Pataki calls pledge ruling ``junk justice''

News Radio 88 ^ | 6/27/02

[areafiftyone]

(Albany-AP) -- Republican Governor George Pataki says a ruling today declaring the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional is nothing more than ``junk justice.''

The governor said the ruling, which came from a federal appeals court in San Francisco, should be appealed immediately. The court called the pledge unconstitutional because it contains the phrase ``under God.''

Both of his Democratic opponents in the governor's race -- Andrew Cuomo and H. Carl McCall -- criticized the decision.

The ruling, if allowed to stand, means schoolchildren can no longer recite the pledge, at least in the nine Western states covered by the court.

In the two-to-one decision, the Ninth U-S Circuit Court of Appeals said the phrase amounts to a government endorsement of religion. The court said it violated the Constitution's Establishment Clause, which requires a separation of church and state.

[mlo]

The ruling means TEACHERS can't recite the pledge.

[BillaryBeGone]

In the two-to-one decision, the Ninth U-S Circuit Court of Appeals said the phrase amounts to a government endorsement of religion. The court said it violated the Constitution's Establishment Clause, which requires a separation of church and state.

This falls in the category of "Duh!" What would one expect from this court?!?! Are we surprised? I mean, they are, after all, communists is disguise (albeit, a thin one!).

[M. Thatcher]

The ruling means TEACHERS can't recite the pledge.

Wrong

[BillaryBeGone]

communists is disguise (albeit, a thin one!).

Oops! "communists IN disguise " Sorry!

[mlo]

No, it isn't wrong. That's what the decision was about.

[don-o]

OMG!

The Vandals Took the Handles

[M. Thatcher]

You are entirely incorrect. The atheist father sued so his second-grade child would not have to recite the pledge.

[joeyman]

The court said it violated the Constitution's Establishment Clause, which requires a separation of church and state.

The establishment clause says no such thing. It was a made up ruling from the Warren Court. If you can find "Separation of Church and State" in the Constitution next thing you'll be telling me about where it mentions a woman's right to choose.

[Dimensio]

No, the ruling states that no one nowhere may recite the pledge at all.

Don't look at the wording of the verdict. Look at the general knee-jerk reaction to the ruling made by people who haven't read it. They obviously know best because everyone knows that the majority is always right.

[patton]

No, he sued so that his child would not have to HEAR the pledge, according to his own statement on Fox News.

There is a world of difference.

IMHO.

[M. Thatcher]

Better read the ruling, ace. You are incorrect.

[mlo]

You are entirely incorrect. The atheist father sued so his second-grade child would not have to recite the pledge.

Sorry, but you are wrong. Students already had the right to refuse to cite the pledge. That precedent was set years ago. The father specifically sued over the teacher reciting the pledge. That is what the case was about.

[M. Thatcher]

Good grief, read the thing already.

[DoughtyOne]

at 6:00 p.m. pdt, the Freeper FRiva Feva contest will begin
join the contest to win your registration fees to the FRiva Las Vegas Conference
it's easy, just follow the directions - shouldn't take more than 10 - 15 minutes per night

[M. Thatcher]

FROM THE RULING:

IN CONCLUSION WE HOLD THAT (1) THE 1954 ACT ADDING THE WORDS “UNDER GOD” TO THE PLEDGE AND (2) EGUSD’S [SCHOOL] POLICY AND PRACTICE OF TEACHER-LED RECITATION OF THE PLEDGE, WITH THE ADDED WORDS INCLUDED, VIOLATE THE ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE.

[Dimensio]

Your citation of the ruling demonstrates that mlo was correct.

[M. Thatcher]

No, it does no such thing. The Court ruled that the words "under God" in the pledge are unconstitutional. It also ruled that teacher-led recitations using those words is unconstitutional. That is NOT the same thing as "teachers can't recite the pledge." DUH.

[Deb]

Doesn't he call to also change the currency? Some professor on FOX said he did, but maybe that's another of his suits.

[M. Thatcher]

Don't know. He has been described as an "atheist activist" so I wouldn't be surprised.