!!  Oh wait, I mean...   

[johninpueblo]

I think the pledge should include the words "motherland" and "blood".

What, fatherland was too busy?   

[Saluki_Love]

Fatherland is out screwing around on motherland.

[GGT]

God bless the appeal process!!  Oh wait, I mean...   

 

[testudo]

I didn't think the kids were required to recite the pledge.     Nor were they required to put their hand over their heart.     They were only required to stand and be quiet.

That was the rulio's in MD and DC.

Either way this newdog guy sure has a lot of time on his hands.      Either that or he feels very strongly about this.