CNN News:奥巴马：为叙利亚定下红线的不是我 是世界

Today's edition of CNN STUDENT NEWS starts with an update regarding Syria. Yesterday, we looked at some of the key players in the U.S. debate over possible action against the Middle-Eastern nation. Teachers, you can find that video on our home page. Today, we're focusing on the global community. And we began in Sweden. President Obama was there yesterday, talking about the so-called red line. Something he first mentioned more than a year ago.

A red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus. That would change my equation.

The idea of the red line is that if it's crossed, whoever set it could act in response. So, that was what President Obama said in 2012. Here is what he said yesterday in Sweden.

I didn't set a red line. The world set a red line. The world set a red line when governments representing 98 percent of the world's population, said, the use of chemical weapons are abhorrent.

Governments around the world are having conversations about Syria. We're going to start with the United Kingdom.

Last week, the British parliament voted against the possibility of a strike against Syria. Prime Minister David Cameron says that's a dangerous move that could encourage more chemical weapon attacks.

In France, President Francois Hollande gave a similar message to lawmakers in his nation. President Hollande says, if the Syrian governments isn't punished, it would send a signal to other countries with chemical weapons. The French National Assembly started debating the idea of a strike yesterday. The Syrian government denies that it has used chemical weapons. And the president of Russia doesn't think Syria has used those weapons either. President Vladimir Putin says, he thinks it's absurd that Syrian forces would use chemical weapons since he says they have the upper hand against the rebels. Putin says there needs to be proof that chemical weapons were used.

U.S. emergency crews are gradually getting a massive wildfire under control. We told you about the rim fire. It's been burning in California since mid-August. This rim fire has cost California more than $39 million, it's one of the largest wildfires in California history. Monday night, firefighters had it 70 percent contained, rain and cooling temperatures were helping out with that. Wildfires, of course, can have a wider impact in just burning land and damaging homes. The rim fire forced schools to close, and sports practices to be canceled. Now, things are starting to get back to normal.

You know, just watching the fire, you know. Just concerned about our homes and stuff, so it feels good. We had a tournament, so we're feeling good to get back now and we're excited for our season.

The U.S. government first recognized the Pledge of Allegiance in 1942. It added the phrase "Under God" in 1954. In recent years, that phrase has been challenged in American courts. But every attempt to remove the mention of God from the pledge has failed.

Massachusetts highest court is hearing a similar case on this, but with the twist: it's not arguing that the mention of God violates the First Amendment, like previous cases. It's arguing the phrase goes against state law. Massachusetts constitution says, that "all people are born free and equal and have certain natural, essential and unalienable rights." Plaintiffs in the law suit say that the phrases "Under God" violates the rights of students who don't believe in God. By discriminating against them. Defendants say, there is disagreement, but not discrimination, that the phrase doesn't violate anyone's rights, because students can choose not to say the pledge. Lower court agreed last year, saying the phrase "under God" doesn't convert the exercise of the pledge into a prayer. An atheist couple appealed that ruling, in what Massachusetts Supreme Court decides could have an impact nationwide.

If you're on Facebook, we'd like to get your opinion on this. Talk to us at Facebook.com/cnnstudentnews.