"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

By DAVID KRAVETS, Associated Press Writer 10 minutes ago

A federal judge declared the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance in
public schools unconstitutional Wednesday in a case brought by the same
atheist whose previous battle against the words "under God" was rejected
by the U.S. Supreme Court on procedural grounds.

U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton


A liberal California judge. I really wish that the state of California
would either secede from the union...or crumble into the sea during the next
earthquake. They are completely out of touch with the rest of America.


This will now go to the liberal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals...where they'll
hurry it along to the Supreme Court in the hopes that it will be heard
before the court's vacancies are filled.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
......................snip............
Newdow's argument makes perfect sense. People in this country should be
"free from a coercive requirement to affirm God." Take out those two
words and the Pledge is fine.

I agree with you Harry. You're correct on this one!

Jim

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

By DAVID KRAVETS, Associated Press Writer 10 minutes ago

A federal judge declared the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance in
public schools unconstitutional Wednesday in a case brought by the same
atheist whose previous battle against the words "under God" was rejected
by the U.S. Supreme Court on procedural grounds.

U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton


A liberal California judge. I really wish that the state of California
would either secede from the union...or crumble into the sea during the
next earthquake. They are completely out of touch with the rest of
America.



But not out of touch with the constitution which is quite clear on this
matter. It beyond me why religious folks - some of them anyway - are so
insecure in their beliefs that they have to have help from the government.
The gov't should be completely neutral when it comes to religion. Of course
some nitwits thnk that "freedon of religion" mean you can choose Baptist,
Methodist, or Presbeterian.


--
Peter Aitken

"Peter Aitken" wrote in message
...
But not out of touch with the constitution which is quite clear on this
matter. It beyond me why religious folks - some of them anyway - are so
insecure in their beliefs that they have to have help from the government.
The gov't should be completely neutral when it comes to religion. Of
course
some nitwits thnk that "freedon of religion" mean you can choose Baptist,
Methodist, or Presbeterian.
Peter Aitken

Excellent reply Peter. It shows that you are a man that can think for
himself.

Jim

"Peter Aitken" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

By DAVID KRAVETS, Associated Press Writer 10 minutes ago

A federal judge declared the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance in
public schools unconstitutional Wednesday in a case brought by the same
atheist whose previous battle against the words "under God" was
rejected
by the U.S. Supreme Court on procedural grounds.

U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton


A liberal California judge. I really wish that the state of California
would either secede from the union...or crumble into the sea during the
next earthquake. They are completely out of touch with the rest of
America.



But not out of touch with the constitution which is quite clear on this
matter. It beyond me why religious folks - some of them anyway - are so
insecure in their beliefs that they have to have help from the government.
The gov't should be completely neutral when it comes to religion. Of
course
some nitwits thnk that "freedon of religion" mean you can choose Baptist,
Methodist, or Presbeterian.


--
Peter Aitken


The nitwits are the people that seem to believe the constitution somehow
reads "freedom from religion"
WRT anyone being "out of touch" with the constitution, it is those that
believe in the falsehood of a "wall of separation"

"P Fritz" wrote in message
...

"Peter Aitken" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

By DAVID KRAVETS, Associated Press Writer 10 minutes ago

A federal judge declared the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance in
public schools unconstitutional Wednesday in a case brought by the
same
atheist whose previous battle against the words "under God" was
rejected
by the U.S. Supreme Court on procedural grounds.

U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton


A liberal California judge. I really wish that the state of California
would either secede from the union...or crumble into the sea during the
next earthquake. They are completely out of touch with the rest of
America.



But not out of touch with the constitution which is quite clear on this
matter. It beyond me why religious folks - some of them anyway - are so
insecure in their beliefs that they have to have help from the
government.
The gov't should be completely neutral when it comes to religion. Of
course
some nitwits thnk that "freedon of religion" mean you can choose Baptist,
Methodist, or Presbeterian.


--
Peter Aitken


The nitwits are the people that seem to believe the constitution somehow
reads "freedom from religion"

It means "freedom from YOUR religion", nitwit. How would you like it if the
pledge read "under Buddha", instead of "under god"?

Doug Kanter wrote in message news:CO%Ve.1155


How would you like it if the pledge read "under Buddha", instead of "under
god"?



I don't know. I've often felt underbuddha, but it usually passes in a day
or two.

Eisboch

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"P Fritz" wrote in message

The nitwits are the people that seem to believe the constitution somehow
reads "freedom from religion"

It means "freedom from YOUR religion", nitwit. How would you like it if
the pledge read "under Buddha", instead of "under god"?


We've got it all wrong. Shouldn't the pledge say "... under God, Buddah,
Allah, Yaweh, etc." Then we could all get along. Whenever a new religion
comes along we can add that deity as well.

"Ben" . net wrote in message
m...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"P Fritz" wrote in message

The nitwits are the people that seem to believe the constitution somehow
reads "freedom from religion"

It means "freedom from YOUR religion", nitwit. How would you like it if
the pledge read "under Buddha", instead of "under god"?


We've got it all wrong. Shouldn't the pledge say "... under God, Buddah,
Allah, Yaweh, etc." Then we could all get along. Whenever a new religion
comes along we can add that deity as well.




God is a collective name.

"P Fritz" wrote in message
...

"Peter Aitken" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

By DAVID KRAVETS, Associated Press Writer 10 minutes ago

A federal judge declared the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance in
public schools unconstitutional Wednesday in a case brought by the
same
atheist whose previous battle against the words "under God" was
rejected
by the U.S. Supreme Court on procedural grounds.

U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton


A liberal California judge. I really wish that the state of California
would either secede from the union...or crumble into the sea during the
next earthquake. They are completely out of touch with the rest of
America.



But not out of touch with the constitution which is quite clear on this
matter. It beyond me why religious folks - some of them anyway - are so
insecure in their beliefs that they have to have help from the
government.
The gov't should be completely neutral when it comes to religion. Of
course
some nitwits thnk that "freedon of religion" mean you can choose Baptist,
Methodist, or Presbeterian.


--
Peter Aitken


The nitwits are the people that seem to believe the constitution somehow
reads "freedom from religion"

Freedom certainly means that you can do without something. In any case there
are religions for whom "under god" is a meaningless and silly phrase -
Hinduism and Buddhism to name just two major ones.


--
Peter Aitken