Just 31 words make up what all Americans have learned and recited since they became citizens of the United States, whether by birth or naturalization. Yet it takes only two of those words to create a controversy that never seems to end.

The Pledge of Allegiance has been around for more than 100 years, but the phrase, “under God” has only been a part of it since 1954, added by Congress in order to counter the Communist governments of the times.

Uttered in classrooms around the country every day, the pledge and its “under God” inclusion have been scrutinized for as long as I can remember. It seems that every few years, there are more lawsuits filed aiming to get the phrase removed, though none have been successful so far.

Another of those lawsuits, Doe v. Acton-Boxboro Regional School District, was argued before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court last Wednesday.

The Does are an anonymous atheistic couple who say that keeping “under God” in the pledge violates the Equal Rights Amendment of Massachusetts’ Constitution and discriminates against anyone who doesn’t believe in God.

According to their argument, whether a child says “under God” or refuses to participate in saying the pledge altogether, he or she will be discriminated against by either saying something he doesn’t believe or being ostracized by other children.

The school district counter-argued, saying that the children aren’t forced to recite the pledge, so there is no discrimination.

This is a court case that has been argued multiple times, a controversy that has been around for years. If the case is won, the phrase will be removed in Massachusetts, but it will also pave the way for similar cases in several other states with Equal Rights Amendments in their constitutions (Kansas doesn’t have such an amendment).

Let’s face it: whether the case is won or lost, more lawsuits will continue to be filed. Because a 2004 Supreme Court decision allowing “under God” in schools was practically based on a technicality, the door is still open for another federal judgment on the matter.

To me, this case and the others are just a waste of time and money, to keep fighting for something that doesn’t need to happen. The pledge should be left as it is, and the answer should be simple: either say the pledge with “under God’” or choose to skip that part. Chances are, no one will hear if a few decide to opt out. Otherwise, we’re just beating a horse that’s been dead for a long time.