[Ms. AntiFeminazi]

Man who sued to stop pledge explains reasons for suit (06-26) 17:42 PDT ELK GROVE, Calif. (AP) --

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.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Wednesday the phrase "one nation under God" amounts to a government endorsement of religion in violation of the separation of church and state and can no longer be recited in schools.
------------------------------------------------------------
If I could remember the freeper names of those atheists who were quizzing you the other day about no religion-bashing, I'd ping them.

[Ms. AntiFeminazi]

oops, messed up the formatting and forgot the link:

Man who sued to stop pledge explains reasons for suit

[Concerned]

MS. ANTIFEMINAZI WROTE: "The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Wednesday the phrase "one nation under God" amounts to a government endorsement of religion in violation of the separation of church and state and can no longer be recited in schools."

I just wish I were still a kid and lived in one of the states that the absurd decision covers. I would go to class and say it---OUT LOUD---EVERY DAY after that and just dare someone to try to stop me.

The pledge of allegiance is to the flag of the United States of America, and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands---NOT to whoever might happen to be a judge or President at the time.

CALL OR FAX YOUR SENATORS AND ALL THE OTHER SENATORS---ESPECIALLY DASHOLE---AND DEMAND THAT THEY IMMEDIATELY VOTE ON AND APPROVE BUSH'S JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS!

C'mon, FReepers. Let's ROLL!

[Dales]

I heard this guy on the radio. He says his impetus was that he was looking at the phrase "In God We Trust" on money and decided to sue.

I guess our money is next.