This week the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled the following:

"In the context of the Pledge, the statement that the United States is a nation “under God” is an endorsement of religion. It is a profession of a religious belief, namely, a belief in monotheism. The Court is saying that to recite the Pledge is not merely to describe the United States as a nation founded by people with deeply held religious beliefs; instead, it is to actually swear allegiance to the values for which the flag stands: unity, indivisibility, liberty, justice, and - since 1954 - the reality of monotheism."

While the Pledge of Allegiance may endorse monotheism, I don't believe that requiring someone to recite the pledge constitutes "respecting an establishment of religion," which is what the First Amendment prohibits. The First Amendment was intended to keep the government from respecting Pilgrims over Quakers and Catholics over Protestants, not to force our society to change for the few godless among us. The fact of the matter is, there must be things that the entire nation is willing to presuppose in order for the nation to exist and function as a nation. The Court refers to these as "the values for which the flag stands." Just as the Court has acknowledged that liberty and justice are values for which the flag stands, our founding fathers would argue that a belief in God is just as central an idea. There are mounds of evidence to support this claim, from the Declaration of Independence (men are "endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights"), to numerous examples in the Federalist Papers, to the Constitution itself ("in the year of our Lord"). Now while we may not be requiring school children to swear allegiance to these documents, certainly these are just as much examples of the government "respecting an establishment of religion." There is no distinction in the Constitution between one form of "respecting an establishment of religion" and another; the Constitution and our founding fathers meant to disallow them all. The fact that God is mentioned in such documents, including the Constitution, is only proof that the founding fathers did not view endorsing monotheism as "respecting an establishment of religion," they viewed it as a prerequisite for this nation to exist, just like liberty and justice.

Jefferson once pondered "can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God?" That's exactly what this ruling does; it ignores that our prosperity as a nation is due only to the blessings of the Almighty God. Jefferson continues that the liberties of a nation "are not to be violated but with His wrath." I fear that the same fate awaits those who refuse to acknowledge that God is the reason for our prosperity. I can only therefore pray that soon the Supreme Court will overturn this ruling and save us all from His wrath.