Man who sued to stop pledge explains reasons for suit

SF Chronicle via AP ^ | 6/26/02 | STEFANIE FRITH

[I_Love_My_Husband]

Sacramento atheist Michael Newdow said Wednesday he was trying to restore the Pledge of Allegiance to its pre-1954 version because no one should be forced to worship a religion in which they don't believe.

But if the threatening messages on his answering machine are any indication, the American public is not thanking him.

[lawgirl]

Michael Newdow- why did you do this???

Michael Newdow: "Because I'm a wanker."

Hey- when you get to hell, say hi to Madeleine O'Hare. Thanks.

[DJ88]

:-) Good...I made those calls yesterday, and I could NOT get through to DC because the phone lines were absolutely jammed. A coincidence? I think not. ;-) The American people spoke yesterday and I'm sorry if the minority here doesn't like it, but it's fair to say that THE MAJORITY RULES.

The Defense rests. ;-)

[Equality 7-2521]

He wouldn't characterize the threats he received, saying only that they were "personal and scary. I could be dead tomorrow.

I've noticed the same thing about the highly religious--they're always threatening your life when they disagree with you.

[Equality 7-2521]

I would love to know if this person follows through on his word when in 50-100 years from now Islam is the majority religion.

They don't worry so much about that. Part of their plan for a christian America includes banning islam and either deporting or outright murdering those who are already islamic. Read almost any thread here at FR aboout islam and muslims and you'll see countless calls for just this course of action.

[Arizflash]

No it ain't. Allah is not God and God is not Allah. THANK GOD. Heeheee, you are sure a piece of work, fella. I believe we'll just agree to disagree, if that's ok with you, and leave it at that. See ya around.

[Dimensio]

Two weeks ago I would have claimed that you were exaggerating. Unfortunately, I have since actually seen a FReeper post stating that Islam should be banned in the US.

[weegee]

Even though his daughter wasn't forced to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, it was wrong to require her to listen to it when she doesn't believe in it, he said.

It seems that he doesn't believe in free speech after all. "You can't say that around me!"

[weegee]

Drinking the kool-aid, eh?

[weegee]

Hey ma look at me!!! I got the "Pledge of Alligence" killed!!

Maddy Murray O'Hair's son became a Christian. So much for her efforts to keep him free from a religion other than atheism.

"Jane Roe" of Roe v Wade regrets her abortion now and fights against abortion.

Who knows how this man's child will respond...

[weegee]

I had to listen to my country's president say things that I knew (and were later proved) to be completely untrue. No one ever shut Bill Clinton up.

[weegee]

Do you think while he's at it, he'll go for a lawsuit that takes God out of all those insurance policies ... as in, not responsible for loss by acts of God?

No joke, I think that at least one insurance company tried to avoid payment on the 9/11 attacks because of "act of God".

[weegee]

What's more, our country cannot pay tribute to a particular religion and yet any attempts to block federal funds from going to "NEA-BS artists" is challenged as an attempt to block their "free speech".

It matters not to these people that they are getting public funds to create works of religious (or anti-religious) art like a crucifix in urine, a portrait of Mary constructed out of elephant dung, etc.

[weegee]

But this man is fighting to have the language taken back to the original socialist language of the Pledge.

Red Skelton's line by line explanation of how he takes the pledge defends his interpretation. It holds regardless of the original intent of the pledge's author.

Certainly "under God" can be interpreted to refer to whatever "God" you want it to.

The pledge is not like the constitution. It does not define the limits of our government; it is a declaration that is recited. Those who choose not to recite it are permitted to abstain. There is no right to "avoid" hearing someone else recite it.

[weegee]

Perhaps you should ask Courtney Love and the ACLU. She was leaving clear death threats and threats of physical violence on journalists' answering machines.

The ACLU awarded her a special recognition for "free speech".

[lavaroise]

Sacramento atheist Michael Newdow said Wednesday he was trying to restore the Pledge of Allegiance to its pre-1954 version because no one should be forced to worship a religion in which they don't believe.

??? aNd he is not religious not worshiping, not instituting worshi`????

[Gold Leader]

America was founded by people fleeing religious persicution. Now, you want these people to leave because they don't have the same beliefs as you? How American of you.

[Gold Leader]

No, but it does guarantee the separation of church and state. A public school is 'state'.

[lavaroise]

What kind of person thinks it is OK to defend the inclusion of the words "under god" by calling this man up and threatening his life?

First this is a stupid person that is reacting in typical liberal emotional born manner. Second this man should be called up and threatened with a form of prosecution, but not execution. He is obviously subverting the law of the land by imposing his form of worship.

The Under God does not mean God can be defined or worshiped, it means all worships are sinful. Hence one can only have a strategy that respects fundamentaly the worship_transcending jurisdictions and powers. Under God means under the supremacy of jurisdiction over any definition or forms of worship. SO that we do not have hypocrits like this atheist, telling the world autocraticaly what he likes but forbidding the world from having what it likes: respect under God.

[Dimensio]

Second this man should be called up and threatened with a form of prosecution,

With what would you charge him? Is it a state or federal law and what are the penalties for his violation?