[Carrie]

I'm torn on this one. It's the pledge to me, but that phrase wasn't *originally* in it. It was added in sometime... in the 60s? I don't remember.
Taking it out would be dissassembling the pledge to *me*, but I suppose putting it in was the same thing to the folks who remembered it not being there.

That being said, public school is all about conditioning.
To gays, to "alternate lifestyles", to anti-business, to anti-trade, feel-good schooling/competition, to gov't control, to politically correct bullshit... why censor out one when you push the rest so hard?

I think the case should be dropped simply because the man behind the suit does NOT attend public school and doesn't have to say the pledge. His daughter, for whom he is supposedly doing this, disagrees with the whole thing, doesn't share his view, and wants him to stop. He tried this in Florida as well and when it didn't fly there, he moved to California where he could toss it in front of the infamous 9th district judges who were more likely to let it through.
This isn't about his daughter, it's about HIM. Since the subject of the suit (the daughter) does not support it and doesn't agree with it, the court should drop it. Period.