Once again we have an assault on the Pledge of Allegiance by a district judge on the Left Coast.  As you remember an atheist named Michael Newdow tried to use his daughter to file suit against the phrase "under God" in our Pledge of Allegiance.  Disregard the fact that he didn't even have custody of his daughter and that she didn't have a problem saying the phrase, Mr. Newdow has gone on his own witch hunt trying to eradicate any kind of religious expression.  Since the Supreme Court refused to hear his case because of the situation with his daughter, he found two set of parents who say their children are offended by saying the phrase "under God."  Once again the case is headed to the Supreme Court.  Now, how important is it to have judges who will interpret the Constitution and not legislate from the bench?

President Bush has nominated Judge John Roberts to the Supreme Court as the next Chief Justice.  I have watched the hearings this past week with great interest.  President Bush believes that judges should be originalists and conservative when it comes to deciding cases that come before the Supreme Court.  No one is completely sure about Judge Roberts but he seems to be an honorable and decent man.  He says he will decide cases by the rule of law. 

Will a Chief Justice John Roberts vote to take out the phrase "under God" in our Pledge of Allegiance?  I don't know but I hope not.  The secular humanists and atheists know that they cannot get laws passed that articulate their agenda, so they have to rely on the courts.  Most people are opposed to partial-birth abortion, yet some judges have allowed the gruesome procedure to stand.  Most people in this country are opposed to same-sex marriage yet the Massachusetts Supreme Court has allowed the practice in their state setting up a battle in the United States Supreme Court.  And all of us know that 90 plus percent  believe that the phrase "under God" should stay in our Pledge of Allegiance.  Yet now we have a district judge in California agreeing with atheist Michael Newdow that we have been breaking the law for years when we mention "God" in our Pledge.

I hope that you will pray for our country.  Our Constitution says in the 1st amendment that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."  That's it, my friends.  Do you see the term "separation of church and state" anywhere in that phrase?  You're right, it is not there.  Yet that is the term that we hear constantly by those who would seek to sanitize religious expression in the public square today.    By the way when the framers were debating the 1st amendment and its wording, they used religion and religious denomination interchangeably.  They were not interested in a separation of God and state, only that no denomination would become the official denomination of our country.  To say that the founders wanted God to be a four letter word in the public arena is to be disingenuous.  We have turned the 1st amendment upside down and those who would like to see a secular state constantly emphasizing the establishment clause to the exculsion of the free exercise clause.  I talked with a leader of the Americans United for the Separation of Church and State who actually believes that reciting the pledge and having the phrase "In God We Trust" on our school walls is violating the second commandment in the Bible.  I personally find that mind boggling. 

As your pastor, I will continue to preach God's Word and encourage you to be salt and light in a dark and decaying world.  We must take serious the command of making disciples that Jesus instructed us to do in the Great Commission.  We need to pray for our leaders in government and we must participate in the process.  Otherwise, one day it will be a crime to speak the name of Jesus in public except within the four walls of our church buildings.  Remember the Psalmist, "Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord."  Pray that we will be one nation "under God."