|
UUA President Issues Statement on Pledge Ruling
(Boston, MA - June 27, 2002) On June 26, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance violate the constitutional separation of church and state. The ruling stated that the use of these words was an "impermissible endorsement of religion."
In response to the court's ruling, the Rev. William G. Sinkford, president of the UUA, today issued this statement:
"America is increasingly becoming more religiously pluralistic. This pluralism is a blessing. For many, the language of God is an affirmation, but this language does not resonate with all Americans. The ruling of the federal appeals court in California, which undoubtedly will be appealed, raises questions about what it means to be an American, to be patriotic. The question is not what metaphor we use for the holy; the question is what commitment we make to justice.
"It is important to understand that the court's ruling does not strike down the Pledge of Allegiance; it merely says that Congress made a mistake in 1954 when it added the words "under God" to the Pledge. The original Pledge was recited for many decades without any religious reference. We applaud the court's efforts to restore the original Pledge."
For further information on this issue, please contact John Hurley, UUA director of information, at 617-948-6131 or jhurley@uua.org.
Related Media Coverage and Information
- Religious
leaders not united on pledge
By Virginia Culver, The Denver Post - July 7, 2002
- One
Nation, Under God(s)? The pledge ruling raised a fundamental question: Is
America really monotheistic?
By Rebecca Phillips, beliefnet.com - June 28, 2002
- One Nation,
Divisible, Reacts : Court Puts Pledge Of Allegiance Ruling On Hold
By Frances Grady Taylor, the Hartfort Courant - June 28, 2002
- The
Pledge of Allegiance: A Short History, by Dr. John W. Baer
UU Minister In Pledge Dispute
|