Conflict of Interest

There was talk today that the Supreme Court would avoid dealing with the Pledge of Allegiance case altogether by throwing it out because the father didn't have primary custody of the girl. I'm surprised that there wasn't any protest against that possibility from the right wing quarters; or at least, none I heard of. Yes, it would have resulted in a short term victory for the phrase "under God", but it would also mean that the Supreme Court would have determined that a parent with primary custody also has the right to dictate the whole of a child's moral upbringing. Since most single parents are mothers, this would inadvertantly undermine one of the major underpinnings of paternal authority. And if one thing is more important than forcing the Christian religion on the population, it's reinforcing male authority in individual households.
Alot of people have expressed displeasure that this issue was forced due to a custody battle, but I want to look on the bright side. Because it's a custody battle, it's turned into a metaphorical battle of Daddy vs. Jesus. Instead of being uncomfortable with this, we progressives should do what little we can to hype that metaphor a little. It could be fun watching the religious fundies and the sexists exchange some friendly fire.