[keithtoo]

The phrase "under God" DOES NOT cater to an individual religion and is fully compatible with any belief system, except atheism. Why, on the other hand, should the 95+% of us who believe in God cater to the thick-headed among us who don't? Or more accurately, why should we cater to the childishness of those who don't like the God they do believe in, but wont admit it because they are dissatisfied with the world He put them in?

Atheists think they think, but I dont think they do.

[Dog Gone]

The phrase "under God" DOES NOT cater to an individual religion and is fully compatible with any belief system, except atheism.

No, it's not compatible with polytheism, either. There are a bunch of people who believe in many gods, especially in California.

This decision is not terribly surprising from a purely legal analysis. But it's wrong, simply because the Pledge doesn't establish a religion in violation of the First Amendment. The courts have been moving to a definition which has changed from "no establishment of religion" to "no mention of religion."

This decision was predictable, but wrong. It's going to be overturned, and this is actually going to turn out to be a very good thing in the long run.