today the us supreme court denied a california man's suit to remove "under god" from the pledge of allegiance. it invokes an interesting and potentially extremely emotional issue of the separation of church and state (or lack thereof) currently in the us, so i was quite dissapointed that the court ruled on a technicality. they found that he does not have the legal grounds to sue on behalf of his daughter. so the court begged off taking a real decision and wrote it off as a civil custody matter. rather wimpy i feel. but it beats a decision enacted with finality which denies the girl's right not to say "under god."