MuadDib

I find it interesting that so many theists are so weak in their beliefs that they are threatened by removal of WORDS. It isn't that the word God means nothing to an atheist. In fact, it means quite a bit. Almost all atheists I know hold the term God to mean superstition, evangalism, and entrenching religion into culture. Though I am a Christian, I can see the validity of their claim. It is very hard for someone to remain truly objective on a matter of this magnitude when you have almost all of society breathing down your neck and I personally take comfort in the thought that the government stays out of such entanglements and provides us with some room to think and question such beliefs. It isn't that the word God on a dollar bill or in a pledge is going to destroy their way of life, just like removing won't destroy the Christian way of life. What is important in a legalist state such as ours is the the precident it serves. The logic being the inclusion of such words all revolves around a majority belief in such a deity. The problem is that even the most democratic state can not logically swing with every whim of the populace. There has to be a solid grounding in rights for everyone. Respect for minority rights must trump majority will in matters of basic civil freedoms and rights that would make the majority will less meaningful. Implicit sponsorship of religion does just that. By acknowleding that the government (not the people in government) recognizes a single higher deity it endangers the participation and inclusion of those who do not. Because religion (or lack there of) is an issue that strikes at the heart of almost every human, it absolutely can not be endorsed on merits of popular acceptance.

__________________
"The courts that first rode the warhorse of virtual representation into battle on the res judicata front invested their steed with near-magical properties." ~27 F.3d 751