>>>I'm not sure I care.
>>You better care if you are going to make the argument it is un-constitutional.
>
>If being the key word. I don't really care what historical documents allow or do not allow when forming an opinion of my own.
>
>>Also, why wasn't a const. convention convened to adopt a specific pledge that did not have the phrase "under God"?
>
>Reconstruction ended in 1877. The two words in question were not added until 1954.
>

I was referring to In God We Trust that appears on money. The two issues are bound together...


>>Actually, one thought is that a bunch of folks slid this one by Eisenhower, that he really was not clued into the issue.
>
>A president not conscious of his surroundings. Why is that not hard to believe.
>
>>>Belief in the Almighty is a fairly concrete, and not accurate with respect to non-monotheists.
>>Then they can choose to ignore. Or, begin the ground work for a const. amendment.
>
>Or start electing better representitives.

Precisely... Let the democratic process work. Don't try going the counter-majoritism route of the courts.