I learned the Pledge of Allegiance with Under God in it and I'll not unlearn it ever.
Why? Is there somewhere in the Constitution that recommends or suggests that we say pledges to symbols? Wait a minute!! The pledge wasn't around then was it? Sorry but no can do. It's a socialist pledge meant to 'bond' the nation together after the Constitution had been subverted 30 years prior by the government of these United States
BUT - The addition only confirmed that we, as a nation, honor a higher deity and I not only accept it ---I gladly say it.
What bothers me about this whole thing is that ONE MAN - using a false claim, was allowed to move his view/bias so high in the court system ---that SOME COURT or JUDGE somewhere could not have stopped this man who has become a present day Madlyn O'Hair.
I believe that the Supreme Court will stand by the phrase, and that the present Allegiance will be preserved. I also hope that other attackers will be thwarted before this is allowed to go so high or that their enablers be squished in the early stages.
Sorry.
Disagree.
I will back the 9th on this one. While I'm at it, I don't like the idea of saying a pledge to a piece of cloth. If I'm going to pledge to something inanimate, I'd at least like it to be the Constitution.
I think FR ought to lead the way in staging huge displays of civil disobedience at schools in their communities.
Pick a Congress Critter and push for bills of impeachment:
|
THE POWER OF CONGRESS TO CONTROL THE FEDERAL JUDICIARY Congress has the authority to overrule wrongly decided cases. Wesson v. United States, 48 F.3d 894, 901 (5th Cir. 1995). Congress may cure any error made by the courts. Fast v. School Dist. of City of Ladue, 728 F.2d 1030, 1034 (8th Cir. 1984) (en banc). Congress has the power to counter judicial doctrine. Belgard v. State of Hawaii, 883 F.Supp. 510, 514 (D. Hawaii 1995). At least, that is what federal judges themselves tell us. These same judges make much of separation-of-powers.” The Constitution’s division of power among the three branches is violated where one Branch invades the territory of another, whether or not the encroached upon branch approves the encroachment. New York v. United States, 112 S.Ct. 2408, 2431 (1992). Notice that this judicial doctrine—for that is all it is, the words and even the concept of separation-of-powers” appear nowhere in the U.S. Constitution or even statutes enacted by Congress—applies only when the judiciary feels threatened by other branches of government. Federal judges ignore their own doctrine when judicial legislation is the object (the words “judicial legislation” appear in William Rehnquist’s dissent in Roe v. Wade, 93 S.Ct. 705 (1973). The absurd idea that maintains that the federal judiciary is one of the three “co-equal” branches of government and cannot be disciplined by Congress is easily disproved. First, Congress ordains and establishes courts inferior to the Supreme Court, as it did in 1891 with the federal circuit courts of appeal. I.e., Congress created this mess. Congress can just as easily dissolve it. See Article III, section 1. Second, judges hold their offices during good behavior. Who determines that good behavior? Any individual member of Congress does, objecting to the judge’s behavior by a Bill of Impeachment, as then-Congressman Gerald Ford did in 1969 when he caused Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas to resign. Third, has anyone noticed that a judge cannot bring a Bill of Impeachment against a Congressman? All a judge can do is cause problems for a Congressman if—and only if—the Congressman is indicted by a member of the Executive Branch first. |