Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Pledge of allegiance declared unconstuti

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Doctrinally, satan is less than God, since He created him as an angel, and he rebelled against God, attempting to usurp his position.
Timebuilder, tell me you are not dumb enough to believe in crap like that. Hope you don't think that everything was created in 6 days, or that Noah saved a bunch of animals... By the way, that reminds my of my two year old daughter believing in Santa and the Easter Bunny..., but then she's only two...
 
Dieterly,

Whoa, whoa, what happened to the Easter Bunny?
 
Dieterly said:
Hope you don't think that everything was created in 6 days,

Actually it was, and all it takes is a little relativistic physics to explain it. From a certain celestial perspective, let's say a God-like one, one "day" may equate to approximately one billion earth years. Once the first man was created, let's say the first homo-sapien-sapien, the perspective comes down to earth years from then on.

For more on this checkout: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/A...6481044/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/002-7352394-9768036
 
TWA Dude,

Actually, Christians have readjusted the relativism of "god" days to years etc. many times. These adjustments seem to happen whenever it is convienient in an attempt to make the Christian doctrine scientifically plausible. Even as recently as the early 80's, bible scholars agreed that the age of the universe, after the adjusting for the then current equation, was between 6000 and 12000 years old.


Everyone else;

It's interesting that conservatives label anything in which they disagree as "politically correct". The use of the "pc" label is relative as hell. Afterall, it could be argued that the pro "under god" folks are being "politically correct" by wanting to keep the current pledge.

The crux of the matter is that this trendy use of the "pc" label is just a lame excuse to lump all liberal agendum under one neat and clean banner. Such one-liners makes the villifying of one's beliefs easy and unloads the user of the burden of thought. Incidently, it also makes the job easier for right wing radio talk show hosts. ("political correctness" was coined by a White House staff member (a publicist (a.k.a. "spinmeister")) during Bush Sr's regime).

Whatever YOUR INTERPRETATION of the Constitution of the US, realize that the Consitution is not infallible and the creators of it fully realized this fact.

my .02; leave the "under god " out, ........heck, don't imply pressure to kids to say the pledge at all.
 
quote: "Actually it was, and all it takes is a little relativistic physics to explain it. "


Actually, there was a "big bang" and everything was created in an instant. In fact, the universe is still expanding, so it is still being created.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

You guys gonna keep up this religeous debate or are we gonna talk about some aeroplanes? I don't think religion is paying for bandwidth here.
 
Feel free to look at the other 99% of threads if you don't like this thread. I think by the sheer volume of posts in this thread, it is apparent many people here want to discuss this issue.
 
Timebuilder,

Your lecture on how satan is not the equal of God was truly fascinating. Fascinating, but a bit irrelevant. If you feel compelled to somehow devise ways to "measure" satan and god, and see who is "less" and who is "more", knock yourself out. I don’t think that anyone is going to be surprised when, after all your careful measuring, you conclude that god is superior to satan. Despite all your measuring, we are still left with these fundamental facts:

You favor the inclusion in the pledge allegience a positive reference to an entity which is very similar in name and nature to an entity which you worship, and you expect others not to object to the reference to said entity, even though they do not worship this entity. They may worship an entity or entities which are clearly not that mentioned entity, or, they may worship nothing at all, but still you expect them to accept this reference in the pledge. Yet at the same time, you would object yourself to the inclusion of a laudatory reference to an entity which you do not worship.

That still smells a bit hypocritical to me.
 
Religion and culture are a very real part of aviation. When you are stuck with a complete crew for 2 weeks talking about "specific fuel burn" and best "nautical miles per gallon" etc. etc. gets pretty boring. Seeing the viewpoint from the other side of the fence from other people is very important. Yes this is an aviation thread and believe me religion and culture are a part of aviation that keeps me right were I am.
 
"A clever quote, but applied without wisdom."
-unknown

It is always a mistake to accuse somone of having a particular predeliction or belief on a topic before you have any proof upon which to base your complaint.

Case: dismissed.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top