[BlessingInDisguise]

NO BIG DEAL.

Just go back to the way the pledge was before 1954 when Eisenhower added the "under god" phrase in 1954.

What's the controversy??

[elephantlips]

Boy, do you not get the point.

[rwfromkansas]

The controversy is over liberal activist judges that do not understand the First Amendment. If you agree with them, if you can provide the following, I will begin to believe the Pledge is unconstitutional for having "under God":

1) historical evidence that "under God" is unconstitutional *evidence from the founding to the year 1900 in a continuous stream of similar attitudes against religion in the public sphere*
2) judicial precedents from the same time period, both at the state and national level
3) citations from the Constitution and founding fathers to support your position
4) Actions of the founding fathers in positions of power that support your position

[The Iguana]

Just go back to the way the pledge was before 1954 when Eisenhower added the "under god" phrase in 1954.

Taking God out of our public discourse is not acceptable.

[TN Republican]

The controversy should be about forcing kids to recite any oath that may violate their beliefs. God ain't the half of it, in my opinion.