[Apologetics] 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upholds 'under God' in Pledge of Allegiance

[Art Kelly]

http://tinyurl.com/yddqnat <http://tinyurl.com/yddqnat> 

Court upholds 'under God' in Pledge of Allegiance

By TERENCE CHEA, Associated Press Writer Terence Chea, Associated Press
Writer 1 min ago 
 
SAN FRANCISCO - A federal appeals court in San Francisco upheld the use
of the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance and "In God We
Trust" on U.S. currency, rejecting arguments on Thursday that the
phrases violate the separation of church and state.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel rejected two legal
challenges by Sacramento atheist Michael Newdow, who claimed the
references to God disrespect his religious beliefs.

"The Pledge is constitutional," Judge Carlos Bea wrote for the majority
in the 2-1 ruling. "The Pledge of Allegiance serves to unite our vast
nation through the proud recitation of some of the ideals upon which our
Republic was founded."

The same court ruled in Newdow's favor in 2002 after he sued his
daughter's school district for having students recite the pledge at
school.

That lawsuit reached the U.S. Supreme Court in 2004, but the high court
ruled that Newdow lacked the legal standing to file the suit because he
didn't have custody of his daughter, on whose behalf he brought the
case.

So Newdow, who is a doctor and lawyer, filed an identical challenge on
behalf of other parents who objected to the recitation of the pledge at
school. In 2005, a federal judge in Sacramento decided in Newdow's
favor, ruling that the pledge was unconstitutional.

"I want to be treated equally," Newdow said when he argued the case
before the 9th Circuit in December 2007. He added that supporters of the
phrase "want to have their religious views espoused by the government."

In a separate 3-0 ruling Thursday, the appeals court upheld the
inscription of the national motto "In God We Trust" on coins and
currency, saying that the phrase is ceremonial and patriotic, not
religious.

Reached on his cell phone, Newdow said he hadn't been aware that the
appeals court had ruled against him Thursday.

"Oh man, what a bummer," he said.

Newdow said he would comment further after he had read the decisions.




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gathman.org/pipermail/apologetics/attachments/20100311/e1903a26/attachment.html>