Pledge of allegiance declared unconstuti

[kilomike]

Atheists

Don't blame liberals for this, Please!!!!! Be sure the blame is placed correctly--on ATHEISTS who are attempting to foist their views on other people. As a liberal, and proud of it, person who also believes in God, I was horrified at this foolish decision.

I also want to point out that ALL the Senators unanimously condemned this silliness--including Sens. Daschle and Lieberman, both of whom made public comments about this folly.

Let's skip the liberal-bashing and put the blame squarely on atheist zealots.

 

[cherokee]

I agree we should not "chill out." It is this "silent majority" and lack of action and this chill out attitude that allows decisions such as this to be made since no one speaks out. The minority screams loud enough to be the only one heard and this is what we get. It is not speaking up that allows this political correctness to run amok.

And yes I do believe liberals are to blame, from prayer in school to school vouchers, liberals have fought to get any word God removed from schools. Daschle certainly did it only when he realized it would be incredibly unpopular not to.

 

[AWACoff]

Just to clarify, I am agnostic, not an atheist. Anyways, the phrase "one nation, under God", not "one nation, under a god". It is clearly stipulating the Christian version of an omnipotent being. The founding fathers did not believe in Budha so it obviously is in reference to "THE" God. The ironic part of this all is that 9/11 would never have happened if it wasn't for organized religion. Does the phrase "Religion is the opiate of the masses" ring a bell? The greatness of this country is that people are free to do what they please...to an extent. You cannot yell "FIRE" in a crowded theather...and you cannot force you views on others. Please indulge yourselves in your personal pursuits but do not force me to follow you. I am trying to exercise my rights to be apathetic. Sometimes I just don't care though.

 

[V-1]

How would any proponent of the "under god" phrase, inserted in 1954, feel if it were replaced with "under Allah", "under Vishnu", "under Satan", or "under Zeus"? In a secular nation, there is no place for endorsement of any particular religion. It's easy when in the majority to, consciously or not, force a lifestyle on others who don't agree with the beliefs of the masses.

I respectfully disagree with a statement made that the constitution guarantees "freedom of religion, not freedom from religion". As I recall from elementary history, one of the most prevalent reasons Europeans chose to settle in America was freedom of, and from religion. Seems I recall there was a time in parts of Europe when everyone was required to belong to the Catholic church.

More people have been killed throughout history over belief/non-belief in a particular religion than for any other reason. Unbelievable to me, considering all major religions were founded back when the Earth was flat, and the solar system revolved around it.

My unenlightened opinion only. Thanks for your tolerance.

 

[Timebuilder]

>>I respectfully disagree with a statement made that the constitution guarantees "freedom of religion, not freedom from religion". As I recall from elementary history, one of the most prevalent reasons Europeans chose to settle in America was freedom of, and from religion. Seems I recall there was a time in parts of Europe when everyone was required to belong to the Catholic church.

The folks that came here were not free from religion. When they arrived, they saw and heard diverse religious viewpoints being practiced and discussed with gusto. Many of our foundational ideas came from a viewpoint of what not to be, i.e.: Europe. That viewpoint is just as valid today as it was centuries ago. The only religious exposure that the Europeans were free FROM was the oppression in their PAST.

Understanding the intention of the establishment clause, as it has come to be called, is critical to this discussion. An establishment of a particular religion, let's say Catholicism, would require according to the founders the passage of a federal law by the congress. The law might specify holidays, number of times of attendance per year, and the recitation of prayers at all public gatherings by a registered priest, and the legal punishments for failure to participate. THIS, and only this, is what was intended by the phrase found in the first amendment.

My sense about the early settlers is that they wished to practice their religious beliefs, not to avoid practices or assert that prayer in the small log schoolhouses was an affront to their children.

For V-1: if the founders had been practitioners of Olympic, Hidu, Satan worship, etc, we would not have the country that we live in today. The constitution does not guarantee a "sterile" environment without an exposure to the practices of the majority, only a lack of official approval of a particular set of practices. While the Atheists like to use the question stated above as an illustration of how they feel when they hear "one nation, under God", it is a poor illustration. They can only make their complaint because of the freedom that they have here in our United States, including the freedom to be disagreeable. If armed teams were moving house to house, forcing Atheists to their knees at gunpoint yelling "PRAY, you SWINE!", then I would agree that their rights are being violated. In the pledge of allegiance, this is simply not the case. In fact, every time an Atheist hears those words, he or she should be glad that they live HERE, where they are not forced to participate against their will.

>>The ironic part of this all is that 9/11 would never have happened if it wasn't for organized religion.

Actually, it happened becuase of those people who are being misled by an organized religion, not because "organized religion" exists. This isn't a fault of God, it's a fault of MAN.

Just as we sometimes have trouble understanding a set of regs that govern our activities in the air, we need to have a better grasp of the documents that are the basis of our freedoms.

 

[cherokee]

Right on Timebuilder. One thing I can't figure out is how these atheists and others who are perpetually offended find their arguement in the Constitution. Where does it say that "Thoust has the right NOT to be offended"? This must be the newest Amendement to the Constitution. If you don't want to say the "Under God", don't say it! No one will haul you off to jail. What happens when you see an athlete on TV thanking God for their performance? Do you write a letter to the TV station saying you have been offended because you heard a reference to God?And as far as tolerance goes V-1, it seems to me those people that advocate tolerance the most are in them selves the least tolerant. Did you ever think of being tolerant of the vast majority of people who want this in the Pledge? Or does tolerance only matter when it's the minority?

 

[Timebuilder]

As a former liberal and agnostic, I'll try and answer that question.

According to liberal belief, when a minoity does something, it is generally acceptable, and when a majority does something, it is almost always wrong!

Example: United Negro College Fund: good.

Example: United White Folks College Fund: bad.

Source: Walter Williams, economist. Graduate, Richard Allen Housing Project, Philadelphia.

 

[Obi-Wan]

I think many dont know that the GOD part was added in 1954. So technically if we did fine without it before (in the time of the founding fathers) we can survive without it now.

 

[STEVE CANYON]

The pledge wasn't written by or during the time of the founding fathers.

 

[STEVE CANYON]

The Pledge of Allegiance
A Short History
by Dr. John W. Baer
Copyright 1992 by Dr. John W. Baer



Francis Bellamy (1855 - 1931), a Baptist minister, wrote the original Pledge in August 1892. He was a Christian Socialist. In his Pledge, he is expressing the ideas of his first cousin, Edward Bellamy, author of the American socialist utopian novels, Looking Backward (1888) and Equality (1897).

Francis Bellamy in his sermons and lectures and Edward Bellamy in his novels and articles described in detail how the middle class could create a planned economy with political, social and economic equality for all. The government would run a peace time economy similar to our present military industrial complex.

The Pledge was published in the September 8th issue of The Youth's Companion, the leading family magazine and the Reader's Digest of its day. Its owner and editor, Daniel Ford, had hired Francis in 1891 as his assistant when Francis was pressured into leaving his baptist church in Boston because of his socialist sermons. As a member of his congregation, Ford had enjoyed Francis's sermons. Ford later founded the liberal and often controversial Ford Hall Forum, located in downtown Boston.

In 1892 Francis Bellamy was also a chairman of a committee of state superintendents of education in the National Education Association. As its chairman, he prepared the program for the public schools' quadricentennial celebration for Columbus Day in 1892. He structured this public school program around a flag raising ceremony and a flag salute - his 'Pledge of Allegiance.'

His original Pledge read as follows: 'I pledge allegiance to my Flag and (to*) the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.' He considered placing the word, 'equality,' in his Pledge, but knew that the state superintendents of education on his committee were against equality for women and African Americans. [ * 'to' added in October, 1892. ]

Dr. Mortimer Adler, American philosopher and last living founder of the Great Books program at Saint John's College, has analyzed these ideas in his book, The Six Great Ideas. He argues that the three great ideas of the American political tradition are 'equality, liberty and justice for all.' 'Justice' mediates between the often conflicting goals of 'liberty' and 'equality.'

In 1923 and 1924 the National Flag Conference, under the 'leadership of the American Legion and the Daughters of the American Revolution, changed the Pledge's words, 'my Flag,' to 'the Flag of the United States of America.' Bellamy disliked this change, but his protest was ignored.

In 1954, Congress after a campaign by the Knights of Columbus, added the words, 'under God,' to the Pledge. The Pledge was now both a patriotic oath and a public prayer.

Bellamy's granddaughter said he also would have resented this second change. He had been pressured into leaving his church in 1891 because of his socialist sermons. In his retirement in Florida, he stopped attending church because he disliked the racial bigotry he found there.

What follows is Bellamy's own account of some of the thoughts that went through his mind in August, 1892, as he picked the words of his Pledge:

It began as an intensive communing with salient points of our national history, from the Declaration of Independence onwards; with the makings of the Constitution...with the meaning of the Civil War; with the aspiration of the people...

The true reason for allegiance to the Flag is the 'republic for which it stands.' ...And what does that vast thing, the Republic mean? It is the concise political word for the Nation - the One Nation which the Civil War was fought to prove. To make that One Nation idea clear, we must specify that it is indivisible, as Webster and Lincoln used to repeat in their great speeches. And its future?

Just here arose the temptation of the historic slogan of the French Revolution which meant so much to Jefferson and his friends, 'Liberty, equality, fraternity.' No, that would be too fanciful, too many thousands of years off in realization. But we as a nation do stand square on the doctrine of liberty and justice for all...

If the Pledge's historical pattern repeats, its words will be modified during this decade. Below are two possible changes.

Some prolife advocates recite the following slightly revised Pledge: 'I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all, born and unborn.'

A few liberals recite a slightly revised version of Bellamy's original Pledge: 'I pledge allegiance to my Flag, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with equality, liberty and justice for all.'



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Bibliography:

Baer, John. The Pledge of Allegiance, A Centennial History, 1892 - 1992, Annapolis, Md. Free State Press, Inc., 1992.
Miller, Margarette S. Twenty-Three Words, Portsmouth, Va. Printcraft Press, 1976.

www.vineyard.net/vineyard/history/pledge.htm

 

[LR25]

Political correctness has to stop, its tearing the fibers away bit by bit.

I'm not that old but, the younger people of our country are absorbing all they see and hear.

Its like the song says, they are our future.

GOD help us.

Its like some radio shows on the AM dial, if it offends you, dont tune in.

I heard this from Niel Boortz, " I am here to offend everybody, this is your insensitivity training".

 

[aero99]

When was the last time any of you pledged your alligiance?

I think the last time I did was in 6th grade.

Some people have nothing better to do with their time than to argue about something so trivial.

I am an American and love America, won't go into my spiratual beliefs, but could care less if the word "GOD" is used by 6th graders and younger.

Aren't there some kids starving somewhere that we could spend energy on?

 

[kilomike]

Well said, aero99!

 

[Timebuilder]

>>When was the last time any of you pledged your alligiance?

Answer: Last Sunday morning, as a part of our worship service.

I'll bet it frightens a great many people to think that American school children might be able to exercise the rights that their parents fail to understand.

 

[DCitrus9]

Our forefather's very intentionally excluded any religious statements from the original declaration and constitution. They wanted to impress the fact that the government would not, should not, and does not advocate any specific religious beliefs. This is the same reason "under god" does NOT belong in a proclamation to our nation and it's government. If you choose to believe in a god, fine, but why must you feel the need to impress "god" upon the nation? I'm sure you are offended with Osama attempting to force Allah upon the U.S., yet you choose not to see the correlation to christians who act the same way.
I would like to be patriotic and say the pledge of allegience, but feel it has been tainted with the religious overtone, and I strongly support removing "under god".

 

[Delta3]

I was at GWB's inauguration last year and I was stunned when the preacher asked all 100,000 people to bow our heads and say a prayer to God and Jesus. I bet not all of the 100,000 people on the mall that day were christians, but no one went nuts or anything. Most people just stood there and didn't do anything.

I really don't mind things like saying the pledge of allegiance or saying a prayer, it's not like they are asking you to sign over your soul. If you don't like it, just don't do it.

I just hate when other people push their ideas onto you, and this happens on both the right and left side. I'm sick of going to San Francisco and having a rainbow flag waved in my face and people saying "We're here, we're queer and there's nothing you can do about it a$$hole"

That's when it goes to far.

 

[LR25]

I mean no disrespect, and you are just speaking your mind, but were you really stunned?

This is what I am talking about. Say I was at a place where they practiced Hinduism(whatever) and the loud speakers sounded, everybody drops to there knees and falls on thier faces, as a Christian, am I going to be SHOCKED or HORRIFIED, no. Yes, I might feel a little out of place, but I'm not going to feel "offended" by any stretch of the imagination.

If you do not want to put your hand over your heart and not say the Pledge, than dont do it, this is not a socialistic society.

You have the right to do what you want to do, but so does your nieghbor, why does there have to be laws passed becuase someones child came home from school and asked, what is the Pledge of Allegiance.

I dont think its possible to construct every faccet of each individual person in the entire counrty, thats what is going on, everybody wants thier piece, man, I'm just glad to be an American.

This person dont like that, that person dont like this, is really going to effect you in everyday life. The fact that some Hindus dropped on there faces around me, is that really going to ruin my day, year, decade, NO!

You know what stuns me, the time and energy spent on the most useless subjects that our government does.

I wish I knew what were the hot topics back in the early 40's in this country, and what people were spending there energy on then. We all know for the most part what it was, but what were some of the side notes, some of the things that are not really covered by the history books.

I bet it wasnt people going to local governments saying that all these American flags were distracting, and they should be removed.

I bet it wasnt a lawyer defending an American traitor for Dec. 7th 41, saying "He was just confused because his parents said to sow his wild oats".

What I am getting at is, the endless BS that is in the media everyday about meaningless blather, there have got to be worth while issues out there to deal with other than someones feelings were hurt.

Lets get to some real issues.

Borders, visa's being renewed to dead terrorist's, drivers being arrested for the 10th time for DUI's, wellfare, multi-billion dollar corporate schemes that put thousands of people on the street.

 

[Timebuilder]

>>Our forefather's very intentionally excluded any religious statements from the original declaration and constitution. They wanted to impress the fact that the government would not, should not, and does not advocate any specific religious beliefs.

Only the second sentence is true, my friend.

The mis-characterizationof "the separation of church and state", which is not a constitutionally based concept, has cause a great deal of trouble and wasted time.

In the first amendment, the intent of the founders was that we not have an official, state-sponsored religion. Congress is mandated to pass no law respecting religion; in other words, to have a violation of this "establishment clause", we would have to have congress declare a specific religion, such as Catholicism of Methodism, and declare holidays, practices, official prayers, etc. None of that has ever been proposed, so there is no vilolation of any law or founding document when the congress opens with a prayer, the supreme court opens with a prayer, or when a San Diego schoolgirl says "one nation, under God".

Incidentally, she had no problem with the pledge, nor did her mother. It was her father, who is in a custody battle, who complained.

Many of the young men and women I know who have come out of the public school system over the past 35 years have only learned the politically correct version of this discussion. The NEA is most likely the greastest proponent of this mis-information.

>>I wish I knew what were the hot topics back in the early 40's in this country, and what people were spending there energy on then. We all know for the most part what it was, but what were some of the side notes, some of the things that are not really covered by the history books.

The part that we know the most about is the fact that we entered the war "late", that there was a strong isolationist movement in the US, and that Charles Lindberg did not set a good example with respect to Nazi Germany.

What is often played down is the amount of anti-Jewish sentiment in the US at that time, and few know that FDR turned away a ship full of Jewish refugees from our shores. A great many people in the US thought that Hitler should be left alone to finish his ethnic cleansing. If Hitler had not posed a serious military threat to europe in the process, he might have accomplished his task. Most history texts are too superficial to discuss these matters.

>>Borders, visa's being renewed to dead terrorist's, drivers being arrested for the 10th time for DUI's, wellfare, multi-billion dollar corporate schemes that put thousands of people on the street.

Amen.

Investor confidence needs to be restored. The SEC regs are more than sufficient, and the enforcement isn't. I think we should freeze all the accounts of these bozos until found guilty. If they are found guilty, let's distribute the money among those who lost retirement money and jobs, and make it a tax-free distribution, to boot. How we respond to this crisis will be an example to the world of what America is made of. Justice. It's what's for dinner.

 

[TurboS7]

the power of the gospel

God and the gospel of Jesus Christ the power of salvation are diffrent. People can not understand it nor explain it unless they are under the conviction or inlightment by the Holy Spirit. Jesus said that, "I am the way, the truth, and the life, no man comes to the father except by me." This is a very powerful phrase said by Jesus and is very heavy. The trinity consist of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I like to believe that Satan challanged God after being thrown out of heaven for his rebellion. (Job) The angels had no choice they had to worship God, when they chose to worship Satan instead 1/3 of the angels were thrown out of heaven by God himself. God gave him the earth to rule and control. Satan said you make a being that has a choice and they will choose me over you. God did that when he created man(Genesis), ultimately man failed even when he was having fellowship with Almighty God every day. But God had a plan for the human race. He told Satan you have bruised my heal but I am going to crush your head. Satan had no idea what God was talking about, but he was soon to find out. Once man rebelled we were seperated from God due to our sin. In the Old Testement of the Bible we read of people that were imdwelled by the Holy Spirit, but they were few and far between. God had a covenant with Israel, and he kept it , but Israel totally rebelled. Part of the covenant was that the Messiah would come through Israel to be the savior of the world. What????HUH???? You got to see things from God's eye's. Even with the rebelious nature of man God still loved us. He had a plan. His plan was that he would send his Son Jesus Christ to be born of a virgin(Matthew) and live life impowered by the Holy Spirit on this earth. This is all documented in the Gospels. Jesus always talked about the fact that he would die, but no one really understood what he meant. You see, you or I could have died on that cross, we could have taken the pain, been beaten, and passed on, but nothing would have happened but another man just died. When Jesus died on the cross he had lived a perfect life totally submitting himself to the Father, he knew no sin even though he was tempted many times. The physical death was nothing, but something happened on that cross that changed human history forever. Because of sin and rebellion man was seperated from God for eternity, but Jesus had never been seperated from the Father or the Holy Spirit. When Jesus was on that cross God turned his back on Jesus, the Holy Trinity commited suicide, they were destroyed. Jesus cried out"My God , My God why have you forsaken me." Jesus at that time took the penalty of all our sin and was seperated from the Trinity and the Father even though he did not deserve it, He took our place.Had Jesus not lived a perfect life or had sinned God would have ceased exsisting as God and Satan would have won. Three days later Jesus rose from the dead proof that he had conquered death and paid the price. John 3:16, says"For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believes in him will not perish but have everlasting life." Jesus paid the price and by believing that He paid the price for our sins(all have sinned Rom.3:23)we can have fellowship with the Father. Satan was defeated and he plans to blind the eyes of many and take as many as he can with him to eternal **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED**ation. Satan is a nasty fellow, I am conviced that for those who reject the gospel that Satan will remind you for eternity of that day and the hour that you turned your back on God. The gospel provides that you can believe anything that you wish, but because of the power of the gospel, if you want fellowship with the one true God, the God of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob then you can only have that through Jesus Christ because He was the only one that was and is God Almighty. Why are there other religions, Satan is pissed and he will do anything to fool the human race. The fact of the matter is either you are indwelled by the Holy Spirit via believing that Christ died for your sins on the cross and paid the penalty, or you are eternally lost and seperated from God totally fooled by Satan and are on your way to being seperated from God forever. It is your choice, every human has the right to choose one way or the other, it is black or white. You make your choice, it makes you no better one way or the other from your human brother, it is just TRUTH vs. a lie.

 

[Timebuilder]

You know, in this politically correct, ecumenical, "all religions are equally nonsensical" world, this is probably the very first time that most of the readers here on the board have heard the gospel.

How many are really, really ANGRY to have it presented?

How many are surprised at the substance of the explanation?

How many realize that the favorite disguise of evil is to pretend to be "good", "fair", or "reasonable"?

As tensions escalate in the Mideast, and terror threatens our way of life, all of us would be wise to take a few minutes and consider the Big Picture, and think about a few questions that you never take the time to consider.

In America, you are free to choose these things.