Photograph and article from Bizpacreview.com
Judge sums up ‘under God’ ruling with brilliant explanation
May 13, 2015 by Carmine Sabia
Sometimes even we need to have a positive message rather than righting wrongs, here is one from me.
It is becoming rare that the majority of judges actually pay close attention and follow the constitution. In these times, it is important that our country fight legally on a daily basis to maintain its rights and patriotism from small daycares to colleges, from publicly funded to private, from local to federal from protection to justice. All are under assault by the communist, leftist, radicalized Muslim terrorists determine to rewrite and revamp our entire way of life. Therefore it is a breath of fresh air when we see judges who’s rulings do reflect and uphold the constitution as it was originally written.
The ruling by Judge Bauman was back in February but worth a revisit and reminder that not all in higher authority are pro-Obama agenda socialists, communists, or radicals determined to bring us down.
“The state law was challenged by a self-described humanist family in the Matawan-Aberdeen school district who objected to daily recitings of the Pledge and its inclusion of the words “under God.”
“Hearing the words “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance does not violate the rights of atheists. Ruled the Judge.”
MaryAnn Spoto at NJ Advance Media for NJ.com quoted
Eric Rassbach, deputy general counsel for the Becket Fund as saying “The message today is loud and clear: “God” is not a dirty word, The Pledge of Allegiance isn’t a prayer, and reciting it doesn’t magically create an official state religion. The Pledge–in the tradition of Washington’s Farewell Address or Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address–is not a prayer to God, but a statement about who we are as a nation. Dissenters have every right to sit out the Pledge, but they can’t silence everyone else.”
That decision by Judge Bauman had its foundations planted in an earlier determination.
When presented request for determination in the case ELK GROVE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT AND DAVID W. GORDON, SUPERINTENDENT, PETITIONERS vs MICHAEL A. NEWDOW, ET AL., RESPONDENTS, the Supreme Court was given the following question to determine.
“Whether a public school policy that requires teachers to lead willing students in reciting the pledge of Allegiance, which includes the words “under God,” violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, as applicable through the Fourteenth Amendment.”
“This Court offers the last bastion of protection for the sometimes unpopular application of constitutionally guaranteed freedoms. You will undoubtedly face a maelstrom of outrage in remaining faithful in this case to the constitutional ideal of freedom of conscience for all. This should not deter protection of this precious freedom. This Court should speak with one voice and hew down the daring and dangerous efforts of those who have sought to seduce the public opinion to substitute itself into that tyranny over the rights of conscience that the laws have so justly abdicated. This Court should affirm the opinion of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.”
And they supported their findings by the words of a founding father. Thomas Jefferson was quoted as saying, “We ought with one heart and one hand to hew down the daring and dangerous efforts of those who would seduce the public opinion to substitute itself into that tyranny over religious faith which the laws have so justly abdicated.” Letter from Thomas Jefferson to Edward Dowse, (April 19, 1803), in 10 THE WRITINGS OF THOMAS JEFFERSON 376, 378 (Andrew A. Lipscomb & Albert Ellery Bergh eds., 1905)
So for a judge to stand firm on oath and law, is not only refreshing but telling that not all our government is corrupt but sides with citizens on actual rights and understanding of what our country should be practicing as our civic duty.
Thank you to Judge Bauman but also every citizen, officer, court, defender, protector, media outlet, or educator that does keep our country within the bounds of constitutional republic and democratic form of government – by and for the people.