UNDER A GROOVE?

SCOTUS will be ruling on "under God" in the Pledge:

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court said Tuesday it will decide whether the Pledge of Allegiance recited by generations of American schoolchildren is an unconstitutional blending of church and state.

The case sets up an emotional showdown over God in the public schools and in public life. It will settle whether the phrase "one nation under God" will remain a part of the patriotic oath as it is recited in most classrooms.

The court will hear the case sometime next year.

The justices agreed to hear an appeal involving a California atheist whose 9-year-old daughter, like most elementary school children, hears the Pledge of Allegiance recited daily.

And interestingly,

Justice Antonin Scalia will not take part in the case, apparently because of public remarks earlier this year critical of the lower court ruling in the pledge case. His absence sets up the possibility that the other eight justices could deadlock 4-4, a result that would allow the lower court decision to stand.

Well, given that he thinks he actually is God, that constituted a conflict of interest. Hardeehar, anyway.

TFM says get rid of those two words. In the AP article, Press Sec McClellan, speaking for Bush, notes the presence of "God" and the "creator" in the Declaration of Independence and on our money. There's just, uh, one little difference between those and the Pledge: the latter forces children to declare a belief in God that does not square with their actual beliefs. Going beyond legal issues, money and centuries-old yellowed documents have references to higher powers that are more passive impositions of divinity, while forcing kids to say "one nation under god" is an aggressive imposition of divinity.

I have no idea how they'll rule on this, even without Fat Tony.