So the US Supreme Court is starting to hear the case about the Pledge of Allegiance. What do you all think about it?

My thought is that the father bringing up the lawsuit needs to eat some humble pie and have a cup of religious tolerance to go with it. The founders of the US created the freedom of religion right to say that if anyone didn't want to practice religion, the gov't wouldn't force them to. Likewise, if people were already practicing, the gov't wouldn't force them to practice in another way than what they already did.

It seems like the liberals in the country are trying to get the US to put on an air of secularism, devoid of any kind of religious affiliation, denying the very existence of religion. So really, they are coming from the opposite direction of a state church. They're trying to create a state "anti-church", where you're persecuted for practicing religion at all. Of course, excuses will be made to defend and let any other religion besides Christianity off the legal hook. Judaism is a culture and ethnicity, just like Islam. Buddhism is a part of world history, which took hold of the East and influenced the way it developed over the centuries. Confucius is a wise man that we should all learn from. Yet...what about Christianity? Nothing useful there. It hasn't done jack squat to affect world history. That's right, isn't it?

I'm not going to make any kind of wild, extreme predictions about how someday religious persecution will become a reality and a way of life for Christians, but I do think that there is a lack of balance in the way the gov't and society treats religion. The best we could and should hope for is that a compromise will be reached between the religious and non-religious--and I thought the Constitution set that up nicely, according to why it was written. The religious are free to practice religion and the non-religious are free not to practice religion.

The bottom line, though, is that this whole case just defies common sense. The use of the word God in the pledge is fairly generic. Newdow, the father, says it's indoctrination to the kids. Indoctrination my foot! What harm is it going to do anybody to say that our country is under God? If a kid doesn't know God to begin with, then that line in the pledge isn't going to drastically change/damage their life. And usually if a kid that young has any conception of who God is, that's usually because the parents have taught them that. So Mr Newdow's got his ex-wife to blame for that. Sounds like Newdow's just a coward who is trying to get back at his wife for something and doesn't have the guts to confront her about it himself like a man.

I hope it gits removed..

Not because I Hugly dislike it,
But just because it shouldn't of been changed to add in "under god" in the first place..

"Under God" was added during the 1950s to promote good old American values in the noble fight against communism.

------------------
I'm not an actor. I just play one on TV.

But it's on money too...

And for those who don't live in America but are wondering, the pledge goes:

I pledge alligence to the flag
Of United States of America.
And to the republic for which it stands
One nation under God,
Indivisible with liberty
And justice for all.


------------------
Snail racing: (500 posts per line)
------@%

"In God We Trust" is on money and has been since the US Treasury was founded.

------------------
I'm not an actor. I just play one on TV.

I agree that the lawsuit is silly, but how in the hell is removing "Under God" from the Pledge persecuting Christians?

... And not to nitpick, but no-one has ever said that Islam is an ethnicity.. don't know where you got that from

I can see both sides. Personally, I don't really care, but if I had to pick a side I'd say don't remove it simply because it's kindof traditional...

------------------
Do you have stairs in your house?

Sandlot, here is something to ponder. At the beginning of each week in my high school we have to stand and say the Pledge of Allegiance. I am an atheist, and I am proud of it. Do you know how horrible it is to say "under God"? I HAVE to say it because if I don't someone will notice and the entire class will laugh at me and word will get around that I didn't say "under God". I will be outcast from the social scene and become a high school Untouchable. And since I have to say "under God" my entire day is ruined because I have lied to myself. I know I don't believe in God, but I still lied to myself and that just eats me up inside. "Under God", "In God we Trust", and Ten Commandments in a courthouse is just a way for the christians to legally perform witch burning. It is a known fact that christians hate atheists and will do anything to make our lives miserable.

[/satire]

------------------
If you ever want to be hated by your peers, make them look bad. That's what America did.

I was about to open a can of whoop *** on you, Kieran, but then I saw the satrie tag and it cracked me up

------------------
I'm not an actor. I just play one on TV.

I knew I shouldn't have put that in......I want to see your response...
------------------
If you ever want to be hated by your peers, make them look bad. That's what America did.

[This message has been edited by Kieran Horn (edited March 24, 2004).]

Kieran, take a stand. If you are offended, don't say the pledge. If someone asks you, tell them you are taking a stand based on your religion. People begin to look up to those that take a stand (at least in my case). And "sandlot" who says its the "liberals" that are against god and religion. Although I can see how its convinient for people to generalize a group of people against the pledge as all liberals, that doesnt make it right

------------------
"Just remember -- No matter how bad things get, Northern Minnesota will always be there"
-- Garrison Keeler

...He is taking a stand! For not giving a ****! Like most people!

The Constitution doesn't say the government wont force you to practice a religion, it says there will be no established (state-supported) religion in the United States, like the Anglican Church was in England.

By then the English had long stopped actually forcing people to be Anglican(they were still rough on the Irish and Catholics, though), but everyone's taxes went to support it, which wasn't fair to Catholics, Presbyterians, Lutherans, etc.

We have no state-supported religion in the US, but when the gov't shows preference to a religion, or even to religion itself, it's being unfair. Look at it this way, would you like upside-down pentagrams on your money? would you like "one nation under Zeus" in your pledge?

There is no necessity to put it in our pledge, implying in our pledge of allegiance that this is a belief that all good Americans hold.

The only thing to be careful about is to remember that, even if you don't say it every day, that you believe this nation has to answer to God, and that the government isn't free to do as it pleases, and you have a right to change laws and policies you see as immoral. I say this because I was once told that once this nation isn't "under God," then it's implied that we're all just "under the government:" a govenment which has no limits but what it decides it does.

If you're a Theist, just remember there are lines the government can't cross, and that your allegiance to the government is always secondary to your allegiance to God.

(note also that while no one's tax dollars are supposed to go to a Church, those who send their children to private of parochial schools still pay for the public school system in their taxes. Though I suppose that could have to do with how an educated populace benefits the whole of society.)

------------------
Steal my dreams and sell them back to me.....

I'm not saying it would be persecution to remove the words from the pledge, but it's definitely showing who runs the religious tolerance show in the country. And their agenda has me a little bit on edge, judging by the way things are going. Rehnquist said something that this deals with issues that are a lot greater than domestic ones. Likewise, I think it deals with ones greater than schoolkids saying two words everyday. But the premise is still pretty dimwitted. So it could be the straw that broke the camel's back. Small case, big ramifications.

[This message has been edited by TheSandlot (edited March 24, 2004).]

Here's the thing. This isnt BANNING religion from everything. This is not forcing children, adults, teens, whoever, to say things against their religious beliefs. Believe it or not, not all people are Judeo-Christian. And in a public school, run and operated by people regardless of religion, not all people should be FORCED to say things that go against their beliefs.

------------------
"Just remember -- No matter how bad things get, Northern Minnesota will always be there"
-- Garrison Keeler

God forbid they actually follow through on the separation of church and state. Adhering to the constitution would have HORRIBLE RAMIFICATIONS.

------------------
WOOSH|-----@%

And that is the reason why I'm in whole-hearted support of the voucher system.

To be honest, I think there would be a large stink of "under God" were replaced/removed. There is still a large majority of people who claim to believe in a higher power (God/Jesus, Allah, Budda, etc.).

My take.

------------------
<scribbly handwriting barely resembling name>

I love it how people always assume that means there can be no religion in the Government. I've actually had people try to tell me Bush can't ban gay marriages because it's a religious belief.

Sorry, but that's not what that means at all. It means the Government can't establish a national church. They can put whatever they want in any motto, anthem, or pledge of allegience they want.

------------------
Do you have stairs in your house?

[This message has been edited by Correction (edited March 24, 2004).]

Let me start off by saying that the Pledge of Allegiance and the fact that people say it every single day in some places is utterly stupid. Luckily for me, public and private schools here don't follow this trend.



This case is not so much about religious tolerance as it is about tolerance to people who have no religious believes. As it stands now, I can not officially swear allegiance to my country without acknowledging god. Huh?

I also find the rest of your post a bit ridiculous, particularly the 3rd "the liberals are out to get us" paragraph. I would consider it a fact that aethists in this country are much more likely to be prosecuted by religious extremists than the other way around.

[This message has been edited by KnobZ (edited March 24, 2004).]

I do believe that separation of church and state was meant to entirely SEPARATE the CHURCH and the STATE. They should be completely separate. I think we can all agree on that. How far that goes is another question, obviously. I would like to think it would go far enough as to say that the state cannot show a bias towards a religion. Would you agree? I sure hope you would. I would now assume that this is showing bias, and that it is unconstitutional.

Also, like it or not, the entire concept of the Pledge of Allegiance is pointless indoctrination.
------------------
WOOSH|-----@%

[This message has been edited by BobTheMasher (edited March 24, 2004).]

I'd say it anyway, but I try to look at it from their perspective. The two words imply a lot, and even if most are theists of some kind, it's still unfair. It's not like we're being told we can't express our belief in a God, we are just told the government shouldn't affirm or deny that belief.

Even if you follow the movement directly to it's extreme, nothing unfair will happen to you. When it actually starts being oppressive, let me know.

------------------
Steal my dreams and sell them back to me.....

Did I say it was?



Yeah...I really miss having the cold steel pressing against my head every morning too. Boy, those were the days... You really felt like you'd come up in the world when you heard the gun cock if you slowed down before you paused too long coming out of "nation", and right before "under".

[This message has been edited by TheSandlot (edited March 24, 2004).]

In some schools, they can scrutinize, give detention, suspend, or even expel in serious cases, so.. I mean, I guess its not TECHNICALLY forcing, but.. you can choose going to school, and continuing your future, or saying the pledge

------------------
"Just remember -- No matter how bad things get, Northern Minnesota will always be there"
-- Garrison Keeler

In my schools, the same could've happened if I did say the words.

Heh, that's nothing. These past couple of days I've been looking at Saturday school for turning in my schedule for next year late, and detention for telling the lady that's nonsense.

------------------
Do you have stairs in your house?

Does the Pledge even specify which God it is referring too? No, so I don't see why people get so worked up about it. And because it doesn't specify, it's not persecuting Christians.

------------------
Only To Keep The Public Happy

It's simple, really. The Lemon Test usually used in cases such as these. If the law fails one prong, it's unconstitutional.

- The government's action must not promote a particular religion or religious view;
- The government's action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion; and
- The government's action must not result in an "excessive entanglement" of the government and religion.

Strangely enough, adding "under God" to the pledge obviously fails the first two and probably the last.

"Under God" is lose. Any questions?

They should change it to "under Jesus."

------------------
BV's rendition of Titanic: Let's have sex. I won't let go. I don't need this stone.
The End.
~ Wolfy

Thats not the point... There arent any Muslims complaining. They can accept "under god" to mean "under Allah" and thed Buhdists "under Budha". The problem is that not everyone believes in a higher power, and until every single person who is a legal resident of the united states believes in a hiugher power of some sort the words "under god" shouldn't be in the pledge of aliegence. They also shoudnt be on the money but thats antoher issue all together.

Just for reference, here's the first admendment.

"Seperation of Chruch and state" does not exist in the Constitution. "Under God" in the pledge does not create a government sponsored relgion and it does not prohibit people from practing their own relgion in any way.

------------------
I'm not an actor. I just play one on TV.

That argument, however, always baffled me. It's one thing for a religious person to NOT do something because it's against their religion, since they would view it as a sin or something as such... but for an ATHIEST to worry about this... who cares!? If you're athiest, what difference does it make to you? It's not like you have any higher power to worry about zapping you down for worshipping another being.

------------------
Do you have stairs in your house?

[This message has been edited by Correction (edited March 24, 2004).]

I HATE THAT. I HATE THAT MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE IN THE ENTIRE WORLD.

How would you like to pledge allegiance to your country by saying "I pledge allegiance, to the flag, or the united states of america, and to the republic, for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and jsutice for all. AND I SURE LOVE GAY SEX."

Would that be fun? Would you be happy knowing that you just said that you loved gay sex?

------------------
WOOSH|-----@%

No, but that's not what it's saying at all. The statement isn't saying you worship a god, or even believe in one.

------------------
Do you have stairs in your house?

Like I said...it's a generic phrase.

And yet here you are, arguably one of the most hard-line "liberals" on massassi, and Sandlot was right. How ironic.

------------------
Ω of 14

Also, for true seperation of church and state, the government should not even touch this issue or ever address it.

Likewise with public schools. If an area public school wants to teach a Christian or Muslim class, *LET IT*. The government should not be filtering out religion, it should simply not be addressing it or sanctioning it or denying it. It should be doing nothing about it.

------------------
Ω of 14

Ha ha ha that caught me off guard a bit.

Some people just dont lke the whole God Thing. I wll once in a blue moon say "god Willing", but I try not to say it at all usually. When I feel pressured by any sorta christian belief, I can get REALLY FLIPPIN PEEVED. SO I can sorta see where some of this comes from.

if(getThingFlags(source) & 0x8){
  do her}
elseif(getThingFlags(source) & 0x4){
  do other babe}
else{
  do a dude}

If they need to take it outta the pledge, they need to do it for the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and any other legal document or currency that has "God" in it. I'd like to see them try!


Absolutely!

------------------
I am Darth Slaw.
The Dark Lord of the Sith,
And part of the Nightfire mod team

[This message has been edited by Darth Slaw (edited March 24, 2004).]

That is what it's saying. Let me spell it out for you. I am pledging my allegiance to a country. This country exists under god, and I acknowledge that and it is under these terms that I pledge allegiance. However, I don't believe I am under god. Do you see a connection yet?

[Edit: let's try a role reversal. "i pledge allegiance, to the flag, of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, not under a god, indvisible, with libery and justice for all."]

------------------
WOOSH|-----@%

[This message has been edited by BobTheMasher (edited March 24, 2004).]

[This message has been edited by BobTheMasher (edited March 24, 2004).]

Buddha wasn't a god.

------------------
MadQuack on Military school: Pro's: I get to shoot a gun. Con's: Everything else.
"I'm going to beat you until the laws of physics are violated!!" ! Maeve's Warcry

RIP -MaDaVentor-. You will be missed.