Don't know whether to cry, vomit or both! >:(

Judge Rules Pledge of Allegiance UnconstitutionalBy Melanie
HunterCNSNews.com Senior EditorSeptember 14, 2005(2nd Add: Includes comments
from Americans United for Separation of Church and State.)(CNSNews.com) - A
federal judge in California Wednesday ruled that reciting the Pledge of
Allegiance in public schools is unconstitutional. The case was brought by two
families represented by Michael Newdow, an atheist whose case before the U.S.
Supreme Court was thrown out because it was brought on his daughter's behalf and
he did not have custody of her. In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Lawrence
Karlton said the words "under God" violate the right of school children to be
"free from a coercive requirement to affirm God." According to the Associated
Press, Karlton said he was bound by precedent of the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals, which ruled in favor of Newdow in 2002. Conservatives were quick to
condemn the ruling. "This is an extraordinary and blatant display of judicial
activism. Judge Lawrence Karlton relied on the activist ruling of the Ninth
Circuit which was rendered inoperable by the Supreme Court's ruling on this
issue last year," said Kay Daly, president of the Coalition for a Fair
Judiciary, in a statement."He claims it was precedent, but as an experienced
judge, he knows better. Clearly, this is a ruling by a judge who is obviously an
activist who legislates from the bench to enact his own agenda," added Daly.
Daly said the latest Pledge of Allegiance ruling demonstrates why Judge John
Roberts should be confirmed to be chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court."This
is precisely the reason we need Judge Roberts to be confirmed as Chief Justice.
He's made it clear that he puts the law and the Constitution first. And he's
made it clear that he won't substitute his own values for the clear commands of
the law," said Daly.Mathew Staver, president and general counsel of Liberty
Counsel, called the ruling "dismaying" but "not surprising.""This history of the
Pledge of Allegiance illustrates that the phrase 'under God' is a permissible
acknowledgement rather than an establishment of religion. If the Pledge
established or tended to establish a religion, then that would have happened
during the past 50 years of its existence," said Staver in a statement. "Day
after day we have recited the Pledge from the classroom to the stateroom, from
private meetings to public events, and not once has it tended to establish a
religion," Staver said. "Today's ruling illustrates why we need judges who are
umpires applying settled law rather than activists intent on imposing their own
ideology."The Liberty Counsel filed a brief in the Newdow case when it was heard
by the U.S. Supreme Court. The counsel also plans to file a brief in this case
before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals followed by the Supreme Court if it
goes that far.The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), which specializes
in constitutional law, called Wednesday's decision "legally flawed" adding that
it "underscores the importance of who serves on the Supreme Court of the United
States."Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the ACLJ, expressed hope that the "flawed
decision" will eventually be overturned."This is another example of a federal
district court exhibiting hostility toward a time-honored tradition which has
been defended by numerous Justices including Justice O'Connor who said
eliminating such references 'would sever ties to a history that sustains this
nation even today,'" said Sekulow in a statement. "The Pledge clearly
acknowledges the fact that our freedoms in this country come from God, not
government," Sekulow added.One of the groups involved in the suit, the Becket
Fund for Religious Liberty, which is challenging Newdow in the case, also
pledged to appeal the ruling immediately to the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals."To protect the right for every child to recite the Pledge, we will
immediately appeal this decision to the 9th Circuit," Derek Gaubatz, director of
litigation for the Becket Fund, said in a statement.Newdow, Humanists, liberals
praise ruling"A federal judge did as he was supposed to do and upheld the
Constitution. We should be thankful that we have judiciary that will do that,"
said Newdow.The nation's oldest and largest Humanist group, the American
Humanist Association, applauded the ruling. Newdow was named AHA Humanist
Pioneer in 2004.AHA, which was founded in 1941, has over 100 local affiliates
and is "dedicated to ensuring a voice for those with a positive nontheistic
outlook, based on reason and experience, which embraces all of humanity," its
press release stated."The practice of reciting the Pledge in public schools
specifically targets children, inculcating them with a monotheistic message not
held by millions of Americans," said AHA President Mel Lipman in a
statement."This is not a passive reading of a historic document but an active
swearing of a loyalty oath to one's country and, since 1954, an avowal that our
nation exists 'under God,' which is tantamount to prayer," added Lipman."The
First Amendment does not require hostility toward religion, but mandates
government neutrality toward religion. By imposing a religious belief on those
without such beliefs, the current version of the Pledge utterly fails this
test," Lipman said."This ruling prevents disfranchisement and promotes religious
liberty in America. Enforced conformity to a particular religious position is
wrong. Humanists will remain vigilant in protecting the religious liberty of
public school students," Lipman concluded.The AHA submitted a
friend-of-the-court brief to the Supreme Court on behalf of Newdow in Elk Grove
Unified School District v. Newdow.A religious watchdog group, Americans United
for Separation of Church and State, also applauded the ruling."The court's
decision was correct as a matter of Establishment Clause jurisprudence," said
Americans United Legal Director Ayesha Khan. "The Constitution forbids
government to intervene in religious matters."America is a very diverse nation,"
Khan added. "We have some 2,000 different denominations and faith groups, as
well as many Americans who choose no religious path at all. It is wrong for
public schools to ask students to affirm a religious belief in order to express
their patriotism.""America faces many challenges today," Khan concluded. "We can
best meet those challenges if we are united as a people. Americans should never
be made to feel excluded from our national life because they have the 'wrong'
views about religion."

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/viewstory.asp?Page=%5CNation%5Carchive%5C200509%5CNAT20050914c.html

Poxy *%#*