I think I beat this in the queue, but this is a better headline, so help me God.

That's one custody battle that's gonna get ugly.

Yeah, we pretty much figured they'd avoid removing that stupid phrase from the loyalty oath, on some meaningless technicality that had nothing to do with the merits of the case.

WEAK!!! Scared of the issue???

Technicality or no, the law's the law, and the Court has to follow it. We just need somebody else to challenge this.

Wish they'd get God off my money, too...

Heh. Owned! I'm not on either side of this issue. I just thought this guy was using his daughter. What an ass.

So would they also say that anyone who doesn't actually have a kid in public schools has no right to voice an opinion as to whether or not the kids should say the Pledge as it currently is?

That seems odd.

I wonder if he is possibly going to lose his rights in this custody battle or if they are deciding where the child will live.

It seems to me that unless his rights are terminated, he is still her father and should have the right to speak on her behalf regardless of which parent has physical custody.

JoeFinn-

So then we are all agreed, the Court did the right thing.

Right decision.

Major league avoidance issue. Not a surprise. Now, when will they try to duck the torture issue.

I agree with this blog though the Russians have much larger penis's in a jar than the United States does. We have a new missile gap. Dismembered item pictured.

Check out the incredibly attractive woman staring at the thing too. Bizarre.

It's too bad that now, under god, that girl is going to be, under god, subjected to religious infiltration of our schools, under god.

/obvious

God Bless America

isn't the entire legal system founded on "technicalities"? Is the submitter suggesting the Supreme Court set aside the law when the shoe fits?

I like that outcome.

That's one hell of a dodge by the SCOTUS...

I hear that. I always thought the motto was E Plurbus Unum (Of Many, One) rather than "In God We Trust." If I had my 'druthers...

Micheal Newdow needs some acne medecine or something. He is one fugly dude.

Yup, the law is the law. And the lawyers love to use it. Still waiting on the day that we get to be free FROM religion.
Damned delusional frics.
Maybe the ACLU will push for it now. Get god out of my government, off my money and out of my schools. Teach those myths at home or in your churches.

I'm still trying to figure out how the U.S. Constitution making sure the new country didn't establish the equivalent of the Church of England here somehow morphed into "There will be no acknowledgement or mention of God in any sort of governmental or quasi-governmental activity, and anything the nation's 5 percent of athiests want will supercede what anyone else wants."

I still think it's sad that you septics are forced to say a pledge of allegiance.
It should be a personal choice, not mandatory.

Democracy in inaction, yay!

Ah yes, the judicial equivalent of "Hey, look over there!"

Nice.

Ducking the issue or not -- the lower courts shoulda noted that one.

jessie:

Good point.

FishingWithFredo

Amen!

/er... Right On!

Freedom of Religion

-not-

Freedom from Religion

Sorry, atheists... oh, and it has to be a real religion, too. Thanks.

I want to see them address this issue, but I am not going to have them pull a BushCo2000 and hear what they don't have standing to hear.

/agrees with their stand, hopes for a better case next time.

Wow, remember when the supreme court used to be able to tackle tough issues like this instead of turning into a bunch of trial lawyers?

pussies

RTFA guys - The Supreme Court threw the case out because the man bringing the suit to trial could not technicaly represent the girl.

Bad ruling. They ducked the issue entirely. Cowards.

Kangaroo_Ralph,

what if I choose to believe that the view shared by millions of Christians isn't "real?" Who decides?

Rotten headline. Nothing about duck hunting at all :(

As far as on topic, the SCOTUS is correct, if this guy doesn't have joint custody or sole custody, he gets no say.

C0rf:

Apparently Kangaroo_Ralph does. Duh.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Any Questions?

Kangaroo_Ralph,
What is a "real" religion?
More than 100 sheep? 1000?
Since no religion is based on REALITY, how can any of them be "real?"

Ugh.

I guess ad hominem doesn't just happen to Fark, but now the Supreme Court uses it too!

They might as well just have said "The court has elected to dismiss the case, seeing as the plaintiff is a big fat poopyhead".

And FishingWithFredo, go fark yourself. Majority rule doesn't apply to the separation of church and state. Our constitution is set up to serve ALL citizens, not 95 percent of them.

Why can't we all just get along.

We can do Bismillah on Fridays, and under Vishnu on Wednesdays.

That would leave "under God" for Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday.

Anyone opposed to that?

I don't remember being FORCED to say it. We did do it every morning, but there were a couple of students (one was a Jehovah's Witness) that never said it. Nobody made a fuss.

fell_the_burn is right Technicalities are rules, that are not only to be followed when it's convenient.

When you hear that a criminal defendant "got off on a technicality," it usually means that his rights were violated, and not that there was a typo on his arrest sheet.

C0rf: E Pluribus Unum means "FROM many, one" E is short for ex meaning out of or from. Close enough though.

/latin nazi

It was a good call, since this fellow was obviously using his daughter.

It was unfortunate, in that the Supreme Court is also obviously ducking the inevitable clash, here. I should say postponing it. One day, they will have to address the fact that a reference to the "divine" has no place or purpose in the function of a secular government. Somehow, I doubt the Dubyuh administration will let this fly... he has made it clear that he believes that America is a Christian nation, and not a nation that is blended from several religions and creeds.

Still, the Supreme Court did its job, which I am pleased to see.

Supreme Court on 4th and 1 - PUNTS!

And the crowd goes wild!

So just because Nedow doesn't have custody, that means he loses any and all right to determine how his daughter should be raised? That's some bullshiat there.

redqueenmeg, sorry, my bad... I shoulda known better.

/cynical agnostic