It seems pretty clear that saying "under God" endorses a monotheistic belief. As I\'m sure you guys know, President Eisenhower stated "From this day forward, the millions of our school\'s children will daily proclaim in every city and town, every village and rural schoolhouse, the dedication of our Nation and our people to the Almighty. This was at the signing ceremony that put the words "under God" into the pledge back in 1954. Kinda hard to say that there is a separation between church and state there, don\'t you think? The problem with a decision barring those words from the pledge is that it would create a slippery slope, and we\'d have to be prepared to take out all other references to God in our society at large as well, such as currency. Maybe that\'s not something we want to do, but the pledge implications are striking. It would be akin to a christian kid being in class where everyone is saying one nation under Satan during their morning rituals. Obviously that wouldn\'t be allowed.
My larger argument is that the pledge shouldn\'t even be a part of the morning in schools period. Sure patriotism is important and it benefits all if we have a strong base of citizens who actually like and appreciate the benefits of being U.S. citizens, but requireing six year olds to mindlessly recite a bunch of words they don\'t even understand is not the way patriotism to be taught. Teaching children the many sacrifices our forefathers have made so that we could live as we do today is more along the right track. Making the kid stand up every morning like a bunch of robots and pledge their allegiance is not. And yes, I know they don\'t expell you or anything if you don\'t say the pledge, but a young kid is not going to exercise their contitutional right to not say the pledge because they don\'t think that way. It is my feeling that children will come to appreciate the flag for what it is once they really understand it and our history, but not by rote teaching and memorization. It almost seems like we want our children to make their decision before they are old enough to understand exactly what they are pledging to. It\'s kind of pointless, and seems to have a feeling of "we\'re gonna hook em early, before they even know what\'s going on".
Same goes for the moment of silence. Since when can\'t people who want to pray or reflect on whatever not do that at any point of the day. Why do we need to set aside a certain amount of time each morning in our schools so that people can have that moment? All the way up through high school you had to stand, say the pledge, and then be quiet for the moment of silence. If you didn\'t you weren\'t really punished, but you certainly looked weird.
Sorry this is so long, but after reading the case I started to form some different opinions about this issue. At first I thought it was so stupid for someone to bring a lawsuit, but then I felt differently. And of course the senate voted 99-0 to overturn the decision... what politician would want to be seen as the representative that voted against the "under God" resolution? Their constituents don\'t understand the Anti-Establishment Clause, so the senator would just be labeled either a bleeding heart liberal or an atheist and get voted out of office next election. Sad, but true.
