A number of SCOTUS decisions in recent decades past have found that the recitation and inclusion of religious phrases into essentially governmental protocal and actions do not conflict with the separation of church and state. SCOTUS decisions have relied upon past practice and re-defining religious phrases and actions as "ceremonial deism" and as such is perfectly acceptable. But are they not attempting to disguise religious speech and action? In truth, any reference to a deity is religious speech/action; by re-defining it SCOTUS merely serves up subterfuge and confusion. This is a pefect example of how so called "intellectuals" can even baffle themselves to such depths as to call into question their credibility as jurists. Logically, how is it conceptually possible that the pronunciation of the word "god" does not refer to "god" and is merely a social convention?