The Supreme Court is hearing arguments today about the Pledge of Allegiance- specifically the phrase, “under God” which was added to the pledge in the ’50’s so our kids wouldn’t turn in to soulless commies.

My thinking is this: A certain percentage of people in this country don’t believe in God. When their children are instructed by their school to recite a pledge daily that goes against their religion, (or lack thereof) it’s an undeniable violation of their first amendment rights. The opposing argument goes that a specific religion isn’t endorsed- well, “God” or “No God” is as specific as it needs to get- if you don’t believe in God and are told to repeat that we are one nation under the-thing-you-don’t-believe-in you can see where there’s an undeniable religious component.

The Bush administration’s argument on this issue has been that the reference to God isn’t religious, it’s an “official acknowledgment of our nation’s religious heritage.” Unfortunately this argument doesn’t hold much weight- you don’t have to look far to see the founding father’s opinions on religion.

The French are banning religious head scarves warn by Muslim students in schools. That’s going way too far- and that’s something religious people are worried about happening here- stomping out of all religion. That type of thing can’t happen here because of the first amendment. It’s a two way street.

The bottom line is this- when you mix religion and government you’re asking for trouble. Religion has caused more war and unnecessary death than any other cause in the history of man. It’s an unfortunate, yet undeniable fact.

Treat everyone as you’d like to be treated. Our government doesn’t need God to tell us that, it’s common sense. God has her place, but it’s not overseeing the Federal government (specifically dictating foreign policy to the president.)

Though it may be unpopular, restoring the pledge to its original form is the only logical option to the Supreme Court. If the Court reverses the lower court’s decision it will provide further proof of this court’s obvious corruption.

Quack quack.