| Author |
Message |
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
 Wed Sep 14, 2005 10:33 pm Fed. Judge Rules Reciting Pledge in Schools Unconstitutional |
|
| Quote: |
Federal Judge Rules Reciting Pledge in Schools Unconstitutional
Wednesday, September 14, 2005
SAN FRANCISCO � A federal judge ruled Wednesday that reciting the Pledge of Allegiance (search) in public schools was unconstitutional.
U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton (search) ruled that the pledge's reference to one nation "under God" violates school children's right to be "free from a coercive requirement to affirm God." The judge has granted legal standing to two families represented by an atheist who lost his previous battle before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Read the judge's opinion by clicking here (pdf provided by FindLaw).
Karlton said he was bound by precedent of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which in 2002 ruled in favor of Sacramento atheist Michael Newdow (search) that the pledge is unconstitutional when recited in public schools.
"Imagine every morning if the teachers had the children stand up, place their hands over their hearts, and say, 'We are one nation that denies God exists,"' Newdow said in an interview with AP Radio after the ruling.
"I think that everybody would not be sitting here saying, 'Oh, what harm is that.' They'd be furious. And that's exactly what goes on against atheists. And it shouldn't."
The Supreme Court dismissed the case last year, saying Newdow lacked standing because he did not have custody of his elementary school daughter he sued on behalf of.
Newdow, an attorney and a medical doctor, filed an identical case on behalf of three unnamed parents and their children. Karlton said those families have the right to sue.
Karlton said he would sign a restraining order preventing the recitation of the pledge at the Elk Grove Unified, Rio Linda and Elverta Joint Elementary school districts in Sacramento County, where the plaintiffs' children attend.
Steven Ladd, superintendent of the Elk Grove Unified School District, said the district's school board has long supported allowing students to recite the pledge.
"We will continue to recite the pledge until ordered by the courts not to do so," Ladd said.
The board will consider the ruling at its next board meeting scheduled for Sept. 20, Ladd said.
The order would not extend beyond those districts unless it is affirmed by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (search) � in which case it could apply to nine western states � or the Supreme Court, which would apply to all states.
The decision sets up another showdown over the pledge in schools.
Andrew Napolitano, a senior judicial analyst for FOX News, said the ruling will not directly effect the rest of the nation, only Sacramento.
"There are federal judges who have ruled elsewhere in the U.S. the exact opposite of the way this federal judge has,� Napolitano said, but �this case only affects the area of California in which he [the judge] sits.�
He added that he expects appeals from the school districts, which then will make their way to the Supreme Court.
The Becket Fund, a religious rights group that is a party to the case, said it would immediately appeal the case to the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. If the court does not change its precedent, the group would go to the Supreme Court.
"It's a way to get this issue to the Supreme Court for a final decision to be made," said fund attorney Jared Leland.
The decisions by Karlton and the 9th Circuit conflict with an August opinion by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va. That court upheld a Virginia law requiring public schools lead daily Pledge of Allegiance recitation, which is similar to the requirement in California.
A three-judge panel of that circuit ruled that the pledge is a patriotic exercise, not a religious affirmation similar to a prayer.
"Undoubtedly, the pledge contains a religious phrase, and it is demeaning to persons of any faith to assert that the words `under God' contain no religious significance," Judge Karen Williams wrote for the 4th Circuit. "The inclusion of those two words, however, does not alter the nature of the pledge as a patriotic activity."
Karlton, appointed to the Sacramento bench in 1979 by President Carter, wrote that the case concerned "the ongoing struggle as to the role of religion in the civil life of this nation" and added that his opinion "will satisfy no one involved in that debate."
Karlton dismissed claims that the 1954 Congressional legislation inserting the words "under God" was unconstitutional. If his ruling stands, he reasoned that the school children and their parents in the case would not be harmed by the phrase because they would no longer have to recite it at school.
Terence Cassidy, a lawyer representing the school districts, said he was reviewing the opinion and was not immediately prepared to comment.
The case is Newdow v. Congress, 05-17. Read the judge's opinion by clicking here (pdf provided by FindLaw).
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
SEARCH
Click here for FOX News RSS Feeds
Advertise on FOX News Channel, FOXNews.com and FOX News Radio
Jobs at FOX News Channel.
Internships at FOX News Channel (Accepting Fall Applications Now).
Terms of use. Privacy Statement. For FOXNews.com comments write to
[email protected]; For FOX News Channel comments write to
[email protected]
� Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Copyright � 2005 ComStock, Inc.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Copyright 2005 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved.
All market data delayed 20 minutes.
|
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Wed Sep 14, 2005 10:36 pm |
|
This is not good. This is not good at all.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Wed Sep 14, 2005 10:41 pm |
|
Such BS. If people do not want to say the pledge, no one is making them say it. Some of us however, do want to pledge allegience. Whatever.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Wed Sep 14, 2005 11:00 pm |
|
| Puck wrote: | | Such BS. If people do not want to say the pledge, no one is making them say it. Some of us however, do want to pledge allegience. Whatever. |
Exactly. It is BS. We have to aknowledge fundamental religious ideals of this nation, not push them away.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Wed Sep 14, 2005 11:52 pm |
|
*sighs* This is so stupid there are no words. If the pledge scares them that much, they shouldn't be allowed to have an American flag on the premises. Why bare a flag that the courts order you can't pledge your alleigeance to?
|
|
|
teya
Commander
Joined: 02 Feb 2005
Posts: 423
|
| Thu Sep 15, 2005 10:08 am |
|
^ The issue isn't the flag or the pledge, it's two little words--"under God"--that were not in the original, but were added in the 1950s during the Red Scare to distinguish the US from the "godless communists."
So why not remove 'em?
|
|
|
Link, the Hero of Time
Vice Admiral
Joined: 15 Sep 2001
Posts: 5581
Location: Kokori Forest, Hyrule
|
| Thu Sep 15, 2005 11:40 am |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | Exactly. It is BS. We have to aknowledge fundamental religious ideals of this nation, not push them away. |
you're forgetting that Christianity is not the only religion in the US.
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Thu Sep 15, 2005 12:21 pm |
|
| teya wrote: | ^ The issue isn't the flag or the pledge, it's two little words--"under God"--that were not in the original, but were added in the 1950s during the Red Scare to distinguish the US from the "godless communists."
So why not remove 'em? |
I'm entirely aware of that. I'm just saying, if pledging to the flag is unconstitutional, don't we have a problem? Why fly a flag you can't constitutionally pledge to?
I'm not against removing them. I don't advocate taking God out of everything and certainly not American history, but frankly if the U.S. were a Muslim or Hindu nation, I wouldn't be happy pledging under Allah or one of the 300,000 Hindu gods.
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Thu Sep 15, 2005 2:55 pm |
|
As far as I'm concerned, just don't say it if you don't want to. I don't think it needs to be changed.
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
| Thu Sep 15, 2005 2:57 pm |
|
This is terrible. I don't see how that is "fair" to everyone. It seems the Athiests were the only ones to win.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Thu Sep 15, 2005 5:08 pm |
|
| Founder wrote: | | This is terrible. I don't see how that is "fair" to everyone. It seems the Athiests were the only ones to win. |
Yes. "Under God" can mean a PLETHORA of different religious meanings. It's not only Jewish and Christian, you know.
And Link, I KNOW that Christianity isn't the only religion, but Jeudism and Christianity were what our founding fathers based much/most of their moral ideals on.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Thu Sep 15, 2005 5:12 pm |
|
This is typical, the government of today favors no religion, which in and of itself is religion. If I were still a student, I would demand a pledge, and if I didn't get it, I would organize a group of students to inturrput the teacher, and do it ourselves.
|
|
|
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
| Thu Sep 15, 2005 5:13 pm |
|
It only says "Under God", not "Under a CERTAIN God." Now this discriminates against people of Faith.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Thu Sep 15, 2005 5:14 pm |
|
| LightningBoy wrote: | | This is typical, the government of today favors no religion, which in and of itself is religion. If I were still a student, I would demand a pledge, and if I didn't get it, I would organize a group of students to inturrput the teacher, and do it ourselves. |
Did you know that in 1969, Humanism--ideals that began during the Renassaiunce--was considered a religion? And now they're supporting that religion, the religion that meant much less than Christianity and Judaism.
And I would do the same.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Thu Sep 15, 2005 5:17 pm |
|
I personally don't see a problem with removing the words "under god" from the Pledge, changing it back to it's original form. Afterall, all this has caused is annoyance and trouble, as it will always do. However, as I said earlier one could either just not say it or just leave the "under god" part out.
The article also implies that there is a law stating that students must say the Pledge. Now that, I think is totally wrong.
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Thu Sep 15, 2005 5:22 pm |
|
They reserve the right not to say it. 
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Thu Sep 15, 2005 5:40 pm |
|
Ah, just lead. I see.
| Republican_Man wrote: | | Did you know that in 1969, Humanism--ideals that began during the Renassaiunce--was considered a religion? And now they're supporting that religion, the religion that meant much less than Christianity and Judaism. |
What do you mean by "meant much less," exactly?
During the Renaissance, Humanism had hundreds of thousands of followers.
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Thu Sep 15, 2005 5:46 pm |
|
Humanism is also not necessarliy a religion, it's more of a philosophy.
One can be both Christan and Humanist.
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Thu Sep 15, 2005 5:48 pm |
|
I agree, however to people who consider it a religion, it's probably just as important to them, as your faith is to you (whatever that may be).
It's ideals are just as meaningful.
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Thu Sep 15, 2005 5:59 pm |
|
| LightningBoy wrote: | Humanism is also not necessarliy a religion, it's more of a philosophy.
One can be both Christan and Humanist. |
I mean, the Supreme Court declared it to be a religion in 1969, my apologies.
And by "meant much less" is that one of the ideas that spurred from humanism was the idea of brining back Democracy, and due to humanism, the renaissance happened, which contributed to the formation of democratic nations. However, Judeo-Christian philosophy is more in our history than humanism, which simply brought back out the idea of democracy in terms of our countries history, which is why I said "meant much less."
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Link, the Hero of Time
Vice Admiral
Joined: 15 Sep 2001
Posts: 5581
Location: Kokori Forest, Hyrule
|
| Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:23 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | Yes. "Under God" can mean a PLETHORA of different religious meanings. It's not only Jewish and Christian, you know.
And Link, I KNOW that Christianity isn't the only religion, but Jeudism and Christianity were what our founding fathers based much/most of their moral ideals on. |
Times change. There's now a mix of all religions here, you can't just cater to one.
Think of it from another religious beliefs point of view. If it was "Under Allah" or "Under Buddha" (Random examples) And you were christian. Would you say it?
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:26 pm |
|
What does Allah translate to? And what is Buddah to those that believe in Buddism that believe Buddah to be god? GOD. It's all the same thing.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:32 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | What does Allah translate to? And what is Buddah to those that believe in Buddism that believe Buddah to be god? GOD. It's all the same thing. |
Nope. Budhists don't believe in God. Hindus think there are over 300,000 gods. Allah is the name for a Muslim God, but from what I've read, it's not near the same relationship of the Christian God--named Yahwey, (sp?) or Yhvh.
|
|
|
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
| Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:45 pm |
|
| Exalya wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | | What does Allah translate to? And what is Buddah to those that believe in Buddism that believe Buddah to be god? GOD. It's all the same thing. |
Nope. Budhists don't believe in God. Hindus think there are over 300,000 gods. Allah is the name for a Muslim God, but from what I've read, it's not near the same relationship of the Christian God--named Yahwey, (sp?) or Yhvh. |
With all due respect, that isn't true. Buddists do believe in God. Just in a very unique way. Hindus beleive that all the Gods are one God in many forms. My g/f is Hindu, she taught me this. Allah maybe the Muslim God, but God does not limit himself to race.
In the words of RM, no matter what Religion, God is God.
| Link, the Hero of Time wrote: | | Think of it from another religious beliefs point of view. If it was "Under Allah" or "Under Buddha" (Random examples) And you were christian. Would you say it? |
Yes I would still say it.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:47 pm |
|
I know that Buddha really isn't a God to most Buddhists, and that's why I didn't directly include all Buddhists in my statement. But the teachings of Buddha and Buddha are close enough.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
