I always thought the 9th Circuit's decision in the Pledge of Allegiance case was, well, silly. I suspect that the Supremes will uphold the Pledge. (I doubt that they'll actually address the particulars of the case. This case is political dynamite and there appears to be an easy out: Newdow may lack standing. If you follow the link, you'll see that not everyone agrees with me, but my own observation is that many in the court dislike being at the center of controversy. It's true that some day the Supremes will probably have to make a decision, but I'm guessing several of the would rather it not be now. That, and I believe that Newdow genuinely does lack standing.)
However, I could never get too worked up about the whole thing. Joe Carter explains why Christians really shouldn't get involved in this mess: We don't have a dog in this fight. As Joe points out, the god of the Pledge is hardly the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The god of the Pledge is certainly not the One who died on the cross for our sins.
Instead, the god of the Pledge is the god of the civil religion that grew up out of Rouseau and the enlightenment. As Joe says:
Our God is a jealous God and is unlikely to look favorably upon idolatry even when it is put to good service. While we should be as tolerant of “civil religion” as we are of other beliefs, we can’t justify submitting to it ourselves. That is not to say that we can’t say the Pledge and think of the one true God. But we should keep in mind that this fight isn’t our fight and the “god” of America’ [sic] civil religion is not the God who died on the Cross.
Just so. We have to defend our faith at all times. But defending the Pledge has nothing to do with defending the faith.
BTW, if you're not reading Evangelical Outpost, you should be.