"God" in the Texas pledge

[nkb]

Couple wants 'God' out of Texas pledge

Dallas: Atheists say new wording harming their kids; injunction denied
12:00 AM CDT on Wednesday, August 29, 2007

By KATHERINE LEAL UNMUTH / The Dallas Morning News
kunmuth@dallasnews.com
A day after thousands of schoolchildren began reciting the revised Texas pledge honoring "one state under God," an atheist couple asked a federal judge in Dallas that the language be immediately removed.
Legislators inserted the language into the pledge earlier this year to mirror the U.S. Pledge of Allegiance.
U.S. District Judge Ed Kinkeade denied the request late Tuesday by David Wallace Croft and his wife, Shannon, for a preliminary injunction to stop the use of the pledge before any trial. No trial date has been set. An unidentified John and Jane Doe are also parties to the case.
"The U.S. Supreme Court has made it abundantly clear for decades that patriotic tributes to God are allowed under the Constitution," state solicitor general Ted Cruz argued in court.
The Crofts' attorney, Dean Cook, said, "Two wrongs don't make a right." He argued that the Croft children, who attend Carrollton-Farmers Branch schools, are harmed by recitation of the Texas pledge, even if they are allowed to leave the room. He called it a "temporary jail."
"Children are highly impressionable and subject to peer pressure," Mr. Cook said.
The revised Texas pledge reads: "Honor the Texas flag; I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state under God, one and indivisible."
Mr. Cook argued that the U.S. pledge has been allowed to stand mostly because it is a tradition and has been in place for decades. The Texas language is different because it is new, he said.
Mr. Cruz said this argument of "old may be OK, but new is bad" does not work because the language is identical and has never harmed children who said the U.S. pledge.
"In both the nation and the state there is a long tradition of acknowledging the role of the Almighty," Mr. Cruz said after arguments Tuesday. "Texas is a uniquely patriotic state."
The Crofts announced earlier this month they were suing Gov. Rick Perry, as a representative of the state, over the pledge on the same day arguments were held over their separate lawsuit against the state's minute of silence law.
In each case, the Crofts argue that actions by legislators are unconstitutional and amount to violations of separation of church and state. They argued legislators sought to reintroduce prayer in schools by mandating the moment of silence in 2003. The law gives children the option to "reflect, pray, meditate or engage in any other silent activity" during that minute.
In Texas, schoolchildren recite the U.S. pledge and the Texas pledge and then observe a minute of silence each morning before classes.
The lawsuit challenging the moment of silence is before U.S. District Judge Barbara Lynn. She has not yet issued a ruling.
In 2002, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in San Francisco, ruled in favor of California atheist Michael Newdow's lawsuit challenging the U.S. pledge's inclusion of the words "under God" and held it to be unconstitutional. Two years later, the Supreme Court reversed the decision.
Mr. Cook cited the 9th Circuit's opinion Tuesday.
"This 9th Circuit opinion is one of the most criticized opinions," Judge Kinkeade said in court. "It's roundly criticized."
Mr. Croft said he has received numerous e-mails and postings on his blog, david-wallace-croft.blogspot.com, about his court challenges. While he has received some support from other atheists, many are angry and opposed to his actions. "All the bad things that are going to happen to me are supposedly going to happen in the afterlife," Mr. Croft said in referring to the responses. "It's hard to take that seriously."

[Professor Chaos]

"In both the nation and the state there is a long tradition of acknowledging the role of the Almighty," Mr. Cruz said after arguments Tuesday. "Texas is a uniquely patriotic state."

Ummm...what?

[nkb]

Sorry about posting the whole article, but Dallas Morning News is a (free) subscription.

What burns me the most, apart from theists feeling they need to force everyone else to worship their deity, is that paying tribute to God is being equated more and more with patriotism.
Who came up with that non-sequitur? The first time I heard it was Bush senior.

[Chris]

Patriotism and God have nothing to do with each other. The whole idea makes may asshole pucker.

[Philboid Studge]

Chris wrote

Patriotism and God have nothing to do with each other. The whole idea makes may asshole pucker.

You'd make a great cellmate.

Alas, though: patriotism and god are natural bedfellows, ever since Christinsanity glommed onto to the Roman State like a barnacle on a warship.

Without God, there'd be no Merkin Manifest Density, which was (and is) patriotism writ large.

[Irreligious]

Chris wrote

Patriotism and God have nothing to do with each other. The whole idea makes may asshole pucker.

Asshole puckering is illegal in Texas.

[Eva]

not in private. cf. Lawrence v. texas

[Irreligious]

Eva wrote

not in private. cf. Lawrence v. texas

Yes, but this was a very public display of asshole puckering. Definitely frowned upon by all right-thinking Texans.

[Eva]

and chris is not in texas

I'm actually surprised at the illegality of the whole puckering thing...I though for sure it was mandatory there. How else do you explain why everyone there is so full of shit?

How about squinching? Is that illegal in texas too?

[ubs]

nkb wrote

Sorry about posting the whole article, but Dallas Morning News is a (free) subscription.

Actually thank you for that. I hate signing up for things

nkb wrote

What burns me the most, apart from theists feeling they need to force everyone else to worship their deity, is that paying tribute to God is being equated more and more with patriotism.

Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. ~ Samuel Johnson

[Irreligious]

Eva wrote

and chris is not in texas

But Christ is, and he would not be amused. Repent, heathen!

[Rhinoqulous]