I disagree with the thrust of the July 3 editorial written by Colin Sutker. I have read newspaper/magazine articles, heard this topic discussed on the radio, TV and even in Congress. My beliefs aside, I do not understand why people are so quick to remove the word "God" from any form of communication because it's "unconstitutional." We have a choice to recite the pledge or not. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on that issue.
No matter how you cut it, for hundreds of years, billions of people from many religions have believed "God" is a part of their lives. You're saying that if the government says (through a constitutional amendment) "under God" must remain in the Pledge of Allegiance, that's OK. I have no doubt, if that's what it takes, that a constitutional amendment will be adopted and quickly, but you are missing the point. Ensuring that the use of the words "under God" is constitutional is not going to change a thing.
People like you just don't get it. God is and always will be a part of everyone's life whether you realize it, understand it or even want him in your life. I don't want a generic way of life (trying to be everything to everybody) fostered by a government that is out of step with the people it represents. Thankfully, we will never be able to reach that end, but we continue to take little bites out what many of us hold dear -- a belief that there is a God and we are a nation under God. The president and Congress made it abundantly clear as to how they stand regarding the 9th Court's ruling. We need to remain focused on what's right and true and not on what's politically correct.
Stephen Stoddard
UNC-CH Facilities Services Division
