I Pledge Allegience, to the flag.....

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/10/14/sc...nce/index.html





did you say the pledge of allegience in school? I said it in elementary school but I went to a parochial school.



I say it should be allowed.
«134

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 72
    thttht Posts: 3,931member
    Take it out. It is divisive. It will be truly interesting to read the USSC decision. Then again, they could just go with ceremonial deism blah blah blah stuff.



    And of course, I'd like to see "In God We Trust" off of money too. Saw it on the new 20 dollar bill and it just didn't feel right...
  • Reply 2 of 72
    I think this whole canard is yet another red herring to keep the masses from discussing the real issues facing this country.





    In regards to the court desciusion here's the some importaint points that people should discuss:



    Quote:

    SCALIA NOT PARTICIPATING



    Justice Antonin Scalia (news - web sites), one of the court's most conservative members who normally votes for government displays of religious phrases or symbols, did not take part in the pledge case.



    Newdow had urged Scalia to remove himself from the case. In a speech in January in Fredericksburg, Virginia, Scalia questioned whether courts should remove religious symbols and phrases from public life.



    "We could eliminate 'under God' from the Pledge of Allegiance. That could be democratically done," he said. But he added that would be "contrary to our whole tradition."





    The high court agreed to hear an appeal by the California school district. The school district argued the appeals court improperly found the pledge was a profession of religious belief.



    What happens in a 4-4 tie?



    And here's the million dollar question:



    Quote:

    The justices will hear arguments in the case early next year, with a decision due by the end of June.



    Hmm... June you say? I'd hate to think somebody running for president would use this against his opponent and accuse him of not being a patiot if he believes in the separation of church in state. Nah. that won't happen...



    Keep your eye on the ball people. The war. The lies. The economy. The leaker in the white house...



    I think they should just split the difference and replace the word "God' with "Elvis" and most everyone will be happy with that...



  • Reply 3 of 72
    i wonder how this thread is going to turn out, oh wait, i know. just like all the others. we've been down this road before.
  • Reply 4 of 72
    Quote:

    i wonder how this thread is going to turn out, oh wait, i know. just like all the others. we've been down this road before.



    No, please let me say it.... I hate Bush. I hate Bush



    (That was the one right?)
  • Reply 5 of 72
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by THT

    Take it out. It is divisive. It will be truly interesting to read the USSC decision. Then again, they could just go with ceremonial deism blah blah blah stuff.



    And of course, I'd like to see "In God We Trust" off of money too. Saw it on the new 20 dollar bill and it just didn't feel right...




    you need to reevaluate what really matters in life.



    if you really feel like the mention of God in some things like that is so bad, you have a great life.





    i'm tired of the PC crap.
  • Reply 6 of 72
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Zarathustra

    No, please let me say it.... I hate Bush. I hate Bush



    (That was the one right?)




    no, someone will talk about how under god was added during mccarthyism in the fifties, and it was never meant to be in it.

    then we'll have a whole sub thread about "in god we trust" on money which will turn into whether our country was founded by christians or deists.

    then they'll be some more stuff about god, and a bunch of stuff about how god is a bunch of hooey, and invariably i'll weaken and weigh in with my atheistic point, and say something about having imaginary friends.

    then i'll be so ashamed for losing my cool, i'll avoid this thread and a few days later i'll come back to it and THEN it will be "i hate bush, i hate bush" "clinton is a lying bastard" ad nauseum......



    did i forget anything?



    edit = ad mauseum? a bad museum?
  • Reply 7 of 72
    Nope.

  • Reply 8 of 72
    Quote:

    and THEN it will be "i hate bush, i hate bush" "clinton is a lying bastard" ad mauseum......





    I'm so ahead of the game on this one....
  • Reply 9 of 72
    thttht Posts: 3,931member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by applenut

    you need to reevaluate what really matters in life.



    if you really feel like the mention of God in some things like that is so bad, you have a great life.



    i'm tired of the PC crap.




    Why bother starting a thread about it if you're not willing to hear opinions?
  • Reply 10 of 72
    brussellbrussell Posts: 9,812member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by applenut

    you need to reevaluate what really matters in life.



    if you really feel like the mention of God in some things like that is so bad, you have a great life.



    i'm tired of the PC crap.




    No, it doesn't have much of an effect on anyone's life. But, should this kind of case be decided on basic principles like church-state separation, or on whether something is serious enough to matter to our day-to-day lives? I suppose one could argue that lots of things don't matter to average Americans. What do I give a shit about some Gitmo prisoners from foreign countries? Doesn't affect me nor any other American citizen.



    Technically, someone does have to be "injured" to have a legitimate case. On the other hand, one could argue that, given our tradition of church-state separation, we are in a sense "injured" as a country if we allow religious people to change official school-sponsored statements like the pledge so that they include a reference to God as they did here.



    I personally think the gov't should be completely secular. Religions can promote God on their own. Why do they need the gov't to help them do it? People can say prayers and talk about God all they want in their homes and in their churches and in the streets or wherever they want except in government buildings.
  • Reply 11 of 72
    shetlineshetline Posts: 4,695member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by applenut

    you need to reevaluate what really matters in life.



    if you really feel like the mention of God in some things like that is so bad, you have a great life.




    I have this silly notion that one of the things that "really matters" in life are the principles one believes in and stands up for.



    I have another silly notion that separation of Church and State is one of those important principles.



    I also believe that a pledge should be a serious thing. If you are indeed pledging something you should understand and mean every word you say and be old enough to give meaningful devotion to the words you speak. Have you ever heard third graders asked to recite the pledge individually? Most of them haven't a clue.



    Frankly, I find the notion of making rooms full of children chant out words they don't understand, with or without God involved, day after day, a bit chilling. If the intent is to make the words become true by mindless repetition at a young age, that sounds to me more like brainwashing than an honest attempt to teach civic virtues.



    Quote:

    i'm tired of the PC crap.



    I'm tired of American presidents invoking God more often than the Pope. I'm tired of people who should be standing up for the separation of Church and State resigning themselves to a "you've got to go along to get along" attitude.
  • Reply 12 of 72
    thttht Posts: 3,931member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by BRussell

    People can say prayers and talk about God all they want in their homes and in their churches and in the streets or wherever they want except in government buildings.



    They can even do it in government buildings. The only thing that shouldn't be allowed is the use of government power to promote a religion to the detriment of others or even to the individual. People are allowed to talk about religion anytime and anywhere they want in the US, but if they are under the auspices of the government wielding the powers of the government, they shouldn't be allowed to promote or persecute any "religion". I'd even like it better if priests were elected to government office rather than the political prostitutes we have today. Too many politicians, not enough scientists, engineers, priests, academics, et al.



    The "under God" in the Pledge and "In God We Trust" on US money are barely veiled acts of putting the USA under a Christian umbrella. It is precisely because people don't care about the basic principles of their own country that these actions were allowed to come about. This is first and foremost a nation of men, governed by men, and created for men. The laws and "tradition" of this nation derive its power from its citizens, not the divinity of some religion, not the power of a king nor a dictator. It is accepted - at least I think so - that this nation is a pluralistic society that hold the rights of the individual just as highly as the rights of the many, and under this light, "under God" and "In God We Trust" are only divisive tools.
  • Reply 13 of 72
    rokrok Posts: 3,519member
    um, here's my question tht has gnawed at me for a long time... what business does a young child have "PLEDGING ALLEGIANCE" to ANYTHING? seriously. isn't that a very serious matter, yet we trivialize it by making it a morning ritual devoid of meaning, and have kids that have trouble memorizing multiplication tables swearing allegiance to a country they can't even vote in yet. and while, yes, i guess you don't HAVE TO recite the pledge, it sure as hell is implied that you do it, or else suffer the slings and arrows of your peers, if nothing else.



    i think the "under god" thing is kinda dumb, since it was slapped in during the 50's, supposedly to distinguish us from "godless communists." but having children pledge allegiance to anything just smacks of something wrong...
  • Reply 14 of 72
    brussellbrussell Posts: 9,812member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by THT

    They can even do it in government buildings.



    That's true! Of course individuals can behave religiously in gov't buildings. See, even I've been brainwashed by the religious promoters.

    Quote:

    The "under God" in the Pledge and "In God We Trust" on US money are barely veiled acts of putting the USA under a Christian umbrella.



    Right.



    applenut made a comment about "PC crap," but really it's the other way around: God was put in the pledge and on the money because of political correctness in the 1950s.



    And Eisenhower said this when he signed "under God" into the pledge.

    Quote:

    From this day forward, the millions of our schoolchildren will daily proclaim in every city and town, every village and rural schoolhouse, the dedication of our nation and our people to the Almighty ? a patriotic oath and a public prayer.



  • Reply 15 of 72
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by THT

    Why bother starting a thread about it if you're not willing to hear opinions?



    i'm willing to hear opinions, just ones that make sense and arent based on BAH, ITS RELIGIOUS< GET RID OF IT EVERYWHERE> IM SCARED OF THINGS THAT MENTION GOD.
  • Reply 16 of 72
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by rok

    um, here's my question tht has gnawed at me for a long time... what business does a young child have "PLEDGING ALLEGIANCE" to ANYTHING? seriously.



    so, if God was removed you would still be against it being recited?
  • Reply 17 of 72
    Quote:

    Originally posted by THT

    They can even do it in government buildings. The only thing that shouldn't be allowed is the use of government power to promote a religion to the detriment of others or even to the individual. People are allowed to talk about religion anytime and anywhere they want in the US, but if they are under the auspices of the government wielding the powers of the government, they shouldn't be allowed to promote or persecute any "religion". I'd even like it better if priests were elected to government office rather than the political prostitutes we have today. Too many politicians, not enough scientists, engineers, priests, academics, et al.



    The "under God" in the Pledge and "In God We Trust" on US money are barely veiled acts of putting the USA under a Christian umbrella. It is precisely because people don't care about the basic principles of their own country that these actions were allowed to come about. This is first and foremost a nation of men, governed by men, and created for men. The laws and "tradition" of this nation derive its power from its citizens, not the divinity of some religion, not the power of a king nor a dictator. It is accepted - at least I think so - that this nation is a pluralistic society that hold the rights of the individual just as highly as the rights of the many, and under this light, "under God" and "In God We Trust" are only divisive tools.




    Well put. "under God" or "In God We Trust" have no definitive meaning anyhow. I'm trying to think of what they could put if they're going to waste the space, and I honestly can't think of anything of any use.. Haha.. "Don't steal" Gee whiz. How about "In Prosecution We Trust"
  • Reply 18 of 72
    brbr Posts: 8,395member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by applenut

    http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/10/14/sc...nce/index.html





    did you say the pledge of allegience in school? I said it in elementary school but I went to a parochial school.



    I say it should be allowed.




    Restore it to its original glory before McCarthy and his Wankers took a pledge that united and turned it into one that divided. Then I have no problem.
  • Reply 19 of 72
    How about "In Prosecution We Fear"
  • Reply 20 of 72
    shetlineshetline Posts: 4,695member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Jukebox Hero

    How about "In Prosecution We Fear"



    I really hope that becomes the motto of the Bush Administration. It should be.
Sign In or Register to comment.