This article needs a correction

After rereading the first line of this article a couple of times, I don't think
it's quite accurate. The article starts:

An atheist seeking to remove the words "under God" from the
Pledge of Allegiance and U.S. currency is taking his arguments
back to a federal appeals court.

I think it would be more accurate if it was written like this:

An atheist seeking to remove the word "God" from the
Pledge of Allegiance and U.S. currency is taking his arguments
back to a federal appeals court.

Because U.S. currency doesn't say "under God." With everyone carrying
a credit card these days some might need a reminder of what American
currency actually says:



Or the sentence could have been written like this and it still would have been
accurate:

An atheist seeking to remove the words "under God" from the
Pledge of Allegiance and also "In God We Trust." from U.S.
currency is taking his arguments back to a federal appeals court.

I believe atheists like Mr. Newdow oppose any use of the term "God" when
it is related to the government because of the establishment clause.
However, I have a hard time buying the argument having these four words,
"In God We Trust," in U.S. currency in fact establishes a religion. Does
having these words on my dollar mean that I must believe in a deity in
order to buy or sell goods in the United States? Of course not.

The second line of the article also seemed poorly worded:

Michael Newdow, a Sacramento doctor and lawyer, sued the Elk Grove
Unified School District in 2000 for forcing public school children to recite
the pledge, saying it was unconstitutional.

Wait a minute! This must be a very authoritative school to force children
to recite the pledge. While I was in school we had Jehovah Witness students
who opted out of saying pledge. I've always thought that one can refuse to
say the pledge for religious purposes.

I wanted to point out the way this article was worded because you can frame
an issue with the words you choose to use. In fact, that is exactly what Mr.
Newdow is arguing. So, if America is going to have a constitutional debate about
the establishment clause we should use the right words. Ok, I know I sound like
Frank Luntz now.