An article citing the reasons the line under god should be removed from the pledge of allegiance.

An article citing the reasons the line under god should be removed from the pledge of allegiance. ...One Nation, Uh, Indivisible...Two words in the Pledge of Allegiance - "under god" - have sparked a firestorm from the schools of California to the halls of the Supreme Court, which will decide next June about the legality of the phrase. In a diverse country with a great variety of religious faiths running the gamut from devoted believers to atheists, issues of government and religion are a touchy subject. However, it is clear that the phrase is unconstitutional, and removing it will restore the Pledge to its original meaning.The most obvious contention against the "under god" clause is that it violates the Constitutional separation of church and state. Mandating young children in public schools to pledge their allegiance to a nation "under god" is an unmistakable confirmation of a governmental belief in god. As the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled, the phrase "under god" is as biased and unconstitutional as would be the phrases "under Zeus," or "under Allah."Pledge Bench - Leice sterAlthough everyone is certainly entitled to their own rights and beliefs, the daily repetition of a phrase establishing a public belief in religion is both insulting to and excluding of atheists.Most of those who believe in a god have no way to understand the exclusion often felt by those who do not. Imagine that instead of confirming the existence of a god, the Pledge specifically denied this belief. If American schoolchildren repeated the phrase, "one nation, under no god whatsoever," every school day the outcry from religious people would be deafening. It seems ludicrous to imagine schools publicly denying the existence of a god; it is just as ludicrous for schools to publicly proclaim the existence of such a god.However, many people, including many prominent politicians, have said that to remove the phrase would be ridiculous...