Pledge of allegiance declared unconstuti

[AWACoff]

Timebuilder,
Just because you are a Jesus Freak does not make you "holier than thou". Get off your high horse. I chose not to live my life believing in myth...I chose reality. The Bible (especially the old testament) is simply stories "handed" down generation by generation due to word of mouth. Have you ever played the "Telephone Game"? That game goes like this...a story is told to one person, they relay the story to another...and on and on. Eventually the story is completely changed and bears almost no resemblance to the original. Much of the old testament was created prior to the written word. It is a story...that's it. The New Testament is filled with similar inaccuracies due to incorrect translations. We are dirt. We live...we die. There is nothing else. Enjoy life while you have it.

PS. Don't worry about me burning in hell...there is no hell. Above all, fly safe and have fun. I signing off this thread.

 

[beezlebozo]

Obviously, eternal suffering and d@mnation awaits anyone who does not believe in god's infinite love.

If it's not unconstitutional, don't be upset if your child's teacher is a satanist, and worships in front of the kids every day, as long as they don't have to participate and no laws are broken.

beezlebozo
clown from hell


"God does not play dice with the universe. He plays an ineffable game of His own devising, which might be compared, from the perspective of any of the other players, to being involved in an obscure and complex version of poker in a pitch dark room, with blank cards, for infinite stakes, with a dealer who won't tell you the rules, and who smiles ALL the time." - Good Omens

 

[Timebuilder]

Thanks for reminding me of my old liberal/agnostic days, when I was unable to have a discussion like this without making insulting remarks and attacking the person. You have a right to your opinion, too, even though it is different from mine. That's the American way.

You know who would stop that teacher from practicing satanism in front of the class? Not a Christian. It would be PETA, protesting the killing of the animal sacrifice!

Awacoff, it's good to know that you believe in something: secular humanism. As an American you have made a choice, based on the religious freedom you are guaranteed under the constitution.

That's how this thread got started. If you stopped here for a moment, and thought a little about your freedoms, and how precious they are at this time in our history, then all of this keyboard time on this thread was worth it. God bless America.

Fly safe.

 

[TWA Dude]

Who placed the nativity scene there? The government? Or, was it American citizens? Was a law passed mandating that a particular religious symbol be placed on public property by the city council, or did individual citizens, acting on their own volition, decide what they wanted to place there without any prompting from the government?

Regardless of how it got there a religious symbol (as opposed to just the word "God") on publically-supported property is an implicit endorsement of said religion. Most buildings are private and may endorse whatever they wish.

This is the very essence of the discussion: what actually entails an "official endorsement" of a particular religious belief, and can the government limit the activity of American citizens, exercising their constitutional freedoms, just because they are employed by the government in a public building, or attending a public school? Do these employees or students and teachers give up thier constitutional rights in these situations?

Whether or not anyones' rights are being violated is up to the courts to decide. For example, when does the line between insulting someone, which is allowed by free speech, cross over to harassment, which is not allowed? As years pass society changes and often so too do definitions of acceptable or unacceptable behavior. So to answer your question as to what constitutes "official endorsement" it's what the courts decide. The three branches of our government and the checks and balances therein decide.

If you have a fear that Christians want to be recognized as the official religion of the United States, you can relax, now. I would fight that idea to the death.

I believe you. But at the same time those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it. Never, EVER say "it can't happen here". It can.

Having an agenda is a big part of being an American. The point of setting aside time is to allow an activity that has little opportunity in a busy student schedule.

How sad it is that our public school students are so-oo busy that time has to be taken out of class to allow them to pray. Horse-cookies! I've missed many days of classes due to religious observance and I never once had any troubles because of it. Our "busy" students who wish or need to pray have plenty of opportunity to do so.

You may have a perception that Christians want to impose a belief on others, but no one has explained just how this is done.

Here's how. A child is the only non-Christian in the class and during a "prayer period" the teacher leads the class in Christian prayer. It's happened to me. It's peer and teacher pressure on a vulnerable child. I resisted it but not all can or will. Nobody should be subjected to that in a public school.

How many people prayed for the first time as that plane accelerated to the ocean?

One of my favorite expressions is "there are no atheists in foxholes".

 

[TurboS7]

Sinners saved by grace

The ONLY diffrence between Christains and the rest of the world is that we are sinners saved by grace."For by grace are you saved through faith, it is not of yourselves it is a GIFT from God, not of works least any man should boast." The only evidence of the power of the gospel are changed lives, changed hearts from the inside out, not slaves to sin. Man cannot do that it happens only through the power of the Holy Spirit. It is a miracle that no one can understand, when that power of conviction starts knocking on the deep inside of your life don't reject it, check it out. The power is not in church, it is not in any type of organized religion, it is in the wonderful Word of God the Bible, which God through inspiration of the scriptures gave to us. No AcWolf, it is not a bunch of fairy tales is a POH from the one who made us.This Word has been preserved and is .002% accurate from the time that it was authored. There are many books written both Christian and secular that talk about how incrediable that is.
When I was flying back from Punta Cana the other night at 350 we turned the lights off just to look at the stars. There were so many and they were so bright it was breath taking. The creation was awesome it is all around us. The aerodynamic'
s and the physic's of flight are amazing. Can you imagine what the recip or turbine engine would be like if when the metals got hot they contracted instead of expanding. We would be carrying more oil then fuel. VHF vs. HF amazing that we can send signals through the air. God told Adam to subdue the earth. All this stuff has been here since the beginning, we have just discovered it.
I love freedom of religion. I was talking to a Muslim from Pakistan the other day that has only lived here 6 months. He said the freedom of religion here was fantastic, in Pakistan you can only practice the type of Muslim faith for the part of the country that he lives in. In other words I guess we would have a Catholic state, a Baptist state, a Buddist state, etc. We don't have that. I know that I have nothing to worry about as when the power of the gospel takes hold it changes lives and burns like fire, no one can put it out. It is not religion it is a relationship with the awesome creator that created all things for us because He loves us.
In Duet. 6 God promises Israel that he would bless them that blessed Israel and curse them that cursed Israel. Our blessing on this country may or not be because of the fact that we have acknowleged God. I personally believe that God has blessed this country for one reason and that is to finance getting the gospel to the uttermost part of the earth. I personally believe that the Christian church has failed in this way to great proportions in America, and we will pay for that for eternity.
If you guys havn't been to Haiti you need to go there. Haiti was dedicated to Satan upon its inception, voodo and Satan worship are the mainstream of Haitian economics. The country is not blessed and the curse of Satan is all over the island, it is evident for any that go there. The Christian church still thrives, I will never forget one night in Cap Haitian sitting out on the balcony of the hotel. The heard the Baptist church in the valley singing hyms, their joyous singing was mixed with the voodo drums in the hills mixing together to one thing. It is all a choice of the heart.
Thankyou all who have participated in this thread, being able to express your views on what we hold dear to our heart is one of the precious freedoms that we as American's have. Whether you are Muslim, Hindu, agnostic, a satanist, or whatever, you are welcome here, thankyou.

 

[A Squared]

Time Builder,


>>>>>Well, I see we have an outspoken group of anti-religion bigots here.

Nope, I'm not. If you go back and read my posts in this thread you won't find a single word attacking christianity, or any other religion. Nor is there any indication of what I do or don't worship. All you know is that I disagree with you and you hypocritical opinion on the pledge. Like TWA Dude said, any time domeone disagrees with you, you beleive it's an attack on christianity.
No, it's not, it just isn't there in my words.


>>>>As a left winger, my old personal club, you have to accuse me of lying.

Nope, wrong again, I'm not a left winger, not particularly liberal at all. I haven't made any statement about my political beliefs. You don't like being shown to be a hypocrite, you can't do anything about it so you fall back on the tired old ploy of screaming Liberal, Liberal. After all, anyone who is against you MUST be a liberal, right? No, wrong, I'm just against hypocracy, specifically, your hypocracy.

Now, even though you've tried to cloud the issue with your unsubstantiated charges of "attack on christianity" and "left winger"; Even though you dance around the question and say you'd welcome it, to use it as a "lesson", your answer is clear, you wouldn't be happy with a pledge in public schools which described the nation as "under Satan". That my friend is hypocracy. All your arguments that God is OK in the pledge, that it's not a prayer, that it doesn't demand respect or reverence, that it not a big deal, etc. etc.
All your arguements fall flat on thier face, when we find that you're not willing to be guided by your own words when it's something you don't like, instead of something you do like.


Your hypocracy carries through into your arguments about school prayer. Prayer is not outlawed in school. A student may use his or her free time to pray. Your argument about needing to make time is completely specious. I look back to my high school days and see a lot of free time. In the morning, students who arrived a bit early, were allowed into the cafeteria to study or quietly socialize. There would have been ample time for student to do a little pre-school praying. After that, we had a homeroom period, which had no specific activities other than that we be in our seats and be quiet. Another perfect prayer opportunity. During the day, all students had one or more "study hall" periods during which there were no specific requirements other than being in your seat and being quiet. During Study Hall, you could go to the library, which would be an even better place for a little private, quiet, reflective worship. During lunch, there is planty of time to give quiet thanks for the meal before you. We could also spend our lunch period in the library, as lons as we didn't bring food....another perfect prayer opportunity. There's plenty of free time for a little quiet prayer in a public school day. If praying was truly a priority for a student, they would make the time to do it. Of course, students "praying" in a loud, disruptive manner should be disciplined, just like any other disruptive punk who talks in class, or is otherwise disruptive.

No, my friend, there is ample opportunity for a student of faith to quietly, privately worship, in a public school. The thing is, that's not what you want. When you speak of school prayer, you are speaking of the teacher leading the students in a group prayer, prefererably to your god, you know, the RIGHT god.

That is exactly what should be prohibited in public schools.

 

[kilomike]

I do not recall instances of discrimination against Christians in public schools in my local area. On the weekends, there are CCD (Confraternity of Catholic Doctrine) classes held in the public school building. The church rents the class room space at a certain time slot. Hardly any persecution there.

Additionally, I do not like the idea of a teacher-led Christian prayer. What if some of the kids in the class are Jewish or Muslim? I believe this to be forcing the teacher's beliefs on others. Equally, I feel that the decision on the Pledge was an atheist's attempt to force his views on other people who do not share his atheism. Neither situation is right. Nobody has the right to force their religious views on others.

As an Eastern-rite Catholic by belief, I do not generally discuss religion with others since I consider it a personal matter. For example I know that many people believe in Hell. As a Polish National Catholic by faith, I do not believe in Hell, but that does not give me the right to tell others that thay should not believe in Hell. I have trouble even with my very Roman Catholic mother who believes that the only true religion is Catholicism and with her awful reaction towards an uncle who converted to Pentecostal beliefs. I say that her Roman Catholic faith is right for HER, that his Pentacostalism is right for HIM, and that my Eastern-rite Catholic beliefs are right for ME. There is no one right answer. Come on, folks let's stop trying to convert other people!! I do not care for it when people of other religions go knocking on my door to try to convert me. This is how I felt when the Pledge decision was made.

Also, this situation has NOTHING to do with liberal/conservative! That is the silliest thing I ever heard. It was an ATHEIST that stirred up the pot with this kind of silliness. I have no problem with atheists--they have the right to believe what they wish, but PLEASE do not try to convert me!!

 

[SDF2BUF2MCO]

Wow a religious discussion on an aviation board.
Wanted to chime in with my $0.02. I would lean toward most of the folks who don't want to be bothered with religion and/or christianity would rather think I can do it on my own.
In recent years, however, one thing that has troubled me is our country's obsession with social security numbers. It's used for everything such as college ID, to get insurance, credit cards, get cable TV(!!!), driver's license, pilot license, vote (at least in Florida), etc.
In the book of Revelation 13 it talks about the numbering of man and not being able to buy or sell without the mark. I tried to buy car insurance in FL and was basically shut out until I provided my big brother SSN. While this may seem insignificant, Rev.13 also states the mark will be 'in' the hand or forehead. The technology is here for this to happen via computer chips. What is fascinating is there wasn't any technology or energy source for this type of thing to happen hundreds or thousands of years ago when this was written. So either the person who wrote this had a great science fiction mind or it came from "above".
Again, what has caused me to rethink some of this is our country's obsession with the SSN.

 

[Delta3]

I wonder how many public schools had an assembly after 9/11. At my public university we did, and it was called a "Prayer Service". This is at a school that has more Indians (from India) than African Americans, and no one complained about it.

I don't think events like that are "pushing" religions on people as they are voluntary just like the Pledge of Allegiance.

 

[TWA Dude]

I don't think events like that are "pushing" religions on people as they are voluntary just like the Pledge of Allegiance.

I agree, a one-time commemorative session like you described isn't offensive. However every day for a designated period of time is something different.

 

[Timebuilder]

I just got up after a great night's sleep. When I went to bed at 3:00AM, I had just finished a night flight back from Boca. What an incredible firmament was there for me to see at FL410, over a dark ocean, with the Milky Way all bright and beautiful. Accident of nature. Sure, buddy. If you say so....

Anyway, if our esteemed members don't consider the "hypothetical" examples that were posed here to be slightly obnoxious, or if phrases like "squeal like a stuck pig" aren't considered insulting, well, then I stand corrected. I've been guilty of this myself as I mentioned in my old career, when I was much younger, and less mature.

Likewise, I spent enough time as a liberal to be able to identify one who holds those views. If somone protests when I find they have met one of my tests of the label, I'm not surprised. I always called myself a moderate. It sounded so much more reasonable. After all, I wasn't dealing with the truth, only the idea that we liberals had better, more reasonable ideas than everyone else. I have discovered since that time that all of the really good ideas come from one source, and folks, it ain't us.

In this case, I'm being labeled as a hypocrite. That's one I have borne in the past so too, I know the difference. The only aparent way thay I could "prove" that I am not a hypocrite to this detractor would involve a lot of things that just won't hapen, at least not now. It's entertaining to try and bait someone, hoping they will fall. When they don't fall, all they have to stand on is to pretend that they fell, pointing and saying "look, you fell!" Am I glad that satanism isn't yet practiced in the public schools? You bet. Aren't you? Only a fool or a Satanist would like to see that happen. Let me ammend that: the satanist doesn't want the attention of the entire country on his school district. He searches for the dark corner, always hiding his ways. He follows the prince of darkeness. He circumvents the rights of the child's parents, and instill beliefs that are counter to our culture and destructive to our nation. He works best through the young idealist mind, who sees our best future through socialism, environmentalism, feminism, and a large centralized government to redistribute wealth, as suggested by Karl Marx.

I guess the other thing I would have to do is teach my children about the satan who is being worshiped by their teacher, as I mentioned in response to the "hypothetical" example I was given. Well, that's an easy test, but the conditions of the test don't exist, so heck, you can think what you want. If it helps, you can imagine a nation of outraged parents, storming the doors of Ted Turner's offices. The reality is this: we really are one nation, under God, according to those who set up our country. We didn't need an act of congress in the 1950's to make that true. When we become one nation under satan, which a lot of people would like to see sooner than you expect (see Revelation), then we will change the pledge and our money to reflect that new reality.

Under the honor code, I learned that when somone calls you a hypocrite without the proof, it is more of a statement about themselves than it is about you. After the academy, I went to a liberal college (New York University) and I put away much of what I learned at the academy for a time. Luckily for me, I had only put it aside, and not discarded it wholesale. Fortuately, with some added years came wisdom, and you would have had to know me in the seventies in order to truly appreciate the truth of that statement.

That said, let's try to finish this up.

Prior to 9/11, Christians were the only opressed religious group in the public school system. It is a system run largely by "worldly" men and women, who place their faith in the works of MAN, not God. Just refer to that list of famous quotes posted earlier in this thread. As you saw posted on this topic, the "unsaved" place their faith in man and his thinking, and regard God and His Word as myth, legend, story, oral history, and if you are patient enough, they confess the Bible to be the work of an idle mind. If you ask a feminist, they will tell you it was written by men to oppress women. The feminists never make it to the book of Proverbs, apparently, where God shows what he expects of women, even though a woman was the first link in the chain of "sin". Man was right there to eagerly go along with the idea, too.

If your opinion is that Christians aren't opressed, particularly in our schools, that is your right as an American. We may not have a meeting of the minds on this issue. I remember the animosity I once felt toward Christians, much like Saul of Tarsis before his conversion. Before he was turned by Christ to become an apostle, he plotted the murder and torture of scores of believers. If you don't like having the words "under God" in the pledge, you have options, including writing your congressman. I wish you luck, my friends. As was so correctly pointed out, we have a system of government that works, albiet horribly slowly.

I hope, as always, that a little information, some of which has not been planned, was shared in this thread. Now, more than ever, we are conscious of our heritage and freedoms. As with everything else, the meaning and limits of those freedoms are a continuing discussion.

Since the Ninth Circuit has already said "oops!" on this ruling, our pledge is still intact, along with the first amendment, as we have already shown, right here.

 

[cherokee]

Found this quite appropraite and I think it sums up the thoughts and feelings of many Americans...


Subjecto I hear an AMEN?
> >>Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 16:51:39 -0500
> >>>
> >>>After hearing that the state of Florida changed its
> >>>opinion and let a Muslim woman have her picture on her
> >>>drivers license with her face covered, I believe this
> >>>is even more appropriate. Read on, please!
> >>>
> >>>This is an Editorial written by an American citizen,
> >>>published in a Tampa Newspaper. He did quite a job;
> >>>didn't he?
> >>>
> >>>IMMIGRANTS, NOT AMERICANS, MUST ADAPT.
> >>>I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are
> >>>offending some individual or their culture. Since the
> >>>terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, we have experienced a
> >>>surge in patriotism by the majority of Americans.
> >>>However, the dust from the attacks had barely settled
> >>>when the "politically correct" crowd began complaining
> >>>about the possibility that our patriotism was
> >>>offending others. I am not against immigration, nor do
> >>>I hold a grudge against anyone who is seeking a better
> >>>life by coming to America. Our population is almost
> >>>entirely composed of descendants of immigrants.
> >>>However, there are a few things that those who have
> >>>recently come to our country, and apparently some born
> >>>here, need to understand. This idea of America being a
> >>>multi cultural community has served only to dilute our
> >>>sovereignty and our national identity. As Americans, we
> >>>have our own culture, our own society, our own
> >>>language and our own lifestyle. This culture has been
> >>>developed over centuries of struggles, trials, and
> >>>victories by millions of men and women who have sought
> >>>freedom. We speak ENGLISH, not Spanish, Arabic,
> >>>Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language.
> >>>Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society,
> >>>learn the language! "In God We Trust" is our national
> >>>motto. This is not some Christian, right wing,
> >>>political slogan. We adopted this motto because
> >>>Christian men and women, on Christian principles,
> >>>founded this nation, and this is clearly documented.
> >>>It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls
> >>>of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you
> >>>consider another part of the world as your new home,
> >>>because God is part of our culture. If Stars and
> >>>Stripes offend you, or you don't like Uncle Sam,
> >>>then you should seriously consider a move to another
> >>>part of this planet. We are happy with our culture and
> >>>have no desire to change, and we really don't care
> >>>how you did things where you came from. This is OUR
> >>>COUNTRY, our land, and our lifestyle. Our First
> >>>Amendment gives every citizen the right to express his
> >>>opinion and we will allow you every opportunity to do
> >>>so. But, once you are done complaining, whining, and
> >>>griping about our flag, our pledge, our national
> >>>motto, or our way of life, I highly encourage you to
> >>>take advantage of one other great American freedom,
> >>>THE RIGHT TO LEAVE.

 

[Timebuilder]

I'll say "amen".

When my Dad emmigrated, he made a tremendous effort to become the best naturalized American he could be. He still has a little trouble pronouncing "out" "about" and "route", but so do people in Wisconsin.

Diversity is what happens as other people take over your country.

 

[TurboS7]

When my wife's great-grandfather imigrated over from Sweden they wouldn't let anyone speak Swedish in the house, only English. They wanted their kids and grandkids to become American's. My relative(supposedly one of the Tudor family of England)he was kidnapped and brought over to the U.S. in 1620. He claimed he was part of the Tudor family and married one of the cousins of the Queen of Scotts. So I guess that bs is part of our family and goes way, way back. If you are from Baltimore then you are more than likely one of my long lost cousins. My great-great grandfather is buried on the cemetry at BWI airport, right next to the Glideslope antenna for runway 10-28.The thread above shows how neat our country is, when you come here you become an American, a little example of what heaven will be like. In Revelation it talks of everyone worshipping God from every tribe and nation, I am sure that you won't want to miss it.

 

[Timebuilder]

"Every knee shall bow, every tongue confess...."

No mere human could make that happen.

 

[A Squared]

So, my hypothetical examples are "obnoxious"? Really? I hypothesized a school which had Moslem prayer. ummm....so what? They exist, not here, but in other parts of the world. That's neither good nor bad, that's just a fact. I merely hypothesized one existing in the US .... and you find that obnoxious? really ? But wait! In a previous post you stated that I am "in the untenable position of pretending further that I (meaning you, timebuilder) would be offended by Muslims praying in a school."

Hmmmm...which is it Timebuilder? You find Muslim prayer in school "obnoxious" or you aren't offended by it? Which is it? You can't have it both ways. If you find it obnoxious, than I was right, you are offended, and your previous statement that I was wrong is dishonest.

Yeah, "squealing like a stuck pig" is insulting, perhaps a bit childish too. the thing is, if you read my post, I am insulting you personally. Nowhere in my posts have I attacked, denigrated, or otherwise insulted Christianity, or any other religion. It is interesting that you consider an insult to you personally to be an insult to Christianity. Perhaps you suffer from a bit of a Messiah complex?

It seems very important to you to label me a liberal, even though you have no evidence of such. You speak of "tests" but you don't say what they are. All you know is I am contemptuous of your hypocrisy. You seem desperate to characterize yourself as fighting the good fight against an evil liberal. Fine. Label away. It’s not true, but if you find some pathetic comfort in it, be my guest.

>>>>>when somone calls you a hypocrite without the proof.......

What more proof do you need? The proof is very clear in your own words. I apologize for repeating myself, but it appears that I must, as you don’t seem to understand.

Here’s your hypocrisy:

When it’s your god in the pledge of allegiance, everyone, no matter what their beliefs, should be happy, because after all, it’s not worship, according to you. Here’s your words, verbatim:

>>>> "the phrase fails to mention the worship of this God, that god, or any particular "god""

and

>>>> "nor does it direct any person to listen, find, study, respect, or embrace any religion whatsoever"


Yet, when it’s Satan in the pledge, you’re not happy, and in your own words you describe it as Satan worship to mention Satan in the pledge.

>>>> "Am I glad that satanism isn't yet practiced in the public schools? You bet"

and

>>>> "teach my children about the satan who is being worshiped by their teacher"

You seem unclear on the concept, so I’ll restate it:

Your position is that "god" in the pledge should be accepted by all, because it isn’t worship or religion, but you won’t accept satan in the pledge, because in your own words, it is satanism to mention him.

Your application of different standards to the mention of god and the mention of satan is hypocrisy in it’s purest form.

You say:


>>>>all they have to stand on is to pretend that they fell, pointing and saying "look, you fell!

Really? What am I pretending? My entire case is thoroughly documented by verbatim quotes of your own words. Perhaps you mean that I am inferring your answer on whether or not you’d like to have "..one nation under satan...." in the pledge. You’re right, I am inferring, you left me no option, as you repeatedly wouldn’t answer the question directly, instead preferring to cloud the issue with extraneous verbiage about my political beliefs, what constitutes satanism, and your earlier life. OK, here’s your chance to clear up any misconception I may have inferred from your obfuscation.

Answer the question that has been asked.

Would you graciously accept replacing "...one nation under god...." with "...one nation under satan...." in the pledge of allegiance in our public schools?

It’s a yes or no question. Answer it with either yes, or no. Don’t continue to evade the question. Be a man, don’t try to hide behind your waffling, stand up for what you believe in. Grab the bull by the horns....yes, or no?

 

[Flyer]

[No message]

 

[Timebuilder]

We'll take this a step at a time. Part One.

You start right off with an attack, just like James Carville, pointing fingers and making gross assumptions. Here is what you said at the beginning:
Timebuilder,

the trouble with people like you is deep down inside you KNOW that yours is the RIGHT religion, so it shouldn't offend anyone to have YOUR religion pushed on them, because after all it's the RIGHT one, right?

I'm sorry to say this, but that was 100% incorrect, right off the bat. You had to make an assumption for which you had no text to quote, and no idea to which you could point.
Your post of the hypothetical situations were obnoxious because of your intent to sneer, to demean, and inject venom into what was for the most part a civil discussion of the constitutional aspects of the ninth circuit decision. You bad attitude was uncalled for, and brings dishonor to yourself and to other pilots on this board.

Quote: So, my hypothetical examples are "obnoxious"? Really? I hypothesized a school which had Moslem prayer. ummm....so what? They exist, not here, but in other parts of the world. That's neither good nor bad, that's just a fact. I merely hypothesized one existing in the US .... and you find that obnoxious? really ? But wait! In a previous post you stated that I am "in the untenable position of pretending further that I (meaning you, timebuilder) would be offended by Muslims praying in a school."

Hmmmm...which is it Timebuilder? You find Muslim prayer in school "obnoxious" or you aren't offended by it? Which is it? You can't have it both ways. If you find it obnoxious, than I was right, you are offended, and your previous statement that I was wrong is dishonest.


Muslims praying in a school are not obnoxious to me. Your attitude is what I find obnoxious. I don't know you well enough to know if this is indicative of your personality on a day to day basis, so I can't say if you are obnoxious. As I mentioned, Muslims pray in schools here in the US everyday. You act as though I am troubled by that. I'm not. I'm troubled that US public schools exclude Christians from exercising the same rights, in the same manner, with the same time and spaces (rooms) set aside for the purpose. I have visited mosques. Muslims do not offend me, whether I believe they are correct in their belief is a separate and distinct matter than the respect that I hold for their freedom to practice their religion. The same holds true for satanists. I don't have to agree with their views in order to support their constitutional freedom of religion.


Quote: Yeah, "squealing like a stuck pig" is insulting, perhaps a bit childish too. the thing is, if you read my post, I am insulting you personally. Nowhere in my posts have I attacked, denigrated, or otherwise insulted Christianity, or any other religion. It is interesting that you consider an insult to you personally to be an insult to Christianity. Perhaps you suffer from a bit of a Messiah complex?

A bit childish? Are you serious? I was talking about you insulting me personally, not Christians or Christianity. Other posters did that, and my post addresses all of the individuals taking part, as appropriate. How could you possibly make such an error in interpretation?

Quote: It seems very important to you to label me a liberal, even though you have no evidence of such. You speak of "tests" but you don't say what they are. All you know is I am contemptuous of your hypocrisy. You seem desperate to characterize yourself as fighting the good fight against an evil liberal. Fine. Label away. It’s not true, but if you find some pathetic comfort in it, be my guest.

As a journalist, which is still in my blood, just like aviation, I call'em like I see 'em. I've been there done that have the t-shirt. Before you entered this thread, I had already discussed the liberal court, and both your attacks and the court's decisions are liberal by any test. If you have some right wing ideas, they would appear to be inconsistent with what I have seen from you here in this thread. You are free to reject any label that I choose to describe you or your views, and I am free to reject yours, too. What I find pathetic is what I used to think that passed for truth in those days. I take NO comfort in the idea that someone believes what I believed back then. That is pathetic.


Quote: >>>>>when someone calls you a hypocrite without the proof.......

What more proof do you need? The proof is very clear in your own words. I apologize for repeating myself, but it appears that I must, as you don’t seem to understand.

Here’s your hypocrisy:

When it’s your god in the pledge of allegiance, everyone, no matter what their beliefs, should be happy, because after all, it’s not worship, according to you. Here’s your words, verbatim:
>>>> "the phrase fails to mention the worship of this God, that god, or any particular "god""

and

>>>> "nor does it direct any person to listen, find, study, respect, or embrace any religion whatsoever"

Yet, when it’s Satan in the pledge, you’re not happy, and in your own words you describe it as Satan worship to mention Satan in the pledge.


Where does MY god appear in the pledge? How can I be certain, and more important, how can YOU be certain that it is "my god" that is mentioned there? Waaaaay back in the beginning of this thread, I tried to make this clear. No one's particular god is mentioned, so how can anyone be offended? The Gia worshipers can think it is their god, the satan worshippers can think it is their god, and so on.

Unless you give an identity like "God of Abraham", you haven't made your case. When you mention satan, a particular, identifiable being, rather than a general spiritual idea such as "god", you have completely changed the dynamic of the discussion. No my friend, I did not say that mentioning satan in the pledge was the equivalent of worshiping satan.

Since my post contained responses to several comments, there may be some confusion regarding the whole "worshiping of satan" angle of this discussion. A guy called beezlebozo made this post:

If it's not unconstitutional, don't be upset if your child's teacher is a satanist, and worships in front of the kids every day, as long as they don't have to participate and no laws are broken.

beezlebozo
clown from hell

Maybe you thought that I was lumping in the mention of satan with the worship of satan during my response, which did not refer to the focus of our discussion.

Quote: >>>> "Am I glad that satanism isn't yet practiced in the public schools? You bet"

and

>>>> "teach my children about the satan who is being worshiped by their teacher"

Quote: You seem unclear on the concept, so I’ll restate it:

Your position is that "god" in the pledge should be accepted by all, because it isn’t worship or religion, but you won’t accept satan in the pledge, because in your own words, it is satanism to mention him.


No, I never said it is satanism to mention satan. I concede that it is unlikely though, that anyone but a satanist would want to. Once again, how I would handle the situation in my personal life has no bearing on how I feel about the religious freedoms we are discussing. Certainly, I would teach my children about the satan being worshipped by their teacher, as I told beezlebozo. Perhaps this is where you became confused. I'm not talking about a teacher leading the pledge version you describe that mentions satan. I'm talking about a reference made to a teacher practicing the worship of satan before the class. Was that your misunderstanding?
I think the response from PETA would be hilarious.


Quote: Your application of different standards to the mention of god and the mention of satan is hypocrisy in it’s purest form.


Ahah. Maybe this is the problem. You are mixing constitutional thinking with personal belief. No wonder you think I am being hypocritical! The mention of God in the pledge is sanctioned in two ways. One, by the majority wishes of the American public which is demonstrated by the recitation of the pledge by the individuals who see fit to do so, and second, by the act of congress previously mentioned.

The fact that I detest the evil one personally is not hypocritical, but it is both doctrinal and personal. Just to be extra clear, if congress changes the pledge to mention satan, then I would have the same choices available to me as the people who don't like having God mentioned in the pledge. Those options include, but are not limited to: not speaking during the recitation of the "offending" passage, writing letters to my representatives asking that the pledge be reinstated in its original form, and appearing before the school board. I invite all of the satanists to take this approach.

 

[Timebuilder]

And, part two:

It is important to note that the Christian God and satan are not "equivalent" in the eastern sense of the word, like yin and yang, supposedly equal and opposite. Doctrinally, satan is less than God, since He created him as an angel, and he rebelled against God, attempting to usurp his position.

Quote: >>>>all they have to stand on is to pretend that they fell, pointing and saying "look, you fell!

Really? What am I pretending? My entire case is thoroughly documented by verbatim quotes of your own words. Perhaps you mean that I am inferring your answer on whether or not you’d like to have "..one nation under satan...." in the pledge. You’re right, I am inferring, you left me no option, as you repeatedly wouldn’t answer the question directly, instead preferring to cloud the issue with extraneous verbiage about my political beliefs, what constitutes satanism, and your earlier life. OK, here’s your chance to clear up any misconception I may have inferred from your obfuscation.

Answer the question that has been asked.

Would you graciously accept replacing "...one nation under god...." with "...one nation under satan...." in the pledge of allegiance in our public schools?

I would call these imagined responses of yours that you posed to your "hypotheticals" an act of pretending. In you accusing tone, you imagine my response before hear an answer. You may refer to my commentary anyway you like. If it clouded anything for you, I apologize. I'm used to reading authors where an aside can go on for several paragraphs, and I felt that it was appropriate in this context to illuminate the discussion with observations as I see them. If you look at the major players in the school pledge controversy, you will see that my assessment of the politics of those who hailed the ninth circuit decision are liberal indeed. Don't be surprised if your similar ideas are identified in that manner. You can usually identify a person by what he says and does.

I'm going to stick my neck out and identify this as the question that you say was asked:

Quote: You have two choices. You can admit that you wouldn't like the public schools to have a pledge of allegience to a nation under Satan....Even though, to repeat your own words, it is "is not a prayer" and it does not "direct any person to listen, find, study, respect, or embrace" Satan.
If that's the case, you're a hypocrite, because as soon as it's not YOUR god the nation is under, then you don't want it in the pledge.

Or, you can try to pretend that you wouldn't be bothered by it, in which case we'll all know you're a liar. There's not a single reader on this forum who is dumb enough to believe that an outspoken born again christian who supports school prayer wouldn't have a problem with a pledge to a nation under Satan.

So which is it going to be? Hypocrite or Liar? You mind if your kids pledge to Satan or not?

That's a lot of verbal venom from a guy who wants someone to be "gracious". I have already shown you that it isn't hypocritical to defend the rights of persons whose views you find personally detestable.
As you have just said, you inferred a meaning because I wasn't dancing to your tune in an fashion that was acceptable to you. You got mad. I got disgusted, which is a feat in itself.

NO, there is no reason for me to "graciously accept" such a change in the pledge. You are confusing a position on the establishment clause and a personal attitude, which are two very different things. Far from hypocritical, I submit, it is a reasonable position in a society where we must tolerate minority views while not being ruled by them. This is where you didn't understand my position. You can be a satanist, and I will fight for your religious freedom to be one. Whether I agree with your erroneous choice is irrelevant to the discussion. If you have sufficient numbers, you might even get congress to unofficially recognize that a majority of individuals believe in a faith in satan, although once again, satan is an individual, while we have not identified "god" for the purposes of the Pledge. That will be a problem for the satanists, to be sure.

In short, if a satanist hears the words "under God" and is offended, he has no redress as far as the official "establishment" of a US religion is concerned, as detailed in the first amendment. Your posit that "under satan" would be equivalent, equal, and opposite is incorrect. I would expect a lot of people to be upset if the pledge stated "under the God of Abraham" just as others might be upset if the pledge said "under satan", since both refer to specific religious characters. "Under god" is about as general an idea as you can get from a country that starts its legislative session with a prayer. What I find offensive is the reality that many others would see that assumption of equivalency as a logical position. Then again, we no longer teach critical thinking in public schools.

 

[beezlebozo]

http://www.religioustolerance.org

beezlebozo
clown from hell

incidentally, my forum name was lifted from Bill Hicks, a woefully underrated comedian who died in the early 90's - so don't read to much into that, either. Just playing devil's advocate. I'm signing off this one now, too. Fly safely.

Bill Hicks - Rant In E Minor