Why do you just assume that “religious moderates” don’t side with atheists on this issue? Is it because you have a concept of a spectrum of religious beliefs, with the less extreme believers sheltering those on the extremist end of the spectrum?

But is this really an accurate a picture of the varieties of religious experience in the US?

This might be a good time to point out that Jehovah’s Witnesses oppose “under God”, as do Mennonites, Quakers, and evangelicals of the “Sojourners” stripe. Rev. Barry Lynn, president of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, filed an amicus brief in the Newdow case.

As far as taking the lead, Mennonite Edward Myers a sued his sons’ Virginia school district in federal court over the pledge:

Devoted to God, Not the Pledge

“

To me, it’s heresy,” [Meyers] said. “Government is about keeping civil order. Church is about loving and worshiping God. You don’t mix . . . loving God because of free choice with something that’s about duty and where you were born.”
.

Nisbet, Mooney, Brayton, Mehta, and the guy from Red State Rabble have all said so, numerous times. They must be right, because they say they are.

…okay, so [/strawman], but it seems clear to me that there are times when the moderately religious don’t share our goals, and we shouldn’t hold back at those times simply because mocking them will make them feel like they’re being mocked.

There are many who respect separation of church and state and who are as offended by the ruling as atheists. Why do we rarely see them taking the lead on these issues?

Because they aren’t actually as offended…?

I don’t have a huge problem with the silence. But the Crofts are absolutely right with their Pledge case. That is blatant religion being forced upon everyone.

I agree.

On a side note, I’m glad the atheist couple is fighting this battle, but why are there no religious people beating them to the punch? There are many who respect separation of church and state and who are as offended by the ruling as atheists. Why do we rarely see them taking the lead on these issues?

I wish I could answer that. My best guess is there aren’t that many of them in Texas. I think if this happened in a more liberal state they’d come out. Then again, if it were a more liberal state, I don’t think the problem would exist in the first place…….

And yet, somehow, that doesn’t seem to be good enough… because the point was never about those who want to pray in the first place, but rather about forcing the mandatory participation and attendance on those who don’t.

Are they afraid god won’t bless the state if they don’t give the almighty a shout out in homeroom, or something? What’s the point of these inane laws? Don’t TX state congessmen have any bigger, read that “actual”, problems to solve?
I always hate this kind of “feel good” legislation. It’s just smoke and mirrors to dupe the public into thinking the politicians care about their so-called values. But this doesn’t even feel good except to the theocrats who want to drag us, kicking and screaming, back to the 15th century.