I was so sorry to hear this tragic news. Galina was my staff worker and small group leader for my DTS School in St. Petersburg, Russia in 1997-98. I am so sad for her and Valodya’s loss. Tears for you and prayers… http://www.canoe.ca/LondonNews/01n2.html
Evidently, the judge who ruled the Pledge of Allegience unconstitutional has already put the ruling “on hold indefinitely.” What the heck does that mean? Why did he do this?
Check the story out:http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0627Pledge27-ON.html and http://www.cnn.com/2002/LAW/06/27/pledge.allegiance/index.html which goes into a bit more about why this happened…
My friend Jim (who is Canadian btw) seems to agree with a recent court ruling (see http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A49515-2002Jun26.html for the story) that the phrase “under God” should be taken out of the U.S. Pledge of Allegiance or alternatively that the Pledge should cease to be recited. I wrote up some thoughts on this matter as well as some pertinent historical information that some may find interesting.
I personally don’t really care if the phrase "under God" is part of our Pledge of Allegience, because I believe one can be intensely patriotic without being religious. Still, the story needs to be set straight. Read on…
From what I’ve heard the recent ruling is based on the claim that the phrasing "under God" constitutes religious influence and is therefore unconsitutional because of the separation of church and state clause. Well, the phrase "separation of church and state" is not found in the US Constitution! It was taken from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to a body of church elders in response to fears they expressed that the wording of the 1st Amendment would allow too easily for governmental control over their religious freedoms. They expressed their fears in a letter to Jefferson who responded with assurances that there would be a clear "separation of church and state" and they needn’t fear governmental control because the intent of the 1st Amendment is to protect them against said governmental controls. Basically, the original context of the phrase "separation of church and state" was that religious freedoms would be protected from governmental regulation and not that the government needed protecting from religion. (For details on the letters exchanged between Jefferson and the church elders: http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detail.php?ResourceID=9 )
I think the difficulty lies in modern culture where some people feel that ANY religious reference in a public institution is forcing the state (or member of the state) to participate in a particular religion or religious element. I don’t know that this scenario was considered at all back when the Constitution was written because it was generally assumed that most citizenry was at least mildly religious and predominantly Jewish or Christian. Times have indeed changed and perhaps our Constitution (and other symbols of our nation) needs to reflect that change. Personally I don’t know. As a Christian myself, my judgement can be clouded and I find it difficult (and largely counterproductive) to separate my deep personal beliefs from other aspects of life including government, education, foreign policy, politics, and so forth.
All of that is not to say that there shouldn’t BE a separation of church and state. I think it is agreed to on (almost) every side that there should be. But the meaning and context of the origin of the phrase has been quite lost in the modern debate (I daresay it has been turned around 180 degrees). Furthermore, the phrase is used so frequently that it is a common misconception to believe that it is found in our constitution when it is not. You can reference the full text of the U.S. Constitution here.
This may not seem noteworthy in that lots of women (and men) bake all the time. But not me. I almost never bake. I think I have baked cookies maybe 10 times since we got married almost 4 years ago. But tonight I baked banana bread! Again, probably something easy, but I’m very proud of my baking accomplishment. While the banana bread was baking, I also made rice krispy treats - YUM! Ok, applause please 
We hadn’t done any hiking since mid-May. We did a fairly short hike on Saturday and it felt like it did way back at the beginning… consistency is the key but keys seem to have a way of disappearing when you need them! The heat doesn’t help much either… we hiked at 6 am and it was still uncomfortably hot for that kind of activity. Ah well, at least I’m going to the pool occasionally and swimming laps while I’m there. I guess that should count for something, right?
Check out Steve’s new look since he got glasses on Saturday. Hopefully they will help alleviate eye strain so he won’t get headaches so frequently. The eye doc diagnoses him with mild far-sightedness, which means his eyes are straining whenever he is reading or working on the computer. Anyhow, here is the new “smarter-looking” Steve:
