Religions > Atheism > "Pledge fight to return to S.F. courtroom; Atheists object to 'under God' phrase"
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"buckeye" |
| Date: |
13 Dec 2007 04:58:45 AM |
| Object: |
"Pledge fight to return to S.F. courtroom; Atheists object to 'under God' phrase" |
"Pledge fight to return to S.F. courtroom; Atheists object to 'under God'
phrase"
http://howappealing.law.com/120107.html#030223
"Pledge fight to return to S.F. courtroom; Atheists object to 'under God'
phrase": Howard Mintz has this article today in The San Jose Mercury News.
Michael Newdow is scheduled to argue the appeal on Tuesday before a
three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The
panel assigned to hear the appeal will consist of Circuit Judges Stephen
Reinhardt and Carlos T. Bea and Senior Circuit Judge Dorothy W. Nelson.
Judge Reinhardt, of course, was on the earlier three-judge Ninth Circuit
panel that held the inclusion of "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance
was unconstitutional with respect to school children, and he joined in that
ruling. Neither Judge Bea nor Judge Nelson was on that earlier three-judge
panel.
The federal district court's decision that the Ninth Circuit will be
reviewing can be accessed at this link. Newdow has made available via this
link the documents filed in the district court and on appeal to the Ninth
Circuit.
I have written extensively about the incorrect premise of the federal
district court's ruling (see my earlier posts here, here, and here) and
also on the effect of the U.S. Supreme Court's reversal for lack of
plaintiff's standing on the precedential effect of the Ninth Circuit's
earlier ruling (see here and here).
And if that's not enough fun for one day, that very same three-judge Ninth
Circuit panel, also on Tuesday, December 4, 2007, will have the pleasure of
hearing Newdow's challenge to the use of the phrase "In God We Trust" on
the Nation's money and as the Nation's motto. Newdow has also posted online
the documents filed in the district court and the Ninth Circuit in
connection with this separate case, and you can access them via this link.
Posted at 11:32 PM by Howard Bashman
***************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Historical Reality SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote
"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"
That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.
It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.
*****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
