The point is, the ORIGINAL pledge didn't ask ANYONE to pay homage to anything other than the Nation State. "God" (three headed goat) was ADDED on a POLITICAL whim! Asking that "God" be removed from the pledge so as it can be returned to it's orginal intention (a pledge to the State alone) seams a reasonable request. No?
No, not when it is not in the mojority's interest, remember this is a panel of judges determining this for us, they are not voted for they are appointed the do not believe in a majority and they do not believe in the people, they are self centered and egotistical, they have their jobs for life, why should they care. Patriotism has to be taught and I believe this is where it starts. The term god as used is generic and the pledge is not mandatory it never has been, the instructions for those that felt uncomfortable, were a spend a moment in contemplation nothing wrong with that. As tomboy stated earlier the constitution does not state anything about the seperation of Church and state it only states that the gov't will not makes laws restricting Americans to any certain religion
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Our Gov't is not a Democracy it is a Republic, and because of this in a land where majority is supposed to rule we have judges that have seen to it that the minority will always rule. Lets not go with the presidential election about a mojority either, because all of you political professors know the reason the president is not decided by popular vote but by the electoral college system, for those of you that don't, the reason the electoral college is used is this, if it we used the popular vote then it would take only 5 states to elect the president and the other 45 states would have no say. Judges should be elected and not appointed, judges are not there to press their beliefs on us, they are not to use their personal feelings to enforce laws either, if they can't seperate their personal feelings from their job then they are in the wrong place.
The term under god was added by our elected officials, whether we like it or not, they were added properly and legally, and now you would have unelected yahoos who answer to no one make our decisions? Does it not bother anyone that the atheist that started this lied to accomplish this? Not only did he lie but he used a (his) child to do it, and his own child does not object to the pledge.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,59652,00.html I will post my proof to what I say or at least try to, but here is my proof, I know alot of others don't require it.