Because omission in itself is an action with far more intent and meaning than inclusion of something that is supposed to be there. Including it would basically be a non-event, as for the past 60 years it has been part of the pledge. Only your dedicated nutters would make a stink over it, and these are what we would consider "career complainers"
Omission, however, implies a willful change to something that is expected. You see it when people skip a line in a song, the expected did not happen, and people therefore notice it. Add the fact that it IS the most contriversial part of the pledge and BANG, instant shitstorm.
Agreed. But again, my original reply was to point out the absurdity of Caroljo's implication that atheists and agnostics are bigger complainers than bible thumpers.
Legally they have recently been the biggest complainers. First let me qualify my response as follows:
There are two types of atheists/agnostics. The normal everyday ones, who like normal people of faith, go about thier lives without issue. Then we have what I like to call "asshole atheists," the non believer counterpart to "bible thumpers" who feel a need to eliminate any trace of religion from the common arena, be it someone saying a prayer before a ball game, a menorah/manger in a public square, or the ten commandments in front of a court house.
The second group, on both sides are very annoying, but it seems to be the atheist side who goes the legal route with far more frequency, over what most of the other people on BOTH side see as trivial chickenshit.
I fail to see how a cross on a hill a person sees on thier drive to work consitutes such a egrareous affront to someone that they feel the need to remove it via the courts.
. 
