wants to do it, Fekking freak.....I'm so glad that were safe, now that god has been put in his place by this guy. From the WSJ
And before anyone says anything, yes I believe in the 1st amendment, and I agree, albeit technically, in the ruling. It is logical in at least the legal sense, but fer crissakes don't we have better things to do than pander to morons like this?? The pledge wasn't hurting anyone so why change it. As well, I find it hard to believe that this guys daughter said BOO about the pledge. Iconoclast my a**, he's a media whore and seems to have developed a pattern of being an annoying wanker
Re Made an Ass of Ermself [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/01/national/01PLED.html[/url] The New York Times portrays Mike Newdow, the California crackpot who sued to declare the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional. It turns out in addition to being a militant atheist, he's a feminist wacko: He does not understand, for example, why the English language allows itself anything so cumbersome and awkward as masculine and feminine pronouns. The Mike Newdow dictionary would replace "he" and "she" with "re," "his" and "hers" with "rees" and "him" and "her" with "erm." "Come on, try it out," he says. " 'Re went to the store.' It's easy." He's also an antifeminist wacko, thanks to a bitter custody dispute. "Television reporters still looking for sound bites on the pledge from Mr. Newdow would be well advised to steer clear of asking about his real obsession," the Times helpfully offers. "As he himself warns, 'I could go on about family law for days.' " He objects to courts that take account of "the best interests of the child," which he says is "arbitrary and indefinable" and subject to "no valid measurements." Meanwhile, a playground fight has broken out on the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, where Newdow won his case last week. The Associated Press reports that Stephen says Alfred stayed his ruling because Mary told him to, but Alfred says he did it all by himself and Mary had nothing to do with it, and Mary is in such a huff she won't even talk about it.
No, he sued to get one phrase, that was recently added (in 1954?), declared unconstitutional. The guy is enough of a wacko that the writer doesn't need to lie to make him sound like one.
...sued to declare the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional.
This might sound completely off the wall unless you're older... I can remember when any black or oriental person was often referred to as such in the news. For example, "the coloured baseball player Jackie Robinson" or "the black musician little Stevie Wonder." Now, you never hear someone referred to by their race. I don't like it, but the guy might be right that sometime starting in the near future when the media refers to someone, they might start dropping the gender-specific titles. I never imagined a day when I wouldn't know the race of a popular person, for example Jason Kidd in the NBA or the singer Pink. Sometime in the future, the same might be said about someone's sex.z
He does not understand, for example, why the English language allows itself anything so cumbersome and awkward as masculine and feminine pronouns.