Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court rejects atheist's latest challenge to Pledge of Allegiance
cna ^ | June 16, 2011

Posted on 06/16/2011 12:46:14 PM PDT by NYer

The U.S. Supreme Court

Washington D.C., Jun 16, 2011 / 06:08 am (CNA).- On June 13, the Supreme Court ruled against atheist activist Michael Newdow's latest attempt to remove the words “under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance.

“Not surprisingly, the Supreme Court has again rejected the argument that saying the Pledge of your own free will creates an official state religion,” said attorney Eric Rassbach, litigation director at the religious liberty defense group the Becket Fund.

“The words 'one nation under God' make clear the bedrock American principle that our rights come not from the State, but are endowed by our Creator.”

On Monday, the Supreme Court rejected Newdow's appeal from the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston. Newdow had attempted to halt the ability of schoolchildren in Hanover, New Hampshire from reciting the Pledge voluntarily.

In March, the Supreme Court also rejected Newdow's appeal from a loss in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.

In both cases, the non-profit Becket Fund for Religious Liberty and global Catholic fraternal organization the Knights of Columbus intervened in the lawsuits to help school children who want to recite the pledge.

The Knights of Columbus led the effort to add the phrase “under God” to the Pledge 55 years ago.

The Becket Fund said in its briefs filed in the First Circuit and the Ninth Circuit that there is a  connection between the pledge and other statements like the Declaration of Independence and the Gettysburg Address. The briefs argue that each of those documents express the basic American philosophy that civil rights are inalienable because government does not create them.

Rassbach warned, however, that Newdow's latest attempt to remove the words “under God” may not be the last challenge to the pledge.

“Dr. Newdow has said that he will continue to challenge the pledge around the country, and we will be there to defend it,” he said.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: atheism; moralabsolutes; newdow; pledge; scotus

1 posted on 06/16/2011 12:46:24 PM PDT by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom; thefrankbaum; Tax-chick; GregB; saradippity; Berlin_Freeper; Litany; SumProVita; ...

There’s still hope for our country!


2 posted on 06/16/2011 12:47:15 PM PDT by NYer ("Be kind to every person you meet. For every person is fighting a great battle." St. Ephraim)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
I thought that guy had gone back under his rock. What a colossal waste of tax payers money.
3 posted on 06/16/2011 12:49:02 PM PDT by svcw (Non forgiveness is like holding a hot coal thinking the other person will be blistered)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

I don’t care if Newdow or whatever the hell his name is says the pledge or not but I find it very offensive that he thinks he has the right to force me to not say “Under God” in the pledge.

Karma is a biatch...


4 posted on 06/16/2011 12:52:15 PM PDT by BCR #226 (02/07 SOT www.extremefirepower.com...The BS stops when the hammer drops.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Michael Newdow should be declared a vexatious litigant.

It can be argued he is only filing these actions because he wants to get back at his ex-wife, a devout Christian.

The courts granted her sole legal and physical custody of their daughter.


5 posted on 06/16/2011 12:53:03 PM PDT by PanzerKardinal (Some things are so idiotic only an intellectual would believe it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

What was the vote breakdown of this decision?


6 posted on 06/16/2011 12:54:03 PM PDT by Carl LaFong (Experts say experts should be ignored.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: svcw

“with Liberty and Justice for all...born and unborn”.

That should make their heads explode.


7 posted on 06/16/2011 12:54:58 PM PDT by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Carl LaFong

There was no decision. The Court voted 9-0 not to hear the case. Technically, this sets no precedent, but he lower court’s ruling stands.


8 posted on 06/16/2011 12:56:22 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Newdow is a pitiful little man with way too much time on his hands. Why doesn’t he move to Cuba? Personally, I would like to beat the crap out of him, but that wouldn’t be very Christian of me.


9 posted on 06/16/2011 12:57:28 PM PDT by ilovesarah2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carl LaFong

It wasn’t a actual decision.

What happened was that Mr. Newdow’s Petition of Certiorari (Petition for the Supreme Court to hear his case) was denied.

As usual, denial was made with comment. So now breakdown of votes.


10 posted on 06/16/2011 12:58:39 PM PDT by PanzerKardinal (Some things are so idiotic only an intellectual would believe it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Newdow is another example of a high-functioning mentally ill person who provides employment for the chattering class and entertainment for the boob-tube hypnotized.


11 posted on 06/16/2011 1:00:23 PM PDT by Steely Tom (Obama goes on long after the thrill of Obama is gone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
I wish some people would sue Newdow for being a nuisance.
12 posted on 06/16/2011 1:04:04 PM PDT by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

For the record, Michael Newdow is a resident of the City of Sacramento and he lives in the southern part of the city near the intersections of Pocket Road and Greenhaven.

He is NOT a resident of the City of Elk Grove as the lamestream media periodically insists.


13 posted on 06/16/2011 1:06:06 PM PDT by MeganC (NO WAR FOR OIL! ........except when a Democrat's in charge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
There’s still hope for our country!

Yes. as always, the hope of authoritarian socialism

14 posted on 06/16/2011 1:08:13 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy (Monarchy is the one system of government where power is exercised for the good of all - Aristotle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Newdow isn’t an atheist, he’s an anti-theist. He doesn’t just not practice religion himself, he considers it his mission to eradicate religion.


15 posted on 06/16/2011 1:09:58 PM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ilovesarah2012
Personally, I would like to beat the crap out of him, but that wouldn’t be very Christian of me.

Many years ago there was a website that had a picture of hillary and, with a click of the mouse, you could slap her. Next best thing to being there.

16 posted on 06/16/2011 1:11:57 PM PDT by RobinOfKingston (An election is not a (national) suicide pact.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat

Newdow: Oh my God,it should be illegal to say God in the Pledge of Allegiance.


17 posted on 06/16/2011 1:12:21 PM PDT by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Dr. Newdow has said that he will continue to challenge the pledge ...

"What's your degree in? Dentistry?"

18 posted on 06/16/2011 1:13:19 PM PDT by dartuser ("Dealing with preterists is like cleaning the litter box ... but at least none of the cats are big.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat

Buy him a ticket to Riyadh, and let him spout his opinions there!;)


19 posted on 06/16/2011 1:14:39 PM PDT by Frank_2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Good day for conservatives. The progressives cut off their Weiner and the SC cuts off Newdow’s.


20 posted on 06/16/2011 1:15:02 PM PDT by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
There was no decision. The Court voted 9-0 not to hear the case.

They denied cert, so all we know is that there weren't four votes to hear the case.

21 posted on 06/16/2011 1:16:42 PM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep ("More weight!"--Giles Corey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Wow, I wish I could waste my whole life on a crusade against something.

Hopefully more meaningful though.

Wonder where he gets the money, time I think to go after the money. Hit’em where it hurts.


22 posted on 06/16/2011 1:18:18 PM PDT by thatjoeguy (Wind is just air, but pushier.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Omg. some people really have to much free time.
What a waste of time and tax money.
And i´m an atheist myself ;-)


23 posted on 06/16/2011 1:20:33 PM PDT by darkside321
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

“State Religion” means that the ruler or elected head of a country is the head of the Church in that country, and that is the official religion of that country. They also assess taxes to pay for the official church. Almost every country in the world has a state religion, except for us. We have never had a state religion, except for awhile Maryland had a state Catholic church, but the idea of the Pilgrims was to worship the way they wanted to, but they were all Christians, so that is how we got “Under God” in our Pledge. We are still mostly Christian, even today.


24 posted on 06/16/2011 1:23:51 PM PDT by MondoQueen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Raycpa

Francis Bellemy was not a conservative.


25 posted on 06/16/2011 1:27:31 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy (Monarchy is the one system of government where power is exercised for the good of all - Aristotle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Oztrich Boy
Francis Bellemy was not a conservative.

Even a commie is right sometimes.

26 posted on 06/16/2011 1:30:03 PM PDT by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: NYer

I am surprised that no one has yet brought a suit on the “prevent the free exercise therof” clause.


27 posted on 06/16/2011 1:30:27 PM PDT by eCSMaster (We will fight for America and it starts here in Madison, WI. It starts here. It starts now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Newdow had attempted to halt the ability of schoolchildren in Hanover, New Hampshire from reciting the Pledge voluntarily.

How and why is this idiot not getting involved in Hanover, NH?

28 posted on 06/16/2011 1:31:02 PM PDT by matt04
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Newdow is such a hateful, spiteful man controlled by evil. May God in His mercy touch that man and make him realize his need to repent and be saved before it’s too late.


29 posted on 06/16/2011 1:39:16 PM PDT by OB1kNOb (Financial Repression.......it answers a lot of questions.....read about it on FinancialSense.com.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobinOfKingston

We had a feature on cable TV where we could throw virtual tomatoes at the TV screen. We hit Obama every chance we got! LOL Great fun.


30 posted on 06/16/2011 1:42:46 PM PDT by ilovesarah2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ilovesarah2012
"Personally, I would like to beat the crap out of him

As would we all! Way too much time on his hands. he should find a new hobby, like clay pottery in the arizona desert or something.

31 posted on 06/16/2011 1:48:08 PM PDT by Soothesayer9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Bubba Ho-Tep
They denied cert, so all we know is that there weren't four votes to hear the case.

There were no recorded dissents, so it's fair to assume that no Justice wanted to hear the case.

32 posted on 06/16/2011 2:21:01 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: NYer

if you keep using the courts to push the same personal agenda and keep losing at some point you should be responsible for ALL court costs.


33 posted on 06/16/2011 2:36:59 PM PDT by SECURE AMERICA (Where can I sign up for the New American Revolution and the Crusades 2012?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ilovesarah2012
*Newdow is a pitiful little man with way too much time on his hands. Why doesn’t he move to Cuba? *

There are all kinds of atheist countries that he can flee to escape from freedom. He can go to Cuba and get a ration of 16 eggs a month or Venezuela and be under the rule of the delightful Chavez. Too bad he missed out on Pol pot's regime, or Ceausescu's Romania. Maybe he could’ve been under Stalin's dictatorship.

I bet he'd go to one of those godless counties of the past if he had a time machine.
Too bad for him and all of America that he can't....

34 posted on 06/16/2011 2:46:46 PM PDT by PATRIOT1876 (The only crimes that are 100% preventable are crimes committed by illegal aliens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Soothesayer9

If this jerk lived in the Midwest or South, it would have happened already.


35 posted on 06/16/2011 2:48:13 PM PDT by libertymaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: ilovesarah2012
Newdow is a pitiful little man with way too much time on his hands. Why doesn’t he move to Cuba? Personally, I would like to beat the crap out of him, but that wouldn’t be very Christian of me.

If you were to beat the crap out of this clown, the only thing left would be a pair of shoes.

36 posted on 06/16/2011 2:50:00 PM PDT by dearolddad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
There were no recorded dissents, so it's fair to assume that no Justice wanted to hear the case.

I'm not sure where the court ever records and announces the votes on cert hearings. The orders that come out of the court only list the cases rejected, maybe mentioning that one justice or another did not take part in that decision.

Here's the actual order list from the Court. Newdow's case is "Freedom From Religion Foundation v. US"

37 posted on 06/16/2011 4:35:12 PM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep ("More weight!"--Giles Corey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Bubba Ho-Tep
I'm not sure where the court ever records and announces the votes on cert hearings.

There are sometimes recorded dissents from denial of cert. ("Justice X would have granted cert."), occasionally even accompanied by dissenting opinions, though there were none in today's order list.

38 posted on 06/16/2011 5:04:52 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: NYer

What a non-story. When the Pledge is recited in my town, we vets add “under God” and keep right on going. The ones that didn’t look embarrassed.


39 posted on 06/16/2011 5:54:04 PM PDT by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

I don’t beleive the pledge of Allegiance is an honest act.

Allegiance should be earned not given, and as such to make little kids who are by nature ignorant of the state of any goverment Pledge their Allegiance to that goverment is a kind to making drones out of otherwise free men.

It is like saying that the Government exist for its own sake and not for the sake of the people, cause it forces them people to pledge their unwavering Allegiance to itself.

No in a Free Republic Allegiance is earned not pledged.


40 posted on 06/16/2011 6:22:05 PM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Monorprise

Yours is the first comment that is well thought out. The Pledge did not exist as an official Pledge until 1942. It is clearly an oath to be a drone who gets indoctrinated by the government.


41 posted on 06/16/2011 7:56:01 PM PDT by JimWayne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Since they’ve ruled on this, they should stop taking cases involving this man. He’s becoming a nuisance, and he wastes their time and our money with his stupidity, for his own selfish motives.


42 posted on 06/16/2011 9:45:45 PM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne

Yea the Irony is I would gladly pledge my Allegiance to God, and it is an unavoidable fact that every nation of the world is under God.

But that doesn’t change the fact that it is wrong to make little kids Pledge their Allegiance to any goverment. A free Government requires a free people who not only keep that Government on its toes but most importantly of all recognized that this goverment exist not for its own sake but for their sake.

No human Government will ever deserve unwavering Allegiance, No free goverment ever can have such allegiance if it expects to remain free.

For that reason alone I think the Pledge needs to go.


43 posted on 06/17/2011 8:09:10 AM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: NYer

First of all, talk about something that is ABSOLUTELY UNenforceable.

Every time this jerk pushes this, I envision hundreds of thousands, even millions, of Americans packing every school parking lot, stadium etc. for the privilege of shouting out the phrase “under God” in the pledge.


44 posted on 06/17/2011 8:14:25 AM PDT by Let's Roll (Save the world's best healthcare - REPEAL, DEFUND Obamacare!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimWayne; Monorprise; Alamo-Girl
It is clearly an oath to be a drone who gets indoctrinated by the government.

Well, that's one way to look at it, I suppose.

On the other hand, to me, the Pledge is "to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands," the one nation — the American nation (that is, We the People) — which the DoI recognizes as a nation "under God."

Note to recognize a nation "under God" is to say that our unalienable rights are not grants of the government, but of the God Who created all men equal.

It is in no sense a pledge of fidelity — a "loyalty oath" — to the federal government.

Governments change. The values that made and make America a good and just and strong nation do not. To say the Pledge is to remind oneself of that fact.

Just my two cents' worth.

45 posted on 06/21/2011 1:54:22 PM PDT by betty boop (We are led to believe a lie when we see with, and not through, the eye. — William Blake)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: betty boop

To be honest that is a way to look at it, but it is not the way the pledge was intended by the devout socialist who wrote the Pledge of Allegiance.
If I were to alter the pledge I would remove the words “one nation”, “indivisible”, and replace the word “the” with “theses”. I would also replace the word “flag” with the word “Constitution” and the word “for” with the word “over”.

If there must be a pledge at all to the Federal Government it should look like this:

“I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of these United States of America, and to the republic over which it stands under God, with liberty and justice for all.”


46 posted on 06/21/2011 3:23:53 PM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Monorprise
“I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of these United States of America, and to the republic over which it stands under God, with liberty and justice for all.”

I like it, Monorprise! That is, it mentions the Constitution — which is arguably a less ambiguous concept than the Flag.

But it isn't the Pledge we have. (I'm always glad to recite the one we have, including the "indivisible" language....)

One minor quibble: The Constitution doesn't "stand over" the republic; it is the bedrock foundation of it.

I gather the socialist who wrote the Pledge was not the person who inserted the "under God" language — which IIRC came later (during the Eisenhower administration???).

Thanks so much for writing, Monorprise!

47 posted on 06/21/2011 3:38:17 PM PDT by betty boop (We are led to believe a lie when we see with, and not through, the eye. — William Blake)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: betty boop

You are correct the socialist who wrote the pledge, a man by the name of Francis Julius Bellamy. Did not include “under God”. The phrase under God got added to the pledge in the 1950’s as a means to help distinguish us from the Soviet Union.


48 posted on 06/21/2011 6:29:14 PM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Monorprise; Alamo-Girl
The phrase under God got added to the pledge in the 1950’s as a means to help distinguish us from the Soviet Union.

LOLOL!!! Well, they sure picked exactly the right phrase to do that!

Eventually, totalitarians are always shipwrecked in wrack and ruin on the rocks of their own prescribed yet fallacious ideology.... At least, that is the report of actual human history, so far.

"Under God" marks the territory of human liberty. Man has no liberty where God is expunged from sociopolitical questions. With God gone, there is only the State (i.e., "the federal government") to mete out our "human rights."

And the State will tell us what they are.

A warning: What the State can grant, it can rescind. If this were the actual case, human "rights" would be total fictions.

Where "man is the measure," humanity shrinks.

That's why the Framers insisted on a rule of law, not of men; and that rule of law is "guaranteed" by the Supreme Ruler of the Universe (Ben Franklin's term, IIRC).

In other words, we are a nation under God. This is what has always made America "exceptional."

May God ever bless America!

And you also, Monorprise!

49 posted on 06/21/2011 8:35:46 PM PDT by betty boop (We are led to believe a lie when we see with, and not through, the eye. — William Blake)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: betty boop
"Under God" marks the territory of human liberty. Man has no liberty where God is expunged from sociopolitical questions. With God gone, there is only the State (i.e., "the federal government") to mete out our "human rights."

And the State will tell us what they are.

A warning: What the State can grant, it can rescind. If this were the actual case, human "rights" would be total fictions.

SO very true. Thank you for sharing your insights, dearest sister in Christ!

50 posted on 06/21/2011 9:20:30 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson