Pledge of allegiance declared unconstuti

[DCitrus9]

Timebuilder, by excluding religious statements I meant "in god we trust" or "under god". As you admit, they wanted no state sanctioned religion and did not want to push their own beliefs on the country. This is very much the same reason "under god" does not belong in a declaration to state.

Turbo: I vote for fiction, just cause it's in print doesn't make it so. Your truth seems to be a lie to me. I have read the bible and studied it in church. I have realized it is all B.S. and choose not to partake in any more of that nonsense. No, it doesn't offend me. It does irritate me when people try to tell me I'm a bad person for not being religious (agnostic, atheist , I don't know and don't really care).

 

[Timebuilder]

DC, check your logic. By saying "under God", or even by making a personal choice to stand silently while others say the Pledge, everyone is operating within the confines of the Constuitution. It is not the equivalent of the Congress passing a "law respecting religion" as the founders excluded.

Indeed, most of the writings of the founders indicate a strong opinion that a "religious and moral people" are the underpinnings of a democracy, and that without those qualities, we as a nation are doomed to failure.

In summary, they simply believed that you should be making the choice, not them. When people recite the Pledge, it is by choice, not law or edict. There is no mandate to exclude religious statements made by individuals, singly or in groups. There is only a rule which says there can be no official religion of the United States. There is not one religious group that I have ever heard to express the opinion that their religion should be turned into the "official" religion.

It can be argued, however, that envirormentalism, with its ties to Gia, or Earth Worship, can be considered a religion, and that the formation of the EPA violated the first amendment by respecting that religion.

But that's another discussion.

I want to hear how somewone has labled you a "bad person" for rejecting the gospel. The basis of the gospel is to choose whether or not you will trust Him for salvation, based on faith. Just as our Constitution guarentees you right to choose you faith or lack of faith, so does the gospel. Having studied the Bible, you know the stakes and the results. After that, it's all up to you.

Just like the Pledge.

 

[DCitrus9]

Timebuilder, you check your logic. The pledge is not a prayer, why do you justify making it into one? If this is a true choice then I should be able to pledge allegiance to the flag and my country. I should not be excluded because of your choice to observe a religion. It was a mistake to add "under god" and now that is being corrected. I don't understand the outrage. If you want to pray, then pray, but don't try to put prayer in every American's mouth.
The reason we hear so much about separation of church and state is because it is the only true way to allow freedom and choices.

 

[Timebuilder]

Actually, the reason we hear so much about the separation of church and state is because a lot of politicians are willing to mislead people into believing that this is a part of the US Constitution. It isn't. It is not a founding principle, aside from the aforementioned restriction agianst congress officially recognozing a religion. That is a fact.

The pledge is not a prayer. It is a recognition that we are a nation of people who are free to believe or not believe, and that our nation was founded by men who believed that we were "endowed by (our) Creator with certain unalienable rights...". If you do not wish to say "under God" in recognition of why you have your freedoms as an American as shown above, then simply stop speaking briefly when you reach that portion, and resume when you reach "with Liberty and Justice for all."

Here is the reason for the outrage you don't understand: a California judge, part of the ninth circuit, the most overturned circuit in the United States, has without basis, declared the practices of a free people to be unconstitutional. This ruling would be comical if it weren't for the fact that this is a syptom of the problems in our judicial system. Judges are charged with interpreting the law, and not with legislating from the bench. America's most controversial problems are the result of judicial misconduct, forming law when their only job is to interpret the law.

I certainly don't want you doing any praying, or even think that you are praying, if it isn't in your heart.

 

[DCitrus9]

"If you do not wish to say "under God" in recognition of why you have your freedoms as an American as shown above, then simply stop speaking briefly when you reach that portion, and resume when you reach "with Liberty and Justice for all." "
NO NO NO NO
That is exactly what should not be done. The state does not impose religion. If you want to pray, go to church. You said yourself that the pledge is not a prayer, yet you continue to justify making it one.
You're blinded by religion on this one timebuilder,
I'm done.

 

[Timebuilder]

I'd love to debate you on who is blinded, but I have to point out that I have the constitution on my side with regards to this issue.

The law does not guarantee you a religion-free environment, because that was never the intent of the founders. It does, however, guarantee that others have the individual right to mention God, and that is is not a recognition of an official religion of the US. No doubt, you will hear them.

You are free to not join them, and that is the limit of this issue.

Good day.

 

[A Squared]

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?

You're reasoning goes something like this: we're predomimantly a christian nation (we are) so there shouldn't be any problem in the teachers in a public school leading the students in chanting a litany which gives recognition to the diety of the majority. If those who don't subscribe to that deity don't like it they don't have to chant...right? After all, there's no freedom "from" religion, only freedom "of" religion, right?

Well then, let's turn that exact reasoning around on you and see how you like it. Let's say that you lived in a school district someplace in the US which was predominantly Moslem, let's say 83% Moslem. (unlikely, but let's say for the sake of discussion it is true)

So, your children go to a school where the administrators and the teachers are predominantly Moslem. Every morning, your childrens' teachers lead the class in chanting "praise Allah!, praise Allah!". They walk down halls that bear quotations of Mohanmmad. Several times during the day, the teachers and students in your childerens' classes roll their prayer rugs out and kneel down and face Mecca to pray.

Don't like it? of course you don't, we all know that you're going to squeal like a stuck pig.

But why should you object? Remember, there's no guarantee of freedom "from" religon. If you and your children don't like it, you're "free" to not participate if you don't care to. So what's the problem? Why are you squealing like a stuck pig and filing lawsuits?

They have their individual right to mention Allah, right? Why should you object? They are "operating within the confines of the Constuitution" It's not a "recognition of an official religion of the US" they're merely excercising thier individual right to mention Allah. The school board is not establishing an official religion, they're just allowing the teachers and student's to exercise thier individual rights.....right?

No, the reason you're squealing like a stuck pig, is that it's not the RIGHT deity they're recognizing, you know....YOUR deity, the one and only TRUE deity. In your heart of hearts, you think that your children and the 3 or 4 other christian children in this school should be allowed to stand up and chant recognition of YOUR deity. and if the 83% of the teachers and students who don't pray to your deity don't like it, they are free not to participate.

The thing is, you're all for God in schools, as long as it's the RIGHT god.... YOUR god. If it were someone else's god that was recognized every morning, I think you'd suddenly start believing that it wasn't quite so nifty. There's a word for you. It's hypocrite.

regards

 

[cherokee]

Our forefather's very intentionally excluded any religious statements from the original declaration and constitution.


Not true, here is an exerpt from the Declaration of Independence, notice the references to God and the Creator...

"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

Also the next section is a very small text from Article 12 of the Constitution, notice the term Lord.:

"done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names,"


Do you now want to rethink what you think the Founding Fathers meant??

 

[Delta3]

One simple way to solve all of this is to give local communities social power.

Have them decide what they want to say in school. If the Bible belt wants to recite prayers before school let them. The Berkley left wing isn't going to go along with the Bible belt and vice versa.

 

[cherokee]

You know what, looking at my last post I think the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals should declare the Constitution "Unconstitutional". It clearly says "in the year of our Lord". Golly, some people may be OFFENDED! We can't have that!I will hereby start the lawsuit to get the Constitution ruled "Unconstitutional"