I will be the differing voice here. The phrase "under God" was not a part of the original Pledge of Allegiance, it was added in 1954 by an act of Congress to inculcate, as President Eisenhower said, American school children with confession of the Judeo-Christian God in the face of godless Communisim.
Thus the phrase "under God" was clearly a law passed for religious establishment, and thus clearly unconstitutional. Why not "under Allah" or "under Tiamat" (my favorite Mesapotamian god) or "under Vishnu"? When the pledge is said in school, it is clearly coercive on any chiuld who does not wish to say the words "under God" and that is just the way it is. Be the chilsd who refuses toi say the pledge with "under God" in it - look at the adults as it is, falling all over themselves to denouce something that they have no understanding of because there are tv sound bites to make while they wrap themselves around their pro-Godness in an election year. A true conservative would honor the original Pledge, without the phrase "under God" and understand the court's ruling that the power of the state in the public school cannot endorse a belief in a particular deity. Is that so hard to understand? Is that so hard to understand? (the Rev) Vince
