Our country has gone to shat

[Drbio]

Judge: School Pledge Is Unconstitutional
Sep 14 3:19 PM US/Eastern


By DAVID KRAVETS
Associated Press Writer


SAN FRANCISCO


A federal judge declared the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools unconstitutional Wednesday in a case brought by the same atheist whose previous battle against the words "under God" was rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court on procedural grounds.

U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton ruled that the pledge's reference to one nation "under God" violates school children's right to be "free from a coercive requirement to affirm God."

Karlton said he was bound by precedent of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which in 2002 ruled in favor of Sacramento atheist Michael Newdow that the pledge is unconstitutional when recited in public schools.

The Supreme Court dismissed the case last year, saying Newdow lacked standing because he did not have custody of his elementary school daughter he sued on behalf of.

Newdow, an attorney and a medical doctor, filed an identical case on behalf of three unnamed parents and their children. Karlton said those families have the right to sue.

Karlton, ruling in Sacramento, said he would sign a restraining order preventing the recitation of the pledge at the Elk Grove Unified, Rio Linda and Elverta Joint Elementary school districts in Sacramento County, where the plaintiffs' children attend.

The order would not extend beyond those districts unless it is affirmed by a higher court, in which case it would apply to nine western states.

The decision sets up another showdown over the pledge in schools, at a time when the makeup of the Supreme Court is in flux.

Wednesday's ruling comes as Supreme Court nominee John Roberts faces day three of his confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee. He would succeed the late William H. Rehnquist as chief justice.

In July, Sandra Day O'Connor announced her plans to retire when a successor is confirmed.

The Becket Fund, a religious rights group that is a party to the case, said it would immediately appeal the case to the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. If the court does not change its precedent, the group would go to the Supreme Court.

"It's a way to get this issue to the Supreme Court for a final decision to be made," said fund attorney Jared Leland.

The decisions by Karlton and the 9th Circuit conflict with an August opinion by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va. That court upheld a Virginia law requiring public schools lead daily Pledge of Allegiance recitation, which is similar to the requirement in California.

A three-judge panel of that circuit ruled that the pledge is a patriotic exercise, not a religious affirmation similar to a prayer.

"Undoubtedly, the pledge contains a religious phrase, and it is demeaning to persons of any faith to assert that the words `under God' contain no religious significance," Judge Karen Williams wrote for the 4th Circuit. "The inclusion of those two words, however, does not alter the nature of the pledge as a patriotic activity."

Newdow, reached at his home, was not immediately prepared to comment.

Karlton, appointed to the Sacramento bench in 1979 by President Carter, wrote that the case concerned "the ongoing struggle as to the role of religion in the civil life of this nation" and added that his opinion "will satisfy no one involved in that debate."

Karlton dismissed claims that the 1954 Congressional legislation inserting the words "under God" was unconstitutional. If his ruling stands, he reasoned that the school children and their parents in the case would not be harmed by the phrase because they would no longer have to recite it at school.

Terence Cassidy, a lawyer representing the school districts, said he was reviewing the opinion and was not immediately prepared to comment.

[Drbio]

Judge Karlton can kiss my arse.

[kg_veteran]

The 9th Circuit will affirm the district court decision. This one is headed to the Supreme Court.

[LRB]

While I don't believe that anyone should be made to say the pledge of allegiance if they have religious objections, I don't think that it's idiotic to declare it unconstitutional for others to do so. I well remember growing up and saying it everyday in school while one of my friends and class mates abstained for religious reasons. There wasn't any problem at all, and still wouldn't be if the ultra liberal and their judges would keep their noses out of it and let some common sense rule. Atheism should not be made the official religion of the the US just because a small handful want it to be so.

[u2sarajevo]

Don't worry. Satan won't win.

[dalmations202]

Don't worry. Satan won't win.

He has 7 years though, coming soon.................

[u2sarajevo]

Originally posted by: dalmations202
He has 7 years though, coming soon.................

?

[Drbio]

Originally posted by: dalmations202

He has 7 years though, coming soon.................

Exactly. Have we entered the window dalm? I know we have talked a bit about this before, but I see more and more signs that this is coming.

Maybe a thread for this alone is warranted?

[u2sarajevo]

I wish someone would fill me in.....


[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-tongue.gif[/img]

[dalmations202]

Exactly. Have we entered the window dalm? I know we have talked a bit about this before, but I see more and more signs that this is coming.

The signs are there if you are "watching" for sure. We haven't entered the 7 years yet though, IMO... we are just feeling the birth pains right now. By my study, it won't start until a peace treaty is signed in Israel that will last for a "promised" 7 years. Before that though, I feel like the US has to be removed from "the World Power". I have my own personal beliefs, which are not quite Baptist, nor Morman, nor any other religion, but my background stemmed from the Baptist church. If I am at least partially correct, then I think you will see more signs of it by a very bad earthquake on the West coast within the next 2 years (just a hunch from some reading).

Maybe a thread for this alone is warranted?

Not sure that many here would be interested. I am always interested in people's opinions of the future, and why's. I have read the Bible cover to cover, some of the Koran, and am working on the Mormon Bible now, just to compare and contrast. I have also read most of the books of apocraphy. You should check out what the Aztecs, and Mayas had to say about the "end of the age". If you haven't read the Book of Jasher - mentioned in Samuel and Joshua then I advise reading it sometime. Also, the book of 1Enoch is pretty good.

Start a thread, and I'll be glad to be in that conversation. Very interesting stuff if you like History, and Religion.

[Ninkobei]

You guys Can't be serious. The end is near? No doubt thinking that is a good frame of mind to live in - due to the fact that living every moment like it is your last is, I believe, a good thing. I don't even know where to begin on this issue..

[mavsman55]

Yes, because as a senior in high school, I can claim to the fact that saying the pledge of allegiance in the morning scars me emotionally. It is so painful. I can't believe the schools would ask us to do something so rudely barbaric.

[Ninkobei]

if a pledge of allegiance scars you emotionally I can only begin to imagine what everything else in the world must do to you. hows the psychiatrist bill this month?

[dude1394]

There is only one thing to do.....elect more republicans...

Horsepoop.

[mavsman55]

You must not have picked up on my sarcasm ninkobei.

I should have put one of [img]i/expressions/moon.gif[/img] these.

[dude1394]

link

Pledge to Be Replaced By “Crescent of Allegiance”
By a4g, Staff Writer @ 11:44 am

U.S. District Court Judge Lawrence Karlton in San Francisco has ruled it unconstitutional to recite the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools. In his ruling, he said that reciting “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance violates the First Amendment, the first in the Bill of Rights, which requires that the federal government take a hands-off approach to religion.

The United States was largely settled by religious dissidents looking for a place to freely practice their beliefs, free of government intervention or sanction.

In his ruling, the judge recommended a commission to investigate the possibility of replacing the pledge with a “Crescent of Allegiance,” which would feature a “non- binding call to all Americans to spend a moment– or not– in contemplation, but behold
them to no higher purpose or power, from which every American is constutionally protected.” The crescent shape was decided upon by the judge “because of its stunning similarity to the exact shape of San Francisco Bay”, and not the main symbol of Islam, as some critics have charged, who also note that the subtle but important wink to Islam is a common practice in more cowardly versions of jurisprudence. (Although Christians are generally known for following court orders, the more fanatical devotees of Allah have been known to file their amicus briefs with ceremonial daggers.)

The new Crescent of Allegiance would be subtly punctuated by the ringing of windchimes as “a gesture of healing and bonding.” The judge anticipated that the dreamy lack of context for the new Crescent should prevent already undereducated children from experiencing the cognitive assault that concepts like “God,” “Allegiance” or “Nation” might cause in their carefully inculcated worldviews.

Judge Karlton, while expressing no God-based allegiance to the United States, is believed to be anxiously anticipating receiving his paycheck at the end of the week.

[Ninkobei]

<---often times quick to jump the gun. doh