Newdow wins again
"I'm passionate about treating people equally," Newdow told The Chronicle. "Imagine you send your kids to school every day, and the teachers made them stand up and say, 'We are one nation that denies God exists.' Imagine you are Jewish, and they say, 'We're one nation under Jesus.' Imagine you are Christian, and they say, 'We're one nation under Mohammad.'"
Sometimes the courts want to let issues fade away, and sometimes people won't let them.
However, the question of tactical incrementalism is strong and as live here as it is in same-sex marriage. Many civil libertarians who want a strong rule are nervous about Newdow because they want to do it piece-by-piece and bit-by-bit, and because they perceive that "the country isn't ready for it" -- just as with same-sex marriage. Again, it's a strange thing about a precedent system where the answers you get depends significantly on the order in which you ask the questions.
So you have people who say that justice consists in doing the right thing now (although the right thing is incredibly unpopular), and people who say that there's no prospect of that, and that you must, so to speak, build up a ladder and then, so to speak, throw away the ladder after you have climbed up on it.
