Achtung Bubba
Refugee
From Yahoo! News:
Pledge Plaintiff Files Lawsuit Appeal
Tue Jul 16, 1:09 PM ET
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) - The man who challenged the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance is also pushing to end references to God at presidential inaugurations.
Michael Newdow is appealing the dismissal in May of a lawsuit in which he claims it was wrong for President Bush's 2001 inauguration to include a prayer.
In his Pledge of Allegiance lawsuit, he claimed the phrase "one nation under God" violates the Constitution's separation of church and state. On June 26, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed ? at least temporarily ? and ruled the pledge unconstitutional.
Okay, a few questions for you guys who agree with the 9th Circuit Court's decision of a few weeks ago:
1) I'm still harping on this, but how exactly IS the pledge unconstitutional?
2) How was President Bush's inauguration wrong to include a prayer?
3) How in the holy hell was THAT unconstitutional?
Beyond this, it's fairly clear that Michael Newdow is doing the most political damage to the cause of a secular government in a VERY long time.
Shouldn't those who agree with him, having noticed the train wreck he caused with the pledge, simply tell him to shut the hell up?
Pledge Plaintiff Files Lawsuit Appeal
Tue Jul 16, 1:09 PM ET
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) - The man who challenged the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance is also pushing to end references to God at presidential inaugurations.
Michael Newdow is appealing the dismissal in May of a lawsuit in which he claims it was wrong for President Bush's 2001 inauguration to include a prayer.
In his Pledge of Allegiance lawsuit, he claimed the phrase "one nation under God" violates the Constitution's separation of church and state. On June 26, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed ? at least temporarily ? and ruled the pledge unconstitutional.
Okay, a few questions for you guys who agree with the 9th Circuit Court's decision of a few weeks ago:
1) I'm still harping on this, but how exactly IS the pledge unconstitutional?
2) How was President Bush's inauguration wrong to include a prayer?
3) How in the holy hell was THAT unconstitutional?
Beyond this, it's fairly clear that Michael Newdow is doing the most political damage to the cause of a secular government in a VERY long time.
Shouldn't those who agree with him, having noticed the train wreck he caused with the pledge, simply tell him to shut the hell up?
Last edited: