Atheists. Humanists. Freethinkers. Americans.

ACTION ALERT

Urgent: House moving defeated legislation to the floor that will strip the courts of their power to decide Pledge of Allegiance cases

Update: Although we won in committee, we lost on the House floor. The House voted 260 to 167 to pass HR 2389, the so-called Pledge Protection Act. To see how your member of Congress voted, go to http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2006/roll385.xml A "NAY" voting member of Congress should be thanked, and a "YEA" voter should be reprimanded.

Jul. 10, 2006 - Although the House Judiciary Committee failed to vote out HR 2389, the so-called Pledge Protection Act, with a 15-15 tie vote, the House leadership is expected to bring the issue for a floor vote this week.

As we have stated in previous alerts, the House leadership wants to strip all federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, of the power to decide the Constitutionality of the Pledge of Allegiance or its recitation. This would set a dangerous precedent for chipping away at the checks and balances that our three independent branches of government (executive, legislative, and judicial) have given our nation over the past two hundred plus years.

In 1954 Congress corrupted the original version of the Pledge of Allegiance (written in 1892) by adding the words "under God" between "one nation" and "indivisible." The founders of our nation kept the Constitution free of references to a god or gods. In this tradition, it is not surprising that the original Pledge developed as an expression of patriotism -- not religious faith -- which also made no mention of a god. Some members of Congress are intent on tying the concepts of faith and patriotism together, thereby making nontheists second class citizens. If this legislation is passed it would set the stage for further limitations on the Court's exercise of power to decide First Amendment religion cases like public school prayers, legislative prayers, ten commandments, national motto, etc. leading to a tyranny of the majority.

This legislation is being pushed forward -- even though it was defeated in committee -- to play to the religious right for the fall elections. It is shameful that Congress is using this legislation, which attacks the constitutional rights of our constituency, to further their narrow and selfish political goals.

If you have not already contacted your member of Congress on this issue please do so immediately.

Take a stand: Contact your Representative in the House and urge her/him to vote against HR 2389.

You can contact your Representative through her/his website or through the Legislator/Media Lookup by Zip Code.

Below you will find a sample letter regarding this issue. Please feel free to adapt it to your voice, and to add any additional information of importance to you:

Dear Representative ________________,

I urge you to vote against the Pledge Protection Act (HR 2389), which would strip all federal courts, including the highest court in our nation, the U.S. Supreme Court, of the ability to decide the Constitutionality of the Pledge of Allegiance or its recitation. This legislation was defeated in the House Judiciary Committee so it is improper for the House leadership to bring this measure to the floor now.

Our nation's founders deliberately kept the Constitution free of references to a god. In this tradition, the original Pledge written in 1892 and developed as an expression of patriotism -- not religious faith -- also made no mention of a god. As an American who does not believe in the existence of a god, I strongly oppose the efforts of some members of Congress to unite the concepts of faith and patriotism, thereby making me a second-class citizen.

This legislation, attacking my Constitutional right to challenge the use of "under God" through the courts, also violates the separation of powers. Congress must not encroach on the judiciary's power to resolve Constitutional issues. Without such checks and balances, the rights of minorities guaranteed in the Bill of Rights would be meaningless; the Constitution could not be enforced; and a tyranny of the majority would ensue.

Sincerely,
Your signature