Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

House condemns "Under God" court decision
AP ^ | March 20, 2003 | AP

Posted on 03/20/2003 10:02:57 AM PST by LurkedLongEnough

Capitol Hill-AP -- The House has voted to condemn a federal appeals court's ruling that the phrase "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional in public schools.

The non-binding resolution states that the phrase reflects the religious faith central to the founding of the nation.

The resolution passed 400 to seven. Fifteen voted present.

House Judiciary Chairman James Sensenbrenner says the appeals court refused to re-hear the case at a time when the nation is preparing for a war to "defend the values" of the nation's founders.

A Democrat who voted "present" says he thinks the resolution sets a dangerous precedent. Massachusetts Congressman William Delahunt says it tells judges that they'd better tailor their Constitutional views to the congressional majority if they're going to be confirmed.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; US: District of Columbia; US: Massachusetts
KEYWORDS: pledgeofallegiance

1 posted on 03/20/2003 10:02:57 AM PST by LurkedLongEnough
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Comment #2 Removed by Moderator

To: LurkedLongEnough
Who were the 7 against? Any idea?
3 posted on 03/20/2003 10:31:58 AM PST by goodseedhomeschool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #4 Removed by Moderator

To: LurkedLongEnough
A Democrat who voted "present" says he thinks the resolution sets a dangerous precedent. Massachusetts Congressman William Delahunt says it tells judges that they'd better tailor their Constitutional views to the congressional majority if they're going to be confirmed.

Ahahahahaha! That from the party of obstruction? No, judges now know that if they want confirmation in the Senate (not your job, House dude) they'd better tailor their Constitutional views the the extremist pro abortion lobby.

5 posted on 03/20/2003 10:33:07 AM PST by RAT Patrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goodseedhomeschool
Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said the 9th Circuit decision was "exactly consistent" with the Supreme Court rulings over the last 40 years on school prayers. The court, he said, "has said that we cannot ask schoolchildren to recite a prayer or a belief in God in the classroom setting, even if we allow the dissenters to walk out of the room."

Nadler was one of seven Democrats to vote against the resolution. The others were Robert Scott of Virginia; Jim McDermott of Washington; Pete Stark and Mike Honda of California, Gary Ackerman of New York and Barney Frank of Massachusetts.


6 posted on 03/20/2003 10:36:09 AM PST by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
Nadler was one of seven Democrats to vote against the resolution.

If it had been a "weighted" vote the resolution would have failed.

7 posted on 03/20/2003 11:33:40 AM PST by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
If it had been a "weighted" vote the resolution would have failed.

A Nadler apologist.

8 posted on 03/20/2003 12:03:08 PM PST by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Discussted
Let no man decive you by any means for that day shall not come except there come a falling away first.
9 posted on 03/20/2003 1:05:09 PM PST by DONRULES
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson