Work Weekend at Winnipesaukee

Earlier this spring, a storm of substantial magnitude hit Lake Winnipesaukee in the Moultonborough area where the Goedecke camp is located. Many trees were blown over, including the three shown above, resting comfortably on the garage of the front house. Amazingly, the manner in which they fell and the support provided by the surrounding trees minimized the damage to the garage. Still, everyone knew that a bullet had been dodged and that these trees needed to be removed before their full weight crashed through the roof. 

Before any work could be done on these trees, though, the Goedecke family suffered an unimaginable tragedy. Alan Goedecke, the youngest of Marilynn's three brothers, was diagnosed with Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease, a malady of unknown origin, without a cure, and which rapidly spreads through the victim's brain causing death, usually within a month or two. Amazingly, Alan accepted this devastating news with absolutely no self pity. With the support of the extended Goedecke family and his deep Christian faith, Alan remained upbeat and in great spirits up until the very end on June 15. 

Alan was passionate about many things, and the Goedecke camp at Lake Winnipesaukee was high on that list. He was almost always there whenever Marilynn and I spent time at the camp. He loved being there, and he always had three or four projects going on or in the planning stage. As the size of his projects grew, so did his tool set.

The first thing to appear was a small Yamaha ATV (possibly bought by Pop Schindler, his father-in-law). That, along with an attached cart, came in handy for transporting all kinds of things around the camp. A decade or so ago, he decided the camp needed a small tractor to for various landscaping projects, so he bought a  Yamaha Kubota. At the time, I thought it was a bit extravagant, but it soon became indispensable. It encouraged everyone to think bigger and attempt larger and more complex projects that required  mechanical muscle. The next generation Goedeckes were always using it to locate, dig up and transport large boulders to the lake to improve the breakwaters.

A couple years ago, Alan got involved in an even bigger project: transforming a residential home in Bedford, NH, into a new home for his church, New Hope Christian Fellowship. While working on that, Alan was presented with the opportunity to buy a piece of equipment much more powerful than the Kubota: a John Deere 310SG backhoe:

I don't recall the specifics of the purchase, only that Alan said that he got a "great deal" on it, that it was useful when building the church and that it would pay for itself the first time that it was needed at the camp. Truer words were never spoken. 

The first time that Pete Goedecke looked at the trees that had fallen on the garage he said, "I can take care of this with the John Deere."  I was immediately skeptical. Professional tree companies use specialized forestry equipment with grapple hooks to do things like this. I couldn't for the life of me figure out how a backhoe operating in an area of limited mobility could remove those trees from the garage without doing serious damage to the roof. Over the years, though, I've learned never to underestimate Pete. I told him, "Let me know when you're going to do this. I want to witness this in person!" A couple of months later, the weekend of October 5th was set for the Great 2024 Tree Cleanup.   

Pete is a great idea man. He's also excellent at figuring out how to make things work. Meticulous advance planning, though, isn't his forte, or, if it is, it takes place totally inside his head. The rest of us aren't privy to it, which may be the way he likes to operate. A good example was the first step of the project: moving the backhoe from Bedford to Lake Winnipesaukee. Pete knew a guy who could do this for a reasonable price, but it had to happen on a rainy day when the flatbed would otherwise be idle. Knowing he would have little advance notice, Pete decided to fill the backhoe's 36 gallon tank with diesel fuel ahead of time. Now, most people might have done this by making multiple trips to the gas station with a large, portable, gas container. Not Pete. He decided instead to drive the backhoe to the local gas station. You may be wondering whether this was even legal. Many states impose a variety of restrictions, including:

• Possession of a backhoe certification
• A special Mobile Equipment permit 
  
• The use of escort vehicles
• 
  Driving at certain times and taking specific routes

As a resident of the "Live Free or Die" state, though, Pete probably figured that:

1. There are no restrictions regarding this sort of thing in New Hampshire; or
2. No one in Bedford will bat an eye at seeing a backhoe driving on residential streets.

So, rather than waste time researching the legality or asking for permission, Pete  simply jumped into  the backhoe at 6pm, rumbled to the local gas station and filled up. While paying he couldn't resist saying to the cashier, "Guess you don't get many backhoes filling up here, huh?".  He didn't get an answer. Not even a smile.

During breakfast on Saturday morning -- just before the event began -- I asked Pete about his strategy for the day. He spent the next five minutes talking about how the area under back deck had to be cleared and a bunch of black plastic pallets had  to be set up in order to stack all of the firewood that would be generated during the weekend. No mention was made about how he planned to get those trees off the garage.

Once he got outside, though, his plan began to take shape. Since the backhoe was made for digging and scooping, it had no built-in way to grab a tree and lift it. Pete solved this problem by using a long, heavy-duty polyester strap capable of handling loads up to 2,500 pounds. One end of the strap was tied to the tree trunk while the other was tied to the end of the backhoe's arm, right above the bucket. Rather than describe what happened next, simply watch the video below, taken by my daughter-in-law Rebecca. Turn your sound up high so you can hear the banter between the Goedecke brothers, Pete and Herb, as well as stunned comments from the onlookers:

With that tree removed, the remaining tree was handled in a more conventional manner, The backhoe's front loader simply lifted the tree off the roof dropped it to the side as shown in another video, again courtesy of Rebecca:

You'll probably want to watch the video again. There's a whole lot going, most of which you probably didn't catch:

• Minutes prior to this video being taken, Pete had been berating Herb for sweeping debris from the roof into the backhoe's cab. Herb insisted it was accidental. They jawed back and forth at each other for a bit, but then got back to business. But Pete loves that backhoe and he wasn't quite ready to let it go. As he starts to move the backhoe to the tree, he stops, leans out the window and yells, "I can't believe you did that, Herb!" Herb, a bit stunned, looks over to Andy (who gives a small chuckle) and yells in reply, "Hey! Just ... Stop complaining! It was an accident!". Pure gold.
• Pete then puts the backhoe in gear and starts moving to the tree, shouting, "You better watch for me. I can't see, Herb!".  Not the most reassuring thing for all of us to hear as Pete attempts to toss 2,000 pounds of tree off the roof.
• At the 57 second mark, you'll see a figure appear on the other side of the garage. That's me. Pete gave me a job that was perfectly suited to my skill set. While clearing area around the garage to drop the tree, Pete got his chainsaw stuck in one of the trees. [Aside:  As a Mullen with zero Goedecke blood, I can't tell you how good it was to hear that. I've gotten my chainsaw stuck a few times in my life, but I've always been a bit ashamed to admit it, especially to a Goedecke.] My job was to save Pete's chainsaw from being crushed. When the tree fell off the roof, it would crash into the tree holding Pete's chainsaw, taking it down with it. Pete tied one end of the yellow polyester strap to the handle of his stuck chainsaw.  My job was to pull on the other end of the  strap and yank his chainsaw to safety the moment that it became dislodged. I'm happy to report that I executed the plan flawlessly.
  

With the trees off the roof, the weekend was already a success. But there was still a ton of work to be done. With very little conversation, the assembled group divided into a number of teams, with some people on multiple teams.

The Chainsaw Gang

This group generated all of the work for the rest of us. It consisted of the Goedecke brothers and my son, Andy. Their task for the weekend was nothing short of monumental. In addition to the trees that had been removed from the roof, there were many other monstrous trees that had come down over the last year or two that had been stacked along the side of the road. There were also a number of trees that had been damaged while clearing the roof as well as trees around the back camp's leach field. The goal of the Chainsaw Gang was to prune all of these trees and  saw the trunks and branches into fireplace-sized sections that could be split into firewood.  Over the two-day event, Andy estimated he spent about 14 hours chainsawing.  

The Burn Pile Crew

 

As the trees came down and the branches were pruned off, anything that couldn't be turned into firewood was burned. To handle this volume, three separate burn piles were set up. My daughter, Sara, oversaw most of the burning. With her forestry background and knowledge of safe burning practices, she was the natural choice. Plus, she was the only one who thought to purchase a burning permit!  Rebecca spent a ton of time dragging branches and debris to all three burn piles.

Sara's first burning pile was set up in the circular driveway of the front camp. It handled the branches and dead wood pruned off the trees that came off the garage as well as the debris from the trees around the garage that had to be taken down. It also handled the burnable waste generated by the splitting process.  

The second burn pile was set up about a couple hundred feet up the road close to where a large cache of fallen trees were being cut up.
(More about that burn pile later.) The third and final burn pile was set up on the back camp's leach field as Herb and Andy cut down a bunch of trees in that area. Just about everyone -- including Zach, Keira and Dana Joy -- got involved in dragging branches and other debris to these burn piles. All of them stayed hot over Saturday night and were revived the next morning. 

The Transportation Group

This group consisted of Pete and three third generation Goedeckes (Johnny, Amaya and Bryce). Their responsibility was to deliver the fireplace-sized chunks of wood created by the Chainsaw Gang to the Splitters and Stackers. Pete, of course, used the backhoe, filling its front loader with the biggest of the chunks. Johnny used the Kubota to handle the the medium-sized chunks. Amaya and Bryce used (and sometimes fought over) the Yamaha ATV to transport anything else that could fit in attached cart. Rebecca and everyone on the Chainsaw Gang provided the muscle needed to load the bigger pieces into the various conveyors.   

The Splitters and Stackers

Splitting and stacking required a lot more people than I would have thought. It consisted of me, Nancy, Marilynn and a bunch of third-generation Goedeckes (Johnny, Amaya, Callie and Bryce). In fairness to the group, Marilynn and Nancy were also responsible for making all the meals. And Johnny and Amaya were alternating shifts in the Transportation Group. All I can say is three cheers to Nancy for getting us a top-notch splitter!

A year or so earlier, Nancy purchased the splitter from a friend of hers who no longer needed one. While it took two (and sometimes three) people to wrangle a chunk of wood into place and split it, it would have taken an army of people to split all this wood with axes.  I volunteered to be a splitter since I had used one before, but that splitter was operated horizontally. Someone quickly discovered that Nancy's splitter could -- and indeed should -- be adjusted to operate vertically. Man, did that make a big difference! Chunks of wood that weighed over 100 pounds could now be jockeyed into place instead of having to hoist them onto the splitter.

 

For even small pieces of wood, splitting was most efficient with two people: one person to wrangle a log and hold it in place, and another to raise and lower the splitting wedge. I spent most of my time as a wrangler/holder.  Whenever I needed a break, Johnny was right there to take over. Everyone in Splitters and Stackers took a shift operating the wedge. Over time, it evolved into a game of sorts -- raising the wedge just enough to allow the split wood to be cleared, pausing while a new log was set in place, and then quickly delivering another split the instant the holder was ready.  Split wood was tossed into a pile to be stacked. Everyone on the team took a turn stacking, as did anyone else who happened to stop by. Nancy was the mastermind of the stacking operation, organizing all of the black plastic pallets that Pete had somehow acquired and overseeing the method of stacking. 

The Cooks

Arguably, the Cooks were most critical members of the work crew. In addition to participating in all of the outdoor work, this group made sure that the the entire crew was hydrated and well-fed. Some of the highlights:

• Nancy's oatmeal cake for Saturday's breakfast which kept everyone going throughout the morning.
• All of the hot dogs, hamburgers and ears of corn that you could eat for lunch on Saturday.
  
• A turkey dinner with all of the trimmings on Saturday evening.
•  Fried egg sandwiches made to order by Herb on the Blackstone Grill for Sunday breakfast. 
• Nancy's fantastic turkey soup for lunch on Sunday.
• Marilynn's Sunday dinner of American Chop Suey and pita bread that was enjoyed by everyone, even all the kids!
  
• The three apple pies that Nancy somehow found the time to make (with Marilynn's assistance)
• The trays of water that Marilynn delivered to the workers throughout Saturday and Sunday to keep them going.
  

The Tree Fire 

 

 

It was late Saturday afternoon and a fantastic day of work was drawing to a close. It had been a perfect day. The weather had cooperated, none of the equipment had broken down, no one had gotten hurt, and a massive amount of work had been done.   Then Nancy decided to walk up the road to help with the second burn pile. She noticed something a little odd and said to the group, "Is that smoke coming out of that tree up there?" Heads immediately snapped upwards followed by a collective gasp. The top of a tree next to the burn pit was on fire! I immediately headed to the front camp to notify Sara, the burn pile coordinator. The instant she saw the smoke she was on her cell phone calling 911. The 911 operator, in turn, put her in touch with the Moultonborough Fire Department, who arrived within a few minutes.

When the fire brigade arrived they approached Sara (who was obviously in charge) and the following conversation took place:

 

    Fire guy: "Who started this fire?"

    Sara:       "I did."

    Fire guy: "Do you have a burn permit?"

    Sara:       "I do."

And that was it. They didn't ask for any of the details of the burn permit. They didn't even ask to see the burn pit. Sara's word was good enough. The fire brigade then unrolled their hose from the tanker truck and attempted to douse the fire burning about 50 feet above them. When they stopped (after about 30 seconds), the tree was still smoldering. The fire guy then approached Andy and suggested that he cut down the tree. We're guessing he approached Andy because he saw a guy decked out in color-coordinated, high-visibility orange safety gear and figured he was the head of the Chainsaw Gang. While Andy is damn good with a chainsaw (and probably could have dropped the tree if needed), he realized that the right man for the job was Pete with his experience and larger chainsaw. And Pete didn't disappoint. Despite his chainsaw being dull from a long day's work, Pete took care of the tree in a couple of minutes, dropping it away from the power lines and smoldering burn pile and back towards the area that the Chainsaw Gang had recently cleared. Another of Rebecca's video:

And here's a couple of shots of the fire brigade in action:

 

With that, we said thanks and goodbye to the fire brigade and everyone went back to work. Andy didn't like the look of the downed-but-still-smoking tree and decided to chainsaw the top half that had caught fire. While Rebecca dragged all the branches and dead wood to the leach field burn pile, Keira played with the grubs that were still in the rotted area of the tree. 

 

A final postscript to the tree fire saga: As Marilynn and I were splitting a partially burnt section of that tree, a small, gray mouse popped out of it. Marilynn let out a yell as the mouse ran around her feet and then bolted to freedom.  As Marilynn told everyone later,  "That poor mouse! Imagine, first your house is set on fire; then it crashes down to the ground, is cut into pieces, rolled, loaded, and dropped. Then wham!  It’s gone!"

Wrapping Up

 

While most of the excitement happened on Saturday, we still had a solid day of work ahead of us on Sunday. A good portion of the large downed trees that had bordered the road were cut into sections and split, but some were deemed to be too rotten for firewood were relocated (somehow) by Pete and the backhoe to a less visible portion of the woods. Pete and the backhoe also spent some quality time together landscaping the torn-up area around the garage. Here's what it looked like once he was finished: 

 

The Splitters and Stackers didn't stop until it was time for dinner. There was still a pile of logs to be split, but that was left for a future weekend. While the backhoe and the chainsaws were the MVP tools of the weekend, the splitter had to get a vote or two.  Sure, it said "Hold on a minute!" and shut down a couple of times despite having plenty of gas and oil, but that was almost certainly caused by a couple of gigantic logs that we fed it. After it had a few minutes to rest and recover, it was back up and humming.  Below is the pile of firewood it generated:

A cord of wood is a stack with the dimensions 4'H x 4'D x 8W'. That translates into 128 cubic feet of wood. Our stack of wood was roughly 5.5'H x 7.5'D x 18'W. That translates into 742.5 cubic feet of wood. That means that the team created and stacked damn near 6 cords of firewood over a two-day period. Not too shabby!

While it was a "work weekend", the group still managed to have some fun Bryce and Herb actually got up at 6am on Saturday morning to fish! Although the water was a chilly 63°, Herb and Pete jumped in the lake at the end of each workday to get refreshed and clean up a bit. The weather was absolutely gorgeous late Sunday afternoon, so Keira, Zach and Dana Joy got in their bathing suits and played in the water until dinnertime. Amaya paddleboarded around the lake and gave both Bryce and Zach a ride. Keira, Zach and Bryce fished a bit from the dock. While relaxing on the roof deck on Saturday night and marveling at the gorgeous "moon set", Marilynn, Andy, Zach and I saw a shooting star. It was Zach's first shooting star and he said, "That was great! When is the next one?" 

Although the weekend was truly exhausting, everyone was excited about how much was accomplished. It was a lot of fun working together, so it was a little sad to see it end. Not to worry. Pete has a series of other plans in his head involving the backhoe, the chainsaws, the splitter, and 12 cubic yards of gravel and dirt!

"In God We Trust"

Each day my local paper contains a small column called "Today in History", listing things of note that happened on that day. I rarely read the column, but yesterday, for some reason, I did. It contained the following item:

"In 1957, the motto "In God We Trust" began appearing on U.S. paper currency."

I was surprised to realize I was alive when this happened, and so began another deep dive into the bowels of the Internet. Why did this happen? What did this phrase even mean back then? Why was it important to put it on all of our paper currency? Was anyone -- most notably constitutional scholars -- opposed to it at the time? As my brother-in-law would say, these were indeed some of the questions. As I spiraled down the rabbit hole, even more questions emerged.

The first thing I discovered was that "In God We Trust" is the official motto of the United States, approved by Congress and signed into law by President Eisenhower on July 30, 1956.

Some Background

Prior to 1956, the de facto motto of the U.S. was "E pluribus unum", Latin for "Out of many, one". This phrase hearkens back to our nation's founding, July 4, 1776, when the Continental Congress passed the following resolution for the creation of a national seal:

“Resolved, that Dr. Franklin, Mr. J. Adams, and Mr. Jefferson, be a committee, to bring in a device for a seal for the United States of America.”

It took six years, multiple committees and many designs before the Great Seal of the United States was approved. In the end, only one feature of the original committee's design remained untouched: the inclusion of "E Pluribus Unum" to boldly declare the birth of a unified nation from 13 individual colonies.

Learning this, a new burning question was immediately raised. What could have possibly caused the nation to believe that a lofty and patriotic motto such as this, created and designed by three of our most educated and respected founding fathers, should be replaced by "In God We Trust"?

Deeper Background

The use of "In God We Trust" dates back to the Civil War, when Reverend M.R. Watkinson, a Protestant minister from Pennsylvania, believed that the government needed to send a clear message that God was on the side of the Union and its army. In 1961, he decided to send the following letter to Samuel P. Chase, the Secretary of the Treasury Department:

Chase acted almost immediately, sending the following letter to James Pollock, Director of the U.S. Mint:

After some back and forth, Chase and Pollack decided that "In God We Trust" should be used as it was similar to "In God is our trust", a phrase found in The Star Spangled Banner. Following congressional approval on April 22, 1864, coins containing this new inscription began circulation.

A few northern newspapers questioned this change. The New York Times, in particular, wrote: "Let us try to carry our religion — such as it is — in our hearts, and not in our pockets". The general populace, though, approved of the change. The controversy disappeared and the inscription now appears on all U.S. currency.

It Finally Becomes the National Motto

In the early 1950's, the U.S. was embroiled in the Cold War abroad and McCarthyism at home. Similar to the demonizing of the enemy that occurred during the Civil War, ministers began denouncing "godless communists" and insisting that the U.S. declare that God was on the nation's side. In the midst of this fervor, Dwight Eisenhower was elected President. By all accounts, Eisenhower was a deeply religious man who wore his faith on his sleeve. While President, he was baptized into the Presbyterian Church, opened Cabinet meetings with a moment of silent prayer, and initiated something called the National Prayer Breakfast. He also appointed the Reverend Billy Graham as his personal spiritual advisor. With this as fertile ground, Florida congressman Charles Bennett sponsored a bill in 1955 to make "In God We Trust", the national motto. His rationale:

“In these days when imperialistic and materialistic communism seeks to attack and destroy freedom, we should continually look for ways to strengthen the foundations of our freedom.”

While not as eloquent or erudite as Franklin, Adams and Jefferson, Bennett's proposal carried the day with Eisenhower. The bill was adopted by Congress and signed into law by Eisenhower in 1956.

 A Bit about the Establishment Clause

Before we go any further, a brief discussion is needed of the Establishment Clause, the opening clause of the First Amendment:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

Thomas Jefferson believed that this clause created an iron-clad "wall of separation between Church and State". In 1947, Justice Hugo Black echoed Jefferson's belief, saying: "The First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state," and that this wall "must be high and impregnable". 

With this as an historical backdrop, you might wonder how a national motto centered on God could have penetrated this wall. To date, though, the U.S. Court system has treated this "wall" more like a screen door, allowing the belief in a single Almighty deity to permeate many of the nation's laws and institutions.

In Zorach v. Clauson (1952), while not dealing specifically with the national motto, the Supreme Court stated that the nation's "institutions presuppose a Supreme Being" and that the government's recognition of God does not in any way support the establishment of one religion or another.   

In Aronow v. United States (1970), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit specifically ruled that the use of the national motto on currency is "excluded from First Amendment significance because the motto has no theological or ritualistic impact", having only "'spiritual and psychological value' and 'inspirational quality'". Atheists and agnostics aren't being pressured to believe or trust in God in order to live in the United States and use its currency.  

In 1962, Eugene Rostow, Dean of Yale Law, coined a new legal term, ceremonial deism, to refer to any religious reference or practice by the government that has lost its inherent religious connotation due to longstanding use. Per Rostow, these references and practices should now be viewed as simply "cultural rituals". Prominent examples of Rostow's ceremonial deism are the references to a single deity in the national motto and the Pledge of Allegiance. Beginning in 1984, the Supreme Court of the United States began using this term to decide whether to grant an exemption to the Establishment Clause. This leads directly into my final topic.

The Slippery Slope and the Pledge of Allegiance

I've finally reached the real focus of this post: the Pledge of Allegiance. The nation's first pledge  was composed in 1885 by a man named George Balch, an officer in the Union army during the Civil War. 

“We give our heads and hearts to God and our country; one country; one language; one flag!” 

It was rather simple pledge, but it was used by many groups in the U.S. until the 1920's. In 1892, Balch's pledge was revised by Francis Bellamy, a Baptist minister, into a version fairly similar to what is said today. 

"I pledge Allegiance to my Flag and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all."

While Bellamy's version omits any mention of God, it had its own special problem. Bellamy recommended that his pledge be recited while performing the Bellamy Salute. It began with the right hand outstretched toward the flag, palm down and ended with the palm up. With the rise of the Nazi party, Congress made the obvious move in 1942 and replaced the Bellamy Salute with a hand over the heart.

Children performing the Bellamy Salute in 1941

 

Also in 1942, the West Virginia Board of Education made it a requirement for school children to recite the Pledge of Allegiance while saluting the flag. Failure to do so would result in expulsion, with parents liable for a fine up  to $50 and jailed up to 30 days. While most families in West Virginia complied with this requirement, it created a major problem for Jehovah’s Witnesses. Their strict interpretation of the bible includes the belief that saluting and pledging allegiance to the flag violated God’s command against worshiping graven images.

After a number of Jehovah Witness children had been expelled, one of the families challenged West Virginia's requirement and filed suit against the Board of Education. In West Virginia State Board of Education vs. Barnette, the Supreme Court unambiguously stated that the Board's compulsory recitation and salute of the flag was a violation of the student's free speech.  

 "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein."

Despite this warning from the Supreme Court against forcing citizens to profess an act of faith against their will, the board of directors of the Knights of Columbus (a Catholic organization) adopted a resolution in 1951 to add "under God" into their recitation of the Pledge. Again, this was in direct response to the fears of many Americans during the Cold War of "godless communism". In 1953, congressman Louis Rabaut of Michigan sponsored a bill to add the words "under God" to the Pledge. As with the national motto, President Eisenhower was completely on board with Rabaut's bill. As he signed the bill into law on June 14, 1954, Eisenhower issued a statement that began as follows:

"From this day forward, the millions of our school children will daily proclaim in every city and town, every village and rural school house, the dedication of our nation and our people to the Almighty. To anyone who truly loves America, nothing could be more inspiring than to contemplate this re-dedication of our youth, on each school morning, to our country's true meaning."

It's difficult to understand why Rabaut's bill isn't seen as a violation of the Court's decision in Barnette. The bill endorses a specific religious belief (a single deity) and incorporates this belief into the Pledge of Allegiance, an oath that all citizens of the U.S. are expected to recite regularly. While the belief in a single deity aligns with Judeo-Christian religions, many other religions hold different beliefs. Indeed, many other people don't believe in a God at all.  Per Martha Nussbaum, Professor of Law and Ethics at the University of Chicago, forcing these individuals to affirm that the United States was created "under God” is tantamount to forcing Jehovah Witnesses to give the Bellamy Salute. She further states:

"What, however, about the timid child, or the child who has reasonable worries about stigma and peer pressure? The history of the pledge and of the related school prayer issue makes it obvious that non-participation often comes at a cost. If Ellory Schempp was greeted with outright persecution for reading from the Quran, we can expect that children who refuse to say the pledge—whether they stand in silence, sit, or leave the classroom—will be courting the hostility of teachers, administrators, and, perhaps most clearly, their fellow students. The whole point of the pledge, in the mind of its original supporters, was to put all Americans on record as supporting patriotism, and to inculcate the value of patriotism by a daily required exercise in the schools. From the point of view of these concerns, the non-participating child is bound to look at the very least weird and not fully American, at the worst subversive and threatening."

Proponents of the new Pledge point to the 1952 ruling by the Supreme Court in Zorach v. Clauson  which ruled that the First Amendment couldn't possibly require a complete separation of Church and State because, if it did:

"Churches could not be required to pay even property taxes. Municipalities would not be permitted to render police or fire protection to religious groups. Policemen who helped parishioners into their places of worship would violate the Constitution. Prayers in our legislative halls; the appeals to the Almighty in the messages of the Chief Executive; the proclamations making Thanksgiving Day a holiday; `so help me God' in our courtroom oaths--these and all other references to the Almighty that run through our laws, our public rituals, our ceremonies would be flouting the First Amendment."

All of this seems quite a bit far-fetched. Would it really be that difficult to remove references to God in our government? Would police, fire  and first aid personnel really be prevented from performing their duties at a house of worship?  No matter. If there are, indeed, legitimate concerns, I an in total agreement with the conclusion reached by Martha Nussbaum:

"There are traditional references to religion in our public life that should not be pruned away and that pose no constitutional problem. It is extremely doubtful, however, that the pledge, in its current form, is among them."