First Amendment

Originally Published January 30, 2010; Last Updated August 26, 2010; Last Republished August 26, 2010:

Last week our Supreme Court decided Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, a monstrous 5-4 opinion unconvincingly¹ characterizing our corporations as associations of citizens entitled to First Amendment political speech rights, limited only by disclaimer and disclosure requirements.

The majority seems to have conflated the regulatory process applicable to our corporations with the political process applicable to our citizens. Evidently, an interest to protect is sufficient for the majority to guarantee our corporations First Amendment rights in our political process.

That said one can only hope for such a simplified, expansive, and unlimited approach for all First Amendment case law—call it the return to ancient First Amendment principles approach to First Amendment case law.

Blog:

• UPDATED 05/03/2010 ProPublica, Contrary to Citizens United Opinion, Campaign Contribution Records Lack Transparency.

Web:

• UPDATED 08/26/2010 New Yorker, Covert Operations.

  Jane Mayer provides a mini-tutorial on the mischief our billionaires create (literally) behind networks of coordinated corporate facades and fronts—it can be very difficult to determine who's funding the "chants of our cults" and for what purpose.

  Penetration of the facades and fronts usually depreciates and tarnishes much of the good our billionaires accomplish—there's a transparent message here somewhere.

  • NPR, The Brothers Koch: Rich, Political And Playing To Win. Fresh Air Terry Gross talks with Mayer about her New Yorker article.

• UPDATED 04/04/2010 UPI, U.S. Supreme Court: Wallowin' again in that ol' soft money.

  The Supreme Court's recent decision in Citizens created a disparity between the now unlimited spending permitted by unions and corporations and the still limited "soft money" spending by political parties.

  Litigants are expected to ask our Supreme Court to eliminate the current "soft money" limitation in time for the next election—bet you can't wait.

  Of course Congress could act to neutralize the corrosive perception, if not reality, that our politicians are bought and paid for before, during, and after their "public service"² to our nation.

• UPDATED 03/10/2010 ProPublica, Higher Corporate Spending on Election Ads Could Be All but Invisible.

• UPDATED 03/10/2010 WP, Chief Justice John Roberts: Scene at State of Union 'very troubling'.

  Our chief justice does the Supreme Court and our nation a disservice by engaging in polemics with respect to the courts recent decisions.

  It may be news to a youthful and energetic chief justice but that's what a Supreme Court justice does—sit, study, listen, and decide hopefully with dispassionate interest and without political polemics².

  It’s unlikely Supreme Court justices can successfully and simultaneously engage the role of polemic politician and credible Supreme Court justice without doing harm to themselves and the Court.

-----notes-----

1. Many have viewed the decision as an unreasoned political polemic, which further dulls our Supreme Court's patina of credibility.

2. The definition of "public service" appears to be raising money for the next election and not voting inconsistent with interests necessary to raise that money.

Wonder what the relationship is, if any, between this definition of "public service" and the recent harmful shocks to our financial, economic, and social systems equilibrium?

Assuming unconstrained "soft money" enables each political party to offset the "public service" of the other will such offsetting increase or decrease the frequency and magnitude of the harmful shocks to our financial, economic, and social systems equilibrium?

Originally Published July 04, 2010; Last Updated July 07, 2010; Last Republished July 04, 2010:

Today America celebrated its officially recognized day of independence, July 04, 2010.

Web: UPDATED 07/07/2010 UPI Photos, Fourth of July celebration

UPDATED 08/18/21010 Comments have been disabled.
UPDATED 08/14/21010 Comments have been enabled.

Comments have been temporarily disabled pending the passing of a sustained and focused spam attack.

Originally Published December 13, 2009; Last Updated June 28, 2010; Last Republished June 28, 2010:

Our Supreme Court has begun what promises to be a fascinating decades long journey aimed at trying to rebalance religious speech and related concepts.

Its lastest case Christian Legal Society (CLS) v. Martinez (wma)¹ (Hastings Law School; 08-1371) presents the question

"Whether the Ninth Circuit erred when it held, directly contrary to the Seventh Circuit's decision in Christian Legal Society v. Walker, 453 F.3d 853 (7th Cir. 2006), that the Constitution allows a state law school to deny recognition to a religious student organization because the group requires its officers and voting members to agree with its core religious viewpoints."--Supreme Court, CLS--

CLS’s strategic litigation² in Martinez (Hastings) asserts free speech and religious belief principles should trump establishment principles entitling its student organization to Hastings' financial and sponsorship support—no says Hastings, because you discriminate against member and leadership roles based on sexual orientation.

Web:

• Reuters, Supreme Court rules against Christian group that bars gays
• UPI, U.S. Supreme Court: Can Scripture trump non-discrimination law?

-----notes-----

1. See also Ninth Circuit case Kent School District v. Truth

2. UPDATED 12/13/2009 The litigation comes at a time when some major monotheistic religions have become synonymous with pedophilia, demand declines, rapid changes in individuals' religious preferences, competition for converts, and restructure of traditional institutions of religion.

Let us remember too that our young guardians are currently dying in two discretionary conflicts—let our policymakers immediately cease these discretionary conflicts and stop bring our guardians home in coffins.

YouTube:

• History of Memorial Day

Web: UPI Pictures, Memorial Day 2010 Highlights

Originally Published February 16, 2008; Last Updated May 22, 2010; Last Republished May 22, 2010:

Danish newspapers should continue publishing the cartoons parodying the violence advocated in the name of the prophet Mohammad until Danish authorities have locked up all those using violence to suppress ideas they find offensive.

Muslim clerics and followers of the prophet Mohammad, in Denmark and elsewhere need a different message. Advocating or using violence on behalf of the prophet Mohammad is a brain-dead message and strategy—whether to suppress speech, cartoons or the film Submission.

Not everybody thinks that rocking, reciting, and chanting the Koran until you're brain dead is a good idea!

The controversial cartoons that were published and republished by Danish newspapers (and others) can be viewed by clicking on the below published cartoon:

Web:

• UPDATED 05/22/2010 Zapiro's Website, Cartoon - Prophet Muhammad on the couch.

  A new prophet Mohammad cartoon provokes senseless and useless outrage—this one depicting the prophet Mohammad (aka Muhammad) lying on a psychiatrist's couch saying:

  "OTHER Prophets have followers with a sense of humour!..."

• UPDATED 05/13/2010 FLaw, A Cartoonist Faces Backlash, in Sweden and the U.S., for Depicting Mohammed as a Dog: The First Amendment Lessons.
• UPDATED 03/10/2010 NYT, Pennsylvania Woman Tied to Plot on Cartoonist.
• UPDATED 10/28/2009 CSM, FBI arrests two Chicago men for Danish terror plot.

• UPDATED 10/27/2009 CSM, Islamic countries push a global 'blasphemy' law.

  It might not be obvious to some followers of Islam but the world in general and America in particular has had quite a bit of experience with "blasphemy laws" to nefarious affect and effect.

  Stated differently, if Islam is beneficial to people it will not need blasphemy laws, promises of seventy-two virgins in heaven, suicide-bombers, jihadists, jihad wars, suppression of critical speech, physical violence, censorship, filters, repression, coercion, or ignorance¹ to protect and perpetuate it.

  If on the other hand Islam (or other religions) proves not to be beneficial to people it will need all of the above and more to protect and perpetuate it.

• UPDATED 02/19/2008 CSM, Republished Danish cartoon of prophet Muhammad ignites tensions

• UPDATED 02/17/2008 BBC, Danish MPs refuse cartoon apology Danes tell the Iranians to fuck off, diplomatically of course: "If anyone needs to apologise for freedom of speech, human rights, imprisonments, executions and lack of democracy, it is the Iranians."--Villy Soevndal--

  Kudos to the Danes!

• UPI, Muslim clerics upset about cartoon revival

-----notes-----

1. Lacking access to education and uncensored and unfiltered ideas—inhibited or impeded in freedom of thought, judgment, and decision.

Originally Published October 14, 2008; Last Updated May 21, 2010; Last Republished May 21, 2010:

"Experts say U.S. teenagers who post nude photos of themselves on the Internet or send them out in e-mails do not realize how public they can become."--UPI--

Wonder if our teens do realize how public their nudity is and are simply rejecting the alleged "protection" which they perceive as intended to shame them¹ into rejecting their body and sexuality?

How better to illustrate this “shaming” than for a Newark, Ohio (City-Data for Newark, OH) prosecutor² to file criminal charges against teens for sending a nude likeness of themselves (wonder if our First Amendment applies)?

Blog:

• UPDATED 12/31/2009 LSSU, 2010 Banished Words List.

  Lake Superior State University, Word Banishment Committee students have included "sexting" (sexy cellular phone texting) on its Banned Word List for 2010.

  Topping the popular 35^th annual list of the top 15 misused, over-used and generally useless words was "shovel-ready".

• UPDATED 03/28/2009 ZDNet, Girls sue DA who threatened them over bra photos.
• UPDATED 03/27/2009 Wired, ACLU Sues Prosecutor Over 'Sexting' Child Porn Charges. Includes comments from Skumanick.

Web:

• UPDATED 05/21/2010 FLaw, Suit returns Pa. 'sexting' district to spotlight.

  Teen, whose cell phone was confiscated by Tunkhannock Area High School Principal Gregory Ellsworth and given to then Wyoming County District Attorney George Skumanick Jr. sues school district.

  The cell phone contained the naked likeness of the teen, which Skumanick used to unsuccessfully threaten the teen with prosecution (a group of parents and teens sued Skumanick for declaratory relief to eliminate the threat).

  The teen likens the principal's seizure of her cell phone to peering into her bedroom window—it's more like conducting a non-consensual strip search of the teen.

  Kudos to the teen for reminding our school administrators that gaining a world-class quality education does not entail surrendering your constitutional rights.

  Our policymakers and school administrators should focus more on ensuring our teens receive a world-class education and less on their naked likeness.

• UPDATED 05/11/2010 UPI, 'Sexting' teen allegedly stabbed mom.

  The judge appears to be using a peculiar definition of "discipline"—assaulting the teen with a broom⁵!

  Wonder why the judge didn't call the teen's stabbing, after she was assaulted with a broom, "self-defense"?

• UPDATED 04/17/2010 UPI, 'Sexting' at 2 Maryland schools probed.

  The teen-teen sexting shenanigans just keep rising along with the blood pressure of our police, prosecutors, parents, and school administrators.

  Guess it's too much to expect all the teen-teen sexting will just be ignored. Instead focus on teaching our teens how to learn, including how to safely learn about and discover their unique sexuality?

  But, it's difficult to understand how someone that hyperventilates about teen-teen sexting could teach our teens much beyond how to repress their sexuality?

• UPDATED 04/16/2010 UPI, 4 Calif. boys cited for alleged 'sexting'.

  "A sheriff's department school resource officers report names "sexting" the top problem in San Bernardino County schools..."--UPI--

  If it were only true that sexting was San Bernardino County schools top problem...

• UPDATED 03/30/2010 Findlaw, Julie Hilden The U.S. Court Of Appeals for the Third Circuit Issues an Encouraging Ruling in a First Amendment Case About Teen "Sexting". An update of the original case, which prosecutor Skumanick appealed after the lower court ruled in favor of our teens.

  The Third Circuit Court of Appeals (TCCA) ruled in favor of our partially naked teen and dismissed as "moot" to the swimsuit and underwear clad teens.

  Hilden argues the appellate court should have included all teens in its ruling as the same or similar fact pattern is likely to recur in the future.

  In any event our sexting teens are not required to choose between a prosecutor approved moral or gender class and criminal prosecution.

• UPDATED 02/18/2010 UPI, Wash. teens in court for sexting case.

  In addition to using software to ensure digital objects expire in due course it might be useful for our teens to create a fact based index of individuals with an objectively verifiable history of harassment and intimidation aimed at inflicting harm on others, whether any harm actually occurs. Call it the Golden Rule Index Wiki:

  • GRIW ID 127693: David Dumb Ass: On January 20, 2009 David D. Ass sent a nude photo to at least 13 others without the permission of the individual depicted in the photo – distribution of photo had no apparent purpose other than inflicting emotional distress on the person depicted in the photo (see UPI, Wash. teens in court for sexting case)
  • GRIW ID 127693-1 On February 18, 2010 David D. Ass was charged with telephone harassment.
  • GRIW ID 127693-13 On March 02, 2013 David D. Ass stated that he did not want to harm Bonnie Bare Ass and has apologized to her. He has agreed to pay and is paying Bonnie royalties for the rest of his life on the estimated number of times that Bonnie’s nude photo will be displayed during Bonnie’s lifetime or the photo is proven nonextant, whichever occurs first.
  • GRIW ID 127693-203 On March 02, 2087 David D. Ass is no longer...

  Others can consult the index to ensure they understand an individual's harassment and intimidation propensity aimed at inflicting harm on another.

  It's no longer necessary to await our authorities, with their meager resources, to provide a criminal record—if an individual is intentionally harming another, others should know about that harm and who is responsible for inflicting it whether its legal or illegal.

  Then instead of asking do I want this on the front page of the New York Times people can begin asking do I want this in the Golden Rule Index.

  A sort of Wikileaks for individuals (Wikileaks is to nations what the Golden Rule Index Wiki is to individuals).

• UPDATED 12/24/2009 UPI, Nude photo of teen disrupts high school.

  One wonders how many of these reports will precede the report that parents, police, prosecutors, principals, priests, and preachers et al. have stopped getting excited and exercised about teenage sexting.

• UPDATED 12/17/2009 CSM, How to keep your teen safe on the Internet.

  ...the old fashion way—talking to the teens even when you're utterly convinced they're not listening.

  The article includes a link to a Federal Trade Commission Publication, Net Cetera: Chatting with Kids About Being Online.

• UPDATED 12/15/2009 UPI, 15 percent of teens may be sexting
  • PewInternet, Teens and Sexting Survey

  • U.S. Census Statistical Abstracts; Section 24

    The total number of cellular text messages has exponentially increased from 2.1 billion in 2003 to 110.4 billion in 2008. (see UPI, Texting Up Newspapers Down).

• UPDATED 08/04/2009 Reuters, "Sexting" craze on the rise among children⁴.

  Our wonderful teens might want to check out (or write) software that enables them to encapsulate their sexting activity into a self-expiring object (e.g. "Vanish").

  In this way it will be more difficult for sexting activity, that give many adults apoplexy and our religious crowd infarction, to outlast the very important "first love" relationships.

  In the event a relationship period exceeds the self-extinguishing sexting activity—more self-extinguishing sexting activity will surely follow.

  Self extinguishing objects have the added feature of enabling our teens to estimate the length of their relationships, a valuable skill to learn.

• UPDATED 07/14/2009 UPI, Houston schools may ban 'sexting'.

  It's unlikely that any school district has the authority to ban sexting and even less likely, the ability to enforce such a ban.

  Hopefully the Houston Independent School District does a better job teaching our children than making policy restricting their expressions.

• UPDATED 05/15/2009 BBC, Alarm bells ring over "sexting". Finally, the debate appears to be focusing on educating our wonderful teens; not punishing them or suppressing their quite normal and natural sexuality; or shaming them for self-expressions (however inept) of their sexuality.

  It's a perfect opportunity to reflect back healthy attitudes in response to their initial efforts to develop and test their sexuality.

  Let's not pretend that a healthy sexuality will develop by suppressing or reflecting back criminal charges for their expressions of their sexuality.

  Or far worse explicitly or implicitly teach or communicate to our wonderful teens that developing their healthy sexuality is in any way connected or dependent on the usage of their naked likeness by another person—it is not!

• UPDATED 05/04/2009 Reuters, Safe "sexting?" No such thing, teens warned. The article states but does not provide any supporting data or studies on how sexting can damage our girls’ futures?

  It cites Vanessa Hudgens' semi-nude photo becoming public, public humiliation, harassment, or even sexual assault as dangerous consequences but again provides no supporting data.

  Supporting data is important because we want to ensure sexting is not used as a pretext (attempted pun) for continuing oppressive stereotypes about a woman’s body and sexuality.

  If a woman is being sexually assaulted it's not because she is sexting and to imply that it is perpetuates a very dangerous and harmful stereotype—that a woman is responsible for provoking their sexual attackers! Same with harassment! It's not clear how a naked photo humiliates—unless you first infer all the dangerous and harmful stereotypes about a woman's body—then you can justify all oppression of women, including forcing them to wear a burka, so their body is opaque and does not provoke!

  Most do not want harm to come to our teen children from sexting, but perpetuating stereotypes seems much more harmful (e.g. suicide because her naked likeness is public). One hopes someday when we read stories of a boy/girlfriend posting a naked photo of their former girl/boyfriend our response will be what an asshole—not to tell our girls how shameful it is that they are exposing their bodies and then make general unsubstantiated statements about “dangerous consequences”!

• UPDATED 05/01/2009 UPI, Sexting at middle school investigated. It seems like Virginia is taking a more educational and welcomed approach to sexting?

  Assuming the police investigate to ensure our children are not being harmed, exploited, or abused and that the sexting is typical teenage sexual shenanigans, silliness, and stupidity then education is always the solution set.

  Coercive and threatening indoctrination, arresting, and prosecution of our teens for sexting is not in the solutions set.

• UPDATED 04/02/2009 UPI, Canadian teens low on sex, booze, tobacco. Wonder if they're sexting less, too?
• UPDATED 03/31/2009 UPI, Judge: Teens can't be charged for photos. Download the judge's order. A hearing on the injunction has been scheduled for June 2, 2009.
• UPDATED 03/28/2009 MTV, Teens Could Get Hit With Child-Pornography Charges For Sexting.

• UPDATED 03/28/2009 NYT, Judge Sees ‘Serious’ Issues in Cellphone Photos Case.

  “It seems like the children seemed to be the victims and the perpetrators here,...How does that make sense?”--NYT quoting District Court Judge James M. Munley--

  It doesn't make sense, regardless of how nakedness or the physical position depicted in the girls' non-coercive self-shot-image.

  A prosecutor, regardless of how well intentioned, IS NOT qualified and should not be running human sexuality workshops to teach our young girls how to understand, appreciate, and protect their hormone saturated body. Especially a male prosecutor threatening coercive criminal prosecution—talk about obscene—it’s not the teen girls who are the goofballs!

  CBS Julie Chen Interviews DA Skumanick

• UPDATED 03/27/2009 SFGate, NJ girl, 14, arrested after posting nude pics.

• UPDATED 03/27/2009 ACLU, ACLU Sues Wyoming County D.A. For Threatening Teenage Girls With Child Pornography Charges Over Photos Of Themselves (3/25/2009).

  Kudos to the ACLU and the very brave teen girls Marissa Miller, Grace Kelly, and Nancy for filing a lawsuit (pdf) to stop the abusive threat of prosecution by Pennsylvania prosecutor George P. Skumanick.

  The threat of prosecution may say more about Skumanick than the teenage antics of Marissa, Grace, and Nancy?

  • NYT, Students Sue Prosecutor in Cellphone Photos Case
  • CBS News, Sexting Girls Facing Porn Charge Sue D.A.
• UPDATED 02/18/2009 UPI, Boy could face kid porn charge for sexting. It appears the adults (who else but our (over)zealous school administrators³) are shoe-horning a teenage playboy phenomena into a criminal act—breathe, deep breaths...wonder how much, if any, of this is "agenda" or persistent Puritan psychology masquerading as "protection"?
• UPDATED 02/18/2009 NPR, 'Sexting': Racy Teen Messaging Could Be Illegal

• UPDATED 02/15/2009 Newsweek, Teens, Nude Photos and the Law

  "Judging from the sexting prosecutions in Pennsylvania, Ohio and Indiana this year, it's clear that the criminal-justice system is too blunt an instrument to resolve a problem that reflects more about the volatile combination of teens and technology than about some national cybercrime spree. Parents need to remind their teens that a dumb moment can last a lifetime in cyberspace. But judges and prosecutors need to understand that a lifetime of cyberhumiliation shouldn't be grounds for a lifelong real criminal record."--Dalia Lithwick"

• UPDATED 12/11/2009 UPI, Sociologist: Few teens 'sexting'

  "No one brought it up [sexting],'' she [researcher C.J. Pascoe] said. "I had them go through their last 10 messages, their last 10 photos and I never saw it."...--UPI--

• UPDATED 12/11/2008 IW, Teens Post, Send Nude Pix As Sexy Presents
• Nude pix can mean trouble for teens

Res:

• Midwest Teen Sex Show (ORGASMS - Midwest Teen Sex Show #19)

-----notes-----

1. This also seems like a perpetuation of the very harmful logic that says a person is responsible for provoking another simply by expression.

Usually the logic is applied in the context of a female "provoking" a male into sexual assault by virtue of her naked likeness or nakedness.

One of the most effective ways to protect our teens from sexual predators is to ensure they develop a strong and healthy sexual identity—repressing our teens' sexuality and simultaneously teaching them to develop a strong and healthy sexual identity are mutually exclusive.

Shots of Britney's and Paris' vagina going viral on the Internet seem like confirmation a reminder of how much we have to learn—or how much their publicists have learned?

2. Kenneth Oswalt is Licking County's current prosecutor.

3. How long before our school administrators are conducting dragnet strip searches for students' cellphones and inspecting the contents?

• UPDATED 04/14/2009 see UPI, High court to consider strip-search case and NYT, Strip-Search Case Tests How Far Schools Can Go on April 21, 2009 at 10 a.m and U.S. Supreme Court Safford Unified School District #1, et al., Petitioners v. April Redding

  • UPDATED 06/25/2009 Opinion Safford Unified School Dist. #1 v. Redding.

    Fortunately, our Supreme Court upholds our students' reasonable expectation of privacy not to have their undergarments searched; unfortunately the court still fails to grant our students full "probable cause" 4th Amendment protection against school searches, opting for a lesser standard. Additionally, it continues to provide school administrators with "qualified immunity" for all but the most shockingly offensive illegal searches (see BBC, Strip-search of US girl illegal).

  • UPDATED 04/21/2009 Oral argument transcript - when Supreme Court justices begin asking, what's next cavity searches, you've probably cross a threshold.

    Intrusive humiliating strip-searching our children (here Savana Redding) at school seems like indicia of disorder not order especially as here little or no investigation was conducted before the knee jerk strip-search looking for ibuprofen!

    But consider whether it is permissible to MWave scan our students when you suspect they're "popping" ibuprofen or you just want to recover their cell-phone?

Recently a 14 year-old female student was searched and arrested after she was caught texting in class (not sexting) and wouldn't surrendering her cellphone to the teacher or authorities—you'll be happy to know the phone was recovered from the girl's clothing (see Girl arrested after texting in class)!

Are these confrontational encounters frequent? Necessary? Helpful? Creating more problems than they solve? The result of ? ? They certainly are offensive—perhaps Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas misspoke when saying "students do not shed their rights at the schoolhouse gate" (Tinker v. Des Moines School District)? Wonder what would have happened if the young girl had been sexting instead of texting—or talking?!

The young girl can take some solace in the fact that shortly all, students and teacher, will be texting "in class"—it'll be called learning not disruption!

4. British teens have the benefit of a slightly more progressive healthcare system than American teens.

England's National Health Service Sheffield recently told teens "an orgasm a day keeps the doctor away"³—and you thought it was an apple.

Information about the Sheffield self pleasuring publication, can be found here.

Unfortunately American still has a tendency to pressure, intimidate, and fire its healthcare professions, parents, and teachers for daring to teach our children to masturbate.

America is changing and the debate over sexting is commingled in that change.

5. Based on the short article this appears to be yet another preventable incident, in the growing number of such incidents, where our parent(s) lack adequate support and resources (toolkit) to effectively raise our children (hint: the toolkit does not include a broom or knife).

Originally Published March 16, 2010; Last Updated March 18, 2010; Last Republished March 16, 2010:

The United States Army Counter Intelligence Center, Cyber Counterintelligence Assessments Branch authored a special report in March 2008, Wikileaks.org—An Online Reference to Foreign Intelligence Services, Insurgents, or Terrorist Groups? (pdf).

The analyst calls attention to Wikileaks' not insignificant capabilities, though not absolute, for ensuring secure and anonymous free flow of information (transparency)¹. Appropriately enough the report (pdf) is available on Wikileaks.

Surprisingly, the report seems focused on upsetting what it refers to as Wikileaks' center of gravity—trust and anonymity.

One would think the world's premiere advocate and defender of free speech and open society would be trying to ensure and guarantee the center of gravity (and buoyancy) of Wikileaks, another premier advocate and defender of free speech and open society!

Perhaps, our Army has not yet published the report on ways to embrace, support, and improve Wikileaks—if not it should do so ASAP.

Web:

• UPDATED 03/18/2010 NYT, Pentagon Sees a Threat From Online Muckrakers
• Wired, Threat Level, Secret Document Calls Wikileaks ‘Threat’ to U.S. Army

-----notes-----

1. It's interesting to query whether transparency is also necessary and sufficient for sustained elimination of all wars?

If so, our military and intelligence agencies have the most to gain from friction free information flows (transparency).

Publicly arguing for transparency and privately advocating opacity is likely to be as unsuccessful as it is unpersuasive.

A three judge panel from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, reversing its earlier decision, ruled that the phrase "under God" in our Pledge of Allegiance does not violate the Establishment Clause of our First Amendment.

Two members of the panel thought the phrase "under God" when read in a larger historical context simply expresses a non-religious or patriotic secular purpose—placing inalienable rights beyond our government's power.

The majority's unsatisfying attempt to ineffectively secularize the concepts of Creator-God likely reflects its understandable, if unfortunate² reluctance to entangle (weak lemon pun) the court in the ongoing debate over our nation's religious delusion of one nation under God.

Or as the dissenting Circuit Judge Reinhardt¹ more eloquently puts it:

"...Only a desire to change the rules regarding the separation of church and state or an unwillingness to place this court on the unpopular side of a highly controversial dispute regarding both patriotism and religion could explain the decision the members of the majority reach here and the lengths to which their muddled and self-contradictory decision goes in order to reach the result they do..."--Circuit Judge, Reinhardt--

Fortunately, more Americans are engaging the unpopular and controversial debate—eventually the disentanglement of our nation from its religious delusion will be neither unpopular nor controversial.

Web:

• SFGate, Appeals Court says 'Under God' not a prayer
• Findlaw, Newdow v. Rio Linda Union Sch. Dist., No. 05-17257

-----notes-----

1. Reinhardt's dissent simultaneously demonstrates the strength of our Constitution, judiciary, nation, and Americans.

2. On constitutional questions where there exists a low probability that our legislative branch can or will act in remediation of the constitutional issue a high probability of remedial action by our judicial branch is required.

By definition these questions will always be unpopular and controversial, but no less offensive to our beautiful and magnificent Constitution or no less deserving of immediate remediation by a respected and intrepid judicial branch.

Transmutation of the religious phrase "under God" into the a secular patriotic phrase is neither decisive nor intrepid, or constitutional.

It will not be "God" that saves our courts, but rather well reasoned and respected opinions, notwithstanding controversy or popularity.