Mayor orders man removed after he didn't stand for Pledge of Allegiance

[progree]

144. Thank you, I will. I always fight for quixotic causes like separation of church and state

I'm sure the FFRF has competent attorneys that know about all this as much as you do, and if they make a big hoo-hah about the blatant theocratic declaration in the Pledge, that is absolutely fantastic from where I sit. (I have read your #134 carefully).

Anyway, somebody has to litigate this Winter Garden case -- if it comes to that -- and I would happily donate to that.

Any way to resist theocracy, be it lawsuits, protests, boycotts, legislation, whatever, is a better use of time and money, to me, then a lot of what I see going on here. I'm for any way to get the message out why and how some of us feel discriminated against and angered by having our First Amendment violated.

I'm sure they will also bring in the West Virginia State Board of Ed. v. Barnette case (U.S. Supreme Court, 1943, as you've mentioned above, decided on free speech grounds) -- so they don't end up losing the lawsuit -- if it comes to that -- by solely making an Establishment Clause argument.

I'm not too familiar with FFRF, but I have been reading Church and State, the magazine of Americans United for Separation of Church and State (A.U.) for about 3 years, and I think they know the "lay of the land". https://www.au.org/church-state

I'm about to donate a large amount (for me) of money -- enough that it hurts -- to some U.S. Senate candidate that is close in the polls -- knowing full well it's a quixotic gesture on my part because I know with 99.9999999999% certainty that it's not going to change any outcome.

So is every protest I've ever attended a quixotic exercise.

Just because the courts have ruled in certain ways doesn't mean we shut up and fall in line forever. Just because we're not making progress, and overall going backwards in our fight against theocracy, is only more reason to make waves publicly any way we can.

There have been several reversals of even Supreme Court rulings through history, and legislation, and the constitution itself.

All progressive causes that I can think of started out looking like quixotic exercises by sickos, nuts, whackos, flakes, kooks, and ding-dongs. As Margaret Mead said, "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."

Heck, since we're talking about the Pledge, I was flabbergasted to find out that the U.S. Supreme Court reversed itself in just 3 years on a Pledge case --

from the Minersville School District v. Gobitis (1940) case where they ruled 8-1 that students have to salute the flag and say the Pledge

to the West Virginia State Board of Ed v. Barnette (1943) case where they ruled 6-3 that they did not have to.

May the quixotic litigation go on:

Humanists Challenge Pledge Of Allegiance In N.J., 6/2014 (excerpts)
https://au.org/church-state/june-2014-church-state/au-bulletin/humanists-challenge-pledge-of-allegiance-in-nj

“Public schools should not engage in an exercise that tells students that patriotism is tied to a belief in God,” David Niose, legal director for the American Humanist Association, which is representing the family, told the Los Angeles Times.

The American Humanist Association v. Matawan-Aberdeen Regional School District case was filed in the Superior Court of New Jersey for Monmouth County and rests entirely on provisions in the New Jersey Constitution, including its Equal Protection Clause.

Students do have the legal right to opt out of the Pledge, but the family alleges that their child had been harassed at school for refusing to recite it.

(a similar case -- also based on equal protection -- didn't fare well with the Massachusetts Supreme Court (July 2014) - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brad-reid/massachusetts-supreme-cou_b_5311538.html )