The Pledge of Allegiance!! (God or No) (A little long...Sorry)

[7up]

I agree with Dark_5.0. I was too much of a wuss to chime in before this for fear of being bashed. Taking out the under god isn't forcing athiest viewpoint on people, if they replced it with under no god it would be the athiest viewpoint. By taking out under god it is simply taking away any religous bias out schools.

I myself was raised without any religion, I wouldn't say I am an athiest, but I am not religious either. I was always curious why that phrase was in the pledge of alegiance when I was a kid. In many of my classed each student had to lead the pledge of allegiance each day and it would be very hard to say I can't say this because of what i believe. It's hard enough fitting in as a kid without having to go against almost all of your classmates beliefs and not say the pledge of allegiance because it says under god.

By not having under god in the pledge of allegiance, I don't see how it harms anyone. Everyone is free to recite it however they want outside of school. But I do see how having that phrase in the pledge of allegaince can harm some children who care who care not to recite the phrase under god.

[The Deuce]

Originally posted by Dark_5.0
As unpopular as this is gonna be I am gonna say it.

There is seperation of church and state for a reason. If you let church and state intermingle before you know it 10% will be garnished from your paycheck.

If you dont like government mandated laws. There are religious schools you can send your kids to. Religion and public schools isnt practical in america our country is to diverse.

There are plenty of private schools that offer religion as part of the package. Thats the beauty of america there is always a choice.

Later,

Are you kidding? If this starts somekind of uprising, then I guess too bad. Take a look at your paycheck Dark! How much does the government take? Hmm, 7.65% for FICA, at least 15% for Federal income tax, add in whatever your state base tax rate is. Do you agree with the all the programs the governtment is running with your money? Shouldn't this be pointed out by your gripe?

I'm also wondering where the first amendment protection is in your opinion for people who wish to say God. I agree with seperation of church and state 100%. Goverment mandated religion has never been a good idea. Does this mean that we should force the removal of any implication of religion from school? I don't think so.

Let's move the discussion away from such a loaded subject. Assume the man was a vegitarian. Would an outcry against serving meat in school cause such a response? Or would people say that if you don't want to eat meat, don't. Too bad if you don't like the smell of hamburgers.

And yes, the American Cattle farmers do get some of the money already taken out of vegitarians paychecks. But I do not know of any vegan schools. Do vegitarians have a choice? Or are the beliefs of a meat eating majority forced upon them??

Just something to think about.

[Mr 5 0]

Originally posted by Dark_5.0

There is seperation of church and state for a reason. If you let church and state intermingle before you know it 10% will be garnished from your paycheck.

That statement is ridiculous and I'll return to it in a moment but first I'll address the larger issue.

There is a 'separation 'of Church and State in order to allow religious freedom, not to make the mere mention of God's name illegal (unconstitutional).

Saying 'under God' during a recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance does no one any harm, even an atheist child who probably has little understanding of what 'God' really means, anyway.

Under the law, no child - atheist, Muslim or otherwise - is required to say the Pledge. conversely, they should have no right to force the rest of the class to refrain from saying it, as it's written, 'Under God' included.

This is simply PC gone insane, using 'separation of Church and State' as a cover when in fact, that vaunted 'Wall of Separation' atheists always shout about is firmly entrenched in American law and culture.

The reason for the huge outcry over this stupid ruling by a Federal Circuit Court was that average Americans have had enough of a tiny, vocal minority deciding what the vast majority may say and do in a school or public arena, including the mere mention of the name; 'God'. They are sick and tired of having the constitution used as a weapon to make simple, traditional, very American things such as the Pledge of Allegiance 'illegal' and mentioning the name 'God' as some sort of 'offense' that must be ceased.

Sorry, atheist or not, this is a religious country and our people, diverse as they may be, choose to have a God in our lives. We don't all believe the same and we don't all share the same God but to say that the mention of His name is now 'offensive' and 'unconstitutional' is going too far, even for normally ultra-tolerant Americans.

I predict that this ruling will be overturned by the Supreme Court, as it should be.

As for the comment 'If you let church and state intermingle before you know it 10% will be garnished from your paycheck...as I said, it's absurd on it's face.

Reminds me of the line used against John F. Kennedy when he ran for President in 1960; the 'religious right' claimed that if JFK were elected, the Pope would be 'running America''. Well, Kennedy was elected and we never saw a sign of the Pope in the Oval Office.

The charge was absurd as is the comment that if we let church and state intermingle we'll see 10% of of paychecks garnished.

This reflects a longstanding atheist canard that we're just a few steps away from an American theocracy. Please. That is palpable nonsense and those who spout this line are parroting what they've heard elsewhere, not really examining the empty charge.

Thats what the Establishment Clause in the constitution is all about. No establishment of state-sponsored religion. It's not about taking God out of the schoolroom Pledge of Allegiance or forbidding the mention of His name in public gatherings in Federal buildings. That's a crazy stretch of the clause and a very bad one.

Sensible, tolerant, reasonable people understand this simple fact. Some atheist activists apparently do not. Now, we have a court battle ahead and fortunately, the outcome is pretty apparent.

Using the name of God in a simple little Pledge recited in school is about a million miles away from setting up a state-sponsored 'religion'.

Your paycheck is still safe.

[Dark_5.0]

Well anyways I stand by what I said........Its just my opinion.....

First of all I am no aethiest!!!!!! I believe in god my friend.

My statement about 10% being garnished was SARCASM ..........

Government and church dont belong together period. The pilgrams fled England because of the church and government marriage. That is why they made damn sure to put the seperation of the church and state in the constitution.

If what I said isnt popular I really dont care. Its my opinion, I am not here to make friends.

I love god but despise church, to me a church is a business a revenue machine and nothing more. I know I am off topic but I just thought I would throw that in there just to let you know where I am coming from.

Later.

[The Fireman]

You go Mr 5 0! YEAH!!!!!!!!

Whatever Dark_5.0.

[Dark_5.0]

Originally posted by The Fireman
You go Mr 5 0! YEAH!!!!!!!!

Whatever Dark_5.0.

Man that was deep,

[Mustangbelle306]

Originally posted by Mr 5 0


Under the law, no child - atheist, Muslim or otherwise - is required to say the Pledge. conversely, they should have no right to force the rest of the class to refrain from saying it, as it's written, 'Under God' included.

I completely agree. Sad as it is, the world IS the way it is today thanks to...a WAY easier life. Not even a few hundred years ago, life was about ******* SURVIVAL. Now you have these mollycoddled ******* ******* whiners that have nothing better to do than take little Susie to ballet practice, Jimmy to baseball, and try to appease every single person on God's green Earth.

Personally, I don't care if other people believe in God or not. I've been antagonized and irritated by PC/leftist people enough that quite frankly, I don't really give a **** about what happens to 90% of the planet's population. They can fornicate, do drugs, believe in whatever/whoever they want, etc for all I'm concerned BUT...when you try to infringe on MY rights when I have to respect YOURS, that's when I get pissed off

Dark 5.0, if you bring up the foundation of this country as basis for your argument, you basically make your original statement null and void...descendants of those PILGRIMS are the men who originally inserted IN GOD WE TRUST into our society

I don't necessarily trust churches either, but at least keep the theme constant.

[Mr 5 0]

Dark

So; you resent religion and churches but are not an atheist and your 'paycheck' comments were mostly sarcasm?

Alrighty then. Thanks for the clarification.

[The Fireman]

Originally posted by Dark_5.0


Man that was deep,

I tried to keep it real simple so you could follow along better.

[Mustangbelle306]

Originally posted by The Fireman


I tried to keep it real simple so you could follow along better.

I still had a little trouble following

[PKRWUD]

Oh well.

I am very patriotic. hell, I am a direct descendant of one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence, but the only "wrong" that was ever committed with the pledge was adding "under God" to it in the 1950's. It was a political move backed up by paranoid times that existed back then. Both of my parents are ordained ministers, and I do believe in a higher power of some sort, but that is really irrelevant, too. The point that I agree with is that it never should have been added in the first place.

In this country, and in the Constitution, it is the law that church and state will not mix. I believe that if a person wants to add the words "under God" to the pledge when they say it, that's great! More power to them! That is their first amendment right. BUT, that should be the exception, not the rule. The written pledge should remain as it was before congress took it upon themselves to change 50 years ago, with the stipulation added that you can add to it if you like. That way, the Constitution isn't being violated, and those that wish to mention their God while reciting the pledge can and will, with no ill effects.

It's really very simple.

Take care,
-Chris

[7up]

Originally posted by PKRWUD

The written pledge should remain as it was before congress took it upon themselves to change 50 years ago, with the stipulation added that you can add to it if you like. That way, the Constitution isn't being violated, and those that wish to mention their God while reciting the pledge can and will, with no ill effects.

It's really very simple.

Take care,
-Chris

I completley agree. Congress was just asking for trouble by adding that.

[jimberg]

If we have to pull God out of the pledge, we will also have to pull Him out of the Declaration of Independence. Doing so will remove the legitimacy of our rights as individuals and our right to create the United States. I guess we should just consider ourselves British. I guess that means that we now have a church that IS established by the state. Hmmm.. I think I like it the other way.

The seperation of church and state as it is being implemented is a liberal creation. Congress is only forbiddon from establishing a governmental church and mandating that we all must be members, but since our government was founded on the idea that God has created us with rights that were being violated, it stands to reason that the government is allowed to recognize the existence of God. Our nation motto is "In God we Trust", or national anthem invokes the name of God and that was in existence long before 1954. Congress added the "under God" because the people were already saying it and asked them to make it official.

The problem with political correctness is that some people feel that they somehow have a right not to be offended. You are free to believe in such notions as atheism, but you must also deal with what people think and say about you. If you are an atheist, you must also know that the rest of society believes you have a right to be an atheist because God gave you that right.

Dark_5.0, "sarcasm" is intended to hurt someone. Use "facetious" when you are just trying to be funny.

[Dark_5.0]

Originally posted by The Fireman


I tried to keep it real simple so you could follow along better.

I appreciate it man.....as always your sharp as a marble!

[Dark_5.0]

[
Dark_5.0, "sarcasm" is intended to hurt someone. Use "facetious" when you are just trying to be funny. [/B][/QUOTE]

And so I learn.

Thanks,

[Dark_5.0]

Originally posted by PKRWUD
Oh well.

I am very patriotic. hell, I am a direct descendant of one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence, but the only "wrong" that was ever committed with the pledge was adding "under God" to it in the 1950's. It was a political move backed up by paranoid times that existed back then. Both of my parents are ordained ministers, and I do believe in a higher power of some sort, but that is really irrelevant, too. The point that I agree with is that it never should have been added in the first place.

In this country, and in the Constitution, it is the law that church and state will not mix. I believe that if a person wants to add the words "under God" to the pledge when they say it, that's great! More power to them! That is their first amendment right. BUT, that should be the exception, not the rule. The written pledge should remain as it was before congress took it upon themselves to change 50 years ago, with the stipulation added that you can add to it if you like. That way, the Constitution isn't being violated, and those that wish to mention their God while reciting the pledge can and will, with no ill effects.

It's really very simple.

Take care,
-Chris

I absolutely agree....Your a smart man

[PKRWUD]

What is all this "politically correct" and "liberal" crap. Talk about crybabies! The plain and simple fact is that it should not have been altered in the first place, PERIOD. This is so simple, yet there are so many that just seem to want to complicate it for their own personal agenda. This is why I didn't want to participate in this thread in the first place, and why I shouldn't have.

Take care,
-Chris

[Mr 5 0]

Originally posted by PKRWUD

What is all this "politically correct" and "liberal" crap. Talk about crybabies! The plain and simple fact is that it should not have been altered in the first place, PERIOD. This is so simple, yet there are so many that just seem to want to complicate it for their own personal agenda. This is why I didn't want to participate in this thread in the first place, and why I shouldn't have.

Way too late now, Chris. You've made your statements, now we'll discuss them.

What jimberg posted was correct. The separation of church and state issue is a red herring in this instance. The Pledge of Allegiance is a totally voluntary action that any child may opt out of.

That Congress added 'Under God' in 1954 is a fact and was not a 'mistake' but reflected the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, where it was and is clearly stated that our rights come not from the State but from God, The Creator, Providence if you will.

America is a country founded 'under God'. Stating this in a voluntary pledge of Allegiance makes sense and is certainly in no way a 'religious' exercise or remotely an 'establishment of religion'. This should be clear, even to some liberal whacko Judge in San Francisco.

The liberal and PC references allude to the attempts of the ACLU and atheist groups to purge the word 'God' from every public utterance any place that a tax dollar contribued to. If there is any 'whining' going on here, it's from the tiny minority that demand things be the way they say it should be to better comfort their atheism and often very liberal, socialist concepts of America not shared by most citizens.

These folks mangle the Constitution, twisting simple words and phrases into meanings they never had and that the founders would be saddened to see and many people are sick and tired of it.

I don't give a rap about anyone's religion or lack of same but when they begin to infringe on my child's right to utter the passive words Under God in the Pledge of Allegiance in school, I get annoyed and so did a few hundred million Americans.

The complaint is bogus and the ruling will be overturned. Those who have problems with religion, churches and God can work that out another way but American society - already very secular - does not need to conform to their will simply because hearing - just hearing mind you - never mind saying - the word God 'offends' them.

Enough is enough.

It's that simple.

[Mustangbelle306]

Originally posted by PKRWUD
It's really very simple.

It may be simple in your eyes, but others may have different opinions that make it impossible to be "very simple". Not speaking about myself in particular, but you speak as if your opinion is the mandated truth, and not what it is...another opinion, just as mine, or Mr 5.0's, or Fireman's. I have been chewed out several times for the tone of my posts, and I guess I finally understand.

[jimberg]

From The Declaration of Independence
When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals called the pledge a prayer because it contains "under God". It's silly to assume that mentioning God is a prayer. A prayer is when you ask for something. The pledge is a pledge. It isn't even a pledge to God. It just makes a simple statement of fact, that our nation was created under the idea that "nature's God" entitled us to create it.