I can always count on Brother Falwell to give me a laugh. Not a hearty, knee-slapping witty laugh, but a "what the heck was he thinking" kind of comic relief. My latest LOL-attack came from his response to the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recent decision about the Pledge of Allegiance.

I knew I picked the wrong week to start watching the news again. I only found myself watching the news in the last few days because of the rash of forest fires here in Arizona and other drought-stricken southwestern states. With the Fourth of July quickly approaching, I've been curious about how it will affect pyrotechnic displays around the valley. Unfortunately, I stumbled upon something even more dangerous that could affect Independence Day celebrations.

I've read and heard the stories about how Michael Newdow, a Sacramento physician and atheist filed a lawsuit on behalf of his daughter. He is opposed to her school leading her in saying the Pledge of Allegiance, because it declares that we are "one nation under God". The Appeals court voted 2-1 agreeing that the Pledge was unconstitutional because it violates the separation of Church and State as provided in the First Amendment of the Constitution. Certainly, it was a 1954 act of Congress that added the phrase "under God" to the previous version of the Pledge.

Sacramento's Elk Ridge District superintendent David Gordon has asked, "Is the presence of those two words in the pledge constituting pushing religion on children in a classroom? I don't believe it is. I believe it's more an expression of part of the roots of our country."

Many legal experts are confident, however, that the ruling will be overturned by one of the courts; perhaps even by the full eleven-member appeals court when it can reconvene on the ruling. At this point, with the furor raised over this decision, including that by Pres. Bush, Congress, and the Supreme Court, I too believe the decision will be overturned. Because of this I can guarantee that Jerry Falwell's self-proclaimed war against this decision will be declared successful by him thanks to Divine determination.

His quotes are laughable attempts to spurn our great nation to action against evil. "This is probably the most dangerous ruling of any Federal Court in American history because it is a declaration that America is no longer 'one nation under God'. This court is saying that America does not need or want God.", Falwell said on his website www.Falwell.com.

I would argue that this is not the case. The court attempted to assert that the rights of Americans are being addressed. Those constitutional rights are in question and once again Jerry takes it as a religious attack. He has to resort to propaganda to plead his case.

In the Falwell Confidential, Jerry claims "there are forces at work in our nation that want to change who we are and who we have been. They want a completely secularized society that does not even recognize the God for whom our Founding Fathers expressed great fondness and dependence." Then he radically suggests, "we might as well burn all the flags, tear up the Constitution and start over so that every 'offended' person in this nation has the 'right' to feel good and comfy." It sounds to me that Brother Falwell is the offended person right now. Besides that, last time I checked, all Americans have the right to feel good and comfy.

Then he moved on to his Declaration of War. "It is high time that God-fearing, freedom-loving American people stand up and say, 'Enough is enough!' If we don’t do so right now, we will soon lose this culture war, as Pat Buchanan has defined it. I, for one, am not going to sit back and allow this imbecilic decision to go unchallenged." To which he has created a petition to drum up support for the reversal of the court's ruling.

To be sure, the timing of this ruling could not be worse. It has dropped upon our nation with a stronger resonance because it arrives barely more that a week before Independence Day following the horrible tragedy of September 11th. In the wake of petitions requesting that somber day be memorialized by a new national holiday, the one Falwell has raised will surely gain ground. When the ruling is reversed, he will take full credit for leading the charge as if he had Gabriel's trumpet.

I for one agree that the ruling as well as it's timing is "imbecilic". At a time when patriotism is at an all-time high (at least for our generation), declaring our Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional pours rock salt upon a still open wound. The fact that right-wing extremists like Falwell will come out of this like the second coming is the most unfortunate of all.

I know many atheists who do not object to the phrase "under God" in it's placement in our Pledge. They would agree that Congress should not have inserted the phrase, for the Pledge was quite patriotic and strong without it. I know very few who would argue that the reciting of the Pledge should be banned from schools because of the phrase, though they are all applauding the attempt.

It isn't that atheists or even non-Christians want a secular society; just a secular government that doesn't promote a specific religion. There is no need to tear up our Constitution, as Falwell sarcastically assumes, to appease non-Christians. We happen to like it the way that it is because it does protect everyone's rights quite nicely. It simply needs to be defended and upheld by the courts.

So the question becomes, does recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance constitute prayer. As an agnostic I personally say, No. "God Bless America" does in my opinion. But I've never objected to hearing people say that, as long as I'm not forced to say it. It's their right to say it, and my right to not say it. My list of blessings would take too long so I prefer "Gods Bless America". That fits for me, and may tweak the monotheists out there. But again that's my right to say it and there's to ignore me.

I don't object when I hear Pres. Bush, members of Congress, or any government official begin or end a speech with a prayer or "God Bless the United States of America." Again, it is their right as citizens to say it. I don't object to my money reading "In God We Trust", because the way the Fed works, they need all the help they can get.

Truly I only object to prayer in schools because the children are not there for worship. They are there for education. If you want to give them a religious education, pay for private school or send them to Sunday school. Kids can learn about the theory of evolution in biology class then learn genesis creation stories from church. There's the separation we want. Teachers are not priests and schools are not churches. So again, I ask, is the Pledge a prayer? No, I don't think so. It is a pledge to a country and the flag for which it stands. Furthermore, it is about a nation that is supposed to be indivisible. Extremists on both side of this fence are tearing it apart.

I personally agree with the late Red Skelton whose 1969 commentary on the Pledge of Allegiance ended as follows: "Since I was a small boy, two states have been added to our country, and two words have been added to the Pledge of Allegiance: Under God. Wouldn't it be a pity if someone said that is a prayer, and that would be eliminated from schools, too?" Yes Red, it would be a pity.