LH,

The issue may be a red herring, but then why have you been arguing about it for so long? The fact is that you are supporting the use of the word God in the pledge because you believe that God is "the actual functioning substance and working of all that is" In other words, God is something like "The Universe." My point is that, for those who put God in the pledge, this is not what God is. God, to them, is the Christian God-concept, a male all-powerful being who lets you into heaven for righteousness and banishes you to hell for sin. Think of what would happen if at a presidential function someone said "under Allah" or "under Vishnu" or "Under Astarte" and you'd see that the use of the words "under God" isn't about inclusion!

As a member of a minority religion, I think it is wrong to say that it's only the party system that dictates that every single president except Kennedy was a WASP, and that every one in history was a white male christian. In fact, just to say that the parties won't put forth a muslim because it might lose them votes shows you exactly what the issue is: the US does suffer from religious discrimination, and the pledge is part of it. To say that religion is not the issue, but "mental habits" is is meaningless. Both religion and religious discrimination are mental habits, and they are precisely the issue!