[Solid]

Airborne Lawyer- thank you again for these quotes. To clarify- I didn't mean that there was a fundemental incompatability between the social contract and religion, just that I didn't think that the US government established its right to rule by claiming holy sanctity.
My point is basically- There are many, many Supreme Beings being worshipped in the US, regardless of the size of their church. As the US government cannot establish a state religion, and cannot thereby make laws or rules under the authority of any one of those religions, the religions essentially rule each other out. Religious diversity, for this argument, equals an utter lack of religion in terms of government.
In this world, can a consensual self-government be established and function?

I believe that the answer is essentially Yes, and therefore that the inclusion of Supreme Beings in the Founding Father's quotes is more of a mark of the contemporary culture than a necessity in the founding of a government. As such, I think that while the modified Pledge isn't going to seriously hurt anyone (unless its used as a precedent for developing something Islam-like), the reference to god really shouldn't appear there. On money, maybe, because kids don't recite what appears on cash, but not in a pledge that is said in homeroom everyday.

Just my .02, I very much enjoy this conversation,

Thank you,

Solid