Dark Christianity
.::: .::..:.::.:.

May 2008
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Pledge declared unconstitutional due to sectarian concerns


Apparently two groups suing over the inclusion of "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance have gained a victory in the 9th Circuit Court.

Keep a watch on this case, folks--I will be *EXTREMELY* surprised if dominionist groups do not press for this to be taken to the Supreme Court.

As a bit of historical aside--the Pledge of Allegiance did not include "Under God" until 1954, when it was added by pressure from the Knights of Columbus as well as conservative churches that were part of the embryonic dominionist movement in the US. The claim was that it would distinguish the US from "godless Communists"--an example of distraction from the real issues that dominionist groups have used ever since.

A good bit of historical background on the Pledge is at http://www.religioustolerance.org/nat_pled.htm for those interested.

http://history.vineyard.net/pledge.htm (slightly pro-dominionist site) notes, among other things, that some dominionist groups even want to push even *further* for pro-dominionist changes to the Pledge; http://pledgeqanda.com/ (also slightly pro-dominionist) has noted how the ur-Dominionists also pushed as far back as the 1950s to specifically amend the Constitution to declare the US a "Christian Nation" (which gives you an idea how long they've been at this, for those who doubt what I say on dominionist groups actively working for 50+ years to turn the US into a theocracy *de facto* and *de jure* as well)

Needless to say, this has been a rallying point for dominionist groups; nearly all dominionist organisations (in particular the AFA) have been putting out various flyers and whatnot among the lines of "keep God in the Pledge of Allegiance" and whatnot. The threat of resecularisation of the Pledge has been one reason dominionist groups have been pushing for laws to specifically strip the courts of all authority to rule on matters regarding religious rights (http://www.yuricareport.com/Law%20&%20Legal/CourtsMayBeStrippedOnPledge.html details more in regards to the specific issue of the Pledge and its constitutionality).

( )Anonymous- this user has disabled anonymous posting.
( )OpenID
Don't have an account? Create one now.
No HTML allowed in subject