The pledge is not unconstitutional. God as used is not a specified deity, and thus does not violate the establishment of any religion. To some, the "God" in the pledge may be a judeao-xtian one, to others it may be the spagetti monster. To an athiest, "God" may be a non existent entity - so in that case they are saying "under a being that doesn't exist" - which conforms to their belief - so why should they have a problem with that?
There is a difference between the recognition of a myriad of beliefs and a note to that in the pledge, vs the establishment of a set governmental religion.
__________________
Good Hunting!
Captain Haplo
|