Posted on 12/03/2007 4:24:47 PM PST by Jay777
Two blockbuster religious liberty cases - involving the constitutionality of the Pledge of Allegiance in schools and "In God We Trust" on our money - will be heard this week by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. PJI Chief Counsel Kevin Snider will be arguing alongside lawyers for the Department of Justice in defense of the national motto, "In God We Trust."
Both lawsuits were filed by atheist Michael Newdow, who claims that the Pledge of Allegiance and national motto are unconstitutional "establishments" of religion. Ninth Circuit judges have previously heard and agreed with Newdow's position that it violates the First Amendment to recite the Pledge of Allegiance in schools. However, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned that decision on jurisdictional grounds, prompting Newdow to re-file it with additional plaintiffs. The lawsuit against "In God We Trust" was filed by Newdow in late 2005. Pacific Justice Institute intervened as a co-defendant in the lawsuit to defend the constitutionality of the national motto. The Supreme Court has never decided a case directly dealing with the motto, but in several other cases Justices from across the ideological spectrum have pointed to the motto as an example of constitutional expression.
PJI Chief Counsel Kevin Snider, who will be presenting arguments in the motto case tomorrow, commented, "The national motto, 'In God We Trust,' is a perfectly permissible, commemorative acknowledgment of our nation's history and traditions. Without coercing anyone to adopt any religious viewpoint, it reminds us that our rights are a gift from God and are not at the discretion of the government."
(Excerpt) Read more at pacificjustice.org ...
All bow to The Ninth Circus!
Does anybody harbor any illusions as to how these clowns will rule on this?
I hope this time Scalia doesn’t say anything so that he doesn’t have to recuse himself when this goes to SCOTUS.
Another attempt by socialists to destroy our democratic republic.
Red Skeltons - Pledge of Allegiance Commentary
Since I was a small boy,two states have been added to our country, and two words have been added to the Pledge of Allegiance: Under God. Wouldn't it be a shame if it was considered a prayer and removed from the classroom.
Next will be, “endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights”.
Can’t teach that in schools, now can we?
Who is funding all these turd Nudow’s actions?
So if they find that “In God We Trust” is an unconstitutional establishment of religion, what happens? Does that mean that all money with that motto is now invalid in the Ninth Circuit’s jurisdiction?
Our fathers came to this country for a reason so if they don’t like it we should leave?
Only Congress has the power to establish a religion and they are restricted from doing so. God in the pledge of Allegiance, does not establish a religion. A prayer in school does not establish a religion, and a manger scene on public property does not establish a religion. People saying the Lord Jesus Christ's name does not establish a religion. Congress passing a law that says we all have to go to the Glory Bound Baptist Church every Sunday establishes a religion.
Now, Congress is also forbidden from prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Hence, the law of the land says you can not tell me that I can not put a manger scene or the Ten Commandments up. You can not tell me I can not pray. You can not tell me I can not say the Lord's name.
Socialist/Communist wish to remove God from public view so you and I will begin to forget about God. Why do they want you to forget about God? Well, I am an American. I pray to my God and we handle my problems. I do not pray to my Government. Once people have forgotten how to pray to their God for help, they will begin to pray to the Government for help. From the cradle to the grave.
It is imperative that we keep God in public view.
Just wanted to make sure this didn't get lost in your post! :^)
Does anyone really wonder what their decision will be? If it weren't for the gutless GOP they would have broken the 9th up, but no, they're too wimpy!!
THANKS!!
ping
Generation X Conservative says it well:
Since the government is not forcing Michael Newdow or his atheist compatriots to practice Christianity, his case should be thrown out, but since judges like to create new laws and new interpretations of the Constitution as often as Bill Clinton drools over a woman who is not Hillary, we have to worry every time one of these cases come up.
Excellent, and plainly stated.
Well appreciated.
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights
This is talking about God given rights which can not be taken away by Government or man.
If atheist Commies remove God from public view, it will be easier for Government to take away what God has given us.
Again, it is imperative that we keep God in public view.
In fact, I’m keeping it (if no objections).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.