Quote:WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court preserved the phrase “one nation, under God,” in the Pledge of Allegiance, ruling Monday that a California atheist could not challenge the patriotic oath but sidestepping the broader question of separation of church and state.
At least for now, the decision — which came on Flag Day — leaves untouched the practice in which millions of schoolchildren around the country begin the day by reciting the pledge.
The court said atheist Michael Newdow could not sue to ban the pledge from his daughter’s school and others because he did not have legal authority to speak for her.
Newdow is in a protracted custody fight with the girl’s mother. He does not have sufficient custody of the child to qualify as her legal representative, the court said. Eight justices voted to reverse a lower court ruling in Newdow’s favor.
Justice Antonin Scalia removed himself from participation in the case, presumably because of remarks he had made that seemed to telegraph his view that the pledge is constitutional.
“When hard questions of domestic relations are sure to affect the outcome, the prudent course is for the federal court to stay its hand rather than reach out to resolve a weighty question of federal constitutional law,” Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the court.
'Low blow'
“I may be the best father in the world,” Newdow said shortly after the ruling was announced. “She spends 10 days a month with me. The suggestion that I don’t have sufficient custody is just incredible. This is such a blow for parental rights.”
The 10-year-old’s mother, Sandra Banning, had told the court she has no objection to the pledge. The full extent of the problems with the case was not apparent until she filed papers at the high court, Stevens wrote Monday.
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist agreed with the outcome of the case, but still wrote separately to say that the pledge as recited by schoolchildren does not violate the Constitution. Justices Sandra Day O’Connor and Clarence Thomas agreed with him.
The ruling came on the day that Congress set aside to honor the national flag. The ruling also came exactly 50 years after Congress added the disputed words “under God” to what had been a secular patriotic oath.
The high court’s lengthy opinion overturns a ruling two years ago that the teacher-led pledge was unconstitutional in public schools. That appeals court decision set off a national uproar and would have stripped the reference to God from the version of the pledge said by about 9.6 million schoolchildren in California and other western states.
Newdow’s daughter, like most elementary school children, hears the Pledge of Allegiance recited daily.
The First Amendment guarantees that government will not “establish” religion, wording that has come to mean a general ban on overt government sponsorship of religion in public schools and elsewhere.
The Supreme Court has already said that schoolchildren cannot be required to recite the oath that begins, “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.”
The court has also repeatedly barred school-sponsored prayer from classrooms, playing fields and school ceremonies.
White House argued against Newdow
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the language of the First Amendment and the Supreme Court’s precedents make clear that tax-supported schools cannot lend their imprimatur to a declaration of fealty to “one nation under God.”
The Bush administration, the girl’s school and Newdow all asked the Supreme Court to get involved in the case.
The administration had asked the high court to rule against Newdow, either on the legal question of his ability to sue or on the constitutional issue. The administration argued that the reference to God in the pledge is more about ceremony and history than about religion.
The reference is an “official acknowledgment of our nation’s religious heritage,” similar to the “In God We Trust” stamped on coins and bills, Solicitor General Theodore Olson argued to the court.
It is far-fetched to say such references pose a real danger of imposing state-sponsored religion, Olson said.
Newdow claims a judge recently gave him joint custody of the girl, whose name is not part of the legal papers filed with the Supreme Court.
Newdow holds medical and legal degrees, and says he is an ordained minister. He argued his own case at the court in March.
The case began when Newdow sued Congress, President Bush and others to eliminate the words “under God.” He asked for no damages.
On Monday, Newdow said he would continue that fight.
“The pledge is still unconstitutional,” he said. “What is being done to parents is unconstitutional.”
Newdow had numerous backers at the high court, although they were outnumbered by legal briefs in favor of keeping the wording of the pledge as it is.
Both sides react
The Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said he is disappointed.
“The justices ducked this constitutional issue today, but it is likely to come back in the future,” Lynn said. “Students should not feel compelled by school officials to subscribe to a particular religious belief in order to show love of country.”
On the other side, the American Center for Law and Justice said the ruling removes a cloud from the pledge.
“While the court did not address the merits of the case, it is clear that the Pledge of Allegiance and the words ’under God’ can continue to be recited by students across America,” said Jay Sekulow, the group’s chief counsel.
Congress adopted the pledge as a national patriotic tribute in 1942, at the height of World War II. Congress added the phrase “under God” more than a decade later, in 1954, when the world had moved from hot war to cold.
Supporters of the new wording said it would set the United States apart from godless communism.
The case is Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, 02-1624.
This is very good news for a lot of Americans, no doubt about that.
Quote:- Nintendo president Satoru Iwata has revealed the company's new plans on the next generation console and other development plans:
* Nintendo is planning to reveal the next generation console codenamed "Revolution" at E3 2005
* Iwata pointed out the downturn of the Japanese game market is due to too many sequels
* American game market also begins to suffer to a similar cause, the solution is innovation
* The concept of Nintendo DS is to allow people to have a wide range of new experiences, just like when Famicom was first launched in the market
* Nintendo is working on a new Mario Party title which does not require the use of controllers (which is rumored to be Nintendo's first title to work with a new EyeToy like camera for GameCube, known as Manebito/Camera and Ningen-Copy/Manebito
* Nintendo's next console will be able to hook up to both PC monitor and TV sets, the machine will more innovative ideas on hardware and software, which separate it from the competitors
* Nintendo may acquire more stocks from Bandai, to become a larger shareholder of the company.
Just wanted to say that built-in connections for a PC monitor would be really awesome.
...is the best damn movie-licensed game I've played in ages. It's one of the best FPS's I've played in a long time, even though there's not a whole lot of shooting. Oh and it's the best-looking game on any system right now as well, aside from maybe Far Cry if you have an insanely powerful PC. Prettier than Doom 3, oh yes.
The game takes place inside a huge prison, and stealth is key. There's plenty of fighting as well, most mostly hand-to-hand combat which works incredibly well for a FPS. It's actually a lot of fun. There are also these really cool counters where you can turn a guard's gun on themselves. Stuff like that. I won't give you a review right now since I haven't finished the game just yet and I'm sure you've heard from everyone else just how great it is, but I believe it deserves repeating. If you have an X-Box, but the game NOW if you can.
Okay, I'll try posting this AGAIN! UGH! Won't bother explaining why I thought everything was fun though. I TYPED it already! Just read my mind will you?!
So then, I have been playing this game. It's VERY fun, yes.
So is Shadow Battles. It's much more fun than you would think it would be, think Bomberman's simplistic sounding battles as an example of how much more fun a game can be than you think it is.
They are stupid for not including the scavenger hunt, because it seems a lot of people who imported it, not including review sites, actually LOVE it.
