[DrMartinVonNostrand]

Do you support the Ninth Circuits recent ruling, since withdrawn, ordering public schools to cease and desist from the recitation of the Pledge with the words "under God" included?

Not entirely, but pretty much, yes.
I think that goes about it the wrong way. I'm glad to see the case is being kept alive, and with any luck will reach the Supreme Court. What I would like to see done is that this is handled correctly and the Supreme Court strikes down the law that Congress passed in the 1950s that first introduced the words "under God" into the Pledge, thus restoring it to the proper Historical Pledge.

Surely a return to the Historical text is something any good conservative could support, no?

[jwalsh07]

Not entirely, but pretty much, yes.

Is this the moderate view? :-}

I think that goes about it the wrong way.

I should think so. Banning the voluntary recitation of the words "under God" has no place in our Constitutional Republic.

I'm glad to see the case is being kept alive, and with any luck will reach the Supreme Court.

I, on the other hand, put no faith in in the robed oligarchies. None at all. The ongoing culture war spawned by Roe has now been given added impetus with the finding of "transcendent" libeerties in Lawrence. With transcendence, all things are possible.

What I would like to see done is that this is handled correctly and the Supreme Court strikes down the law that Congress passed in the 1950s that first introduced the words "under God" into the Pledge, thus restoring it to the proper Historical Pledge.

Would you also strike chaplains from the armed services, the words "endowed by our creator" in the DOI and the phrase "in the Year of Our Lord" in the Constitution of the United States?