I wrote a letter to the Washington Post last night about the Supreme Court's decision in Michael Newdow's "under God" case. Now that I type it here, it occurs to me that, in the letter, I probably referred to "in God we trust" by mistake. Oh, well. They'll fix that if they want to publish it, right?

The letter responded to an op-ed on the 21st by William Raspberry, who is generally liberal, and who nevertheless supported the Supreme Court's ruling. He compared the ruling to a "no call" on a slightly questionable play in a basketball game. The idea, he says, is not to interrupt the rhythm of the game for an issue that doesn't necessitate it.

I tried to present the view that "under God" is one of several disturbing customs in government which infiltrate public life, such as swearing on the Bible in court and for inaugurations, and the habitual statements politicians make about their religious faith. These are symptoms of a subtle but wide-spread religious (read: protestant christian) influence on our government's worldview. It may be small, but I think it is significant and a good place to start in bringing this issue to light.

Did you know that Tom DeLay has a sign in his office saying "This could be the day," referring to the Rapture? How does a man like that become the House Majority Leader? John Ashcroft compares himself to the biblical Daniel, saying that he doesn't let public opinion influence his decisions, and instead looks to his religion (which, by the way, is Pentecostal). Bush chronically refers to evildoers in his speaches, and describes the world as a struggle between good and evil.

It's a lucky thing none of these people are in positions of power; not being Jews, they are not allowed into the real decision-making. They're just a bunch of troublesome goyim. Public elections, after all, are just illusory, and have no influence on policy-making. Nevertheless, I long for a day when running for public office doesn't necessitate reassuring voters that you are religious; when the debate over social services doesn't center around whether it should be the church, and not the government, to provide them; when reason, and not religion, rules the people's opinions on abortion; and when public schools don't even consider prayer, posting the ten commandments, or having students hear "one nation under God" every weekday, nation-wide. It's a bad sign that a majority of the country is opposed to the smallest of these changes.