Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional

[B00ne]

We had kinda the same thing a few years back in bavaria, where they have to have those Jesus crosses hanging in every classroom. Then our Supreme Court ruled this was against the constitutional freedom of relegion. And what did the bavarian state government do? - they just collectively ignored the supreme court - kinda sick but that's bavaria - conservative, katholic religeous freaks.... . I'd say be happy that u already have a much better seperation of government and religion - germany is supposed to be a christian state - I think that should be unconstitutional too - nobody is going to church anyway (well most ppl aren't - except for bavaria off course)

 

[xirtam]

Our nation was founded on Christian moral and religious principles

I wish. But I think we can attribute it more to our rally cry "No taxation without representation" and our disgust with the "excesses" of the British government, many of which we now implement.

Anyway, since when is rebelling against authority a Christian moral or religious principle? Our nation was founded on rebellion against the entity of which we were a colony. Where do you get that from reading the Bible? I sure don't.

Uniting a country "under God" was probably a pretty good idea, seeing as they needed to unite under something more powerful than the whiney complaints against King George III. I don't think America had any more right to secede from Britain than the South had to secede from the North. Put it that way.

Somebody start a poll. I want to see how long it's been since people have said the pledge of allegiance. I've said it in French (and they better not remove "sur le Dieu"... that's my favorite part ) a few times lately.

I really don't think it's that big of an issue. And I think that those who are whining about it probably don't say it that much to justify whining about it. Sorry. I just don't.

 

[MSNY]

From AmusedOne

I've explained this so simply, a 2 year old could understand. If you come back again with comparisons of private belief instead of government endorsement, I'm going to ignore you.

You don't get it at all. I think my explanations have been simple for anyone to understand. You seem to be so hung up on this "private belief " stuff. Yet there are public demontrations everyday in government
circles of prayer in the congress and even an announcement by the highest court of the land..."and may God save this court"....

Your not getting it at all, God is NOT a private religion. People may be religious anywhere in society. And if your telling me I do not have the right to publicy proclaim and express my beliefs ANYWHERE then even our churchs according to you need to be shut down.....

After all there in a public forumn expressing a veleif in God. Ya churches are public forums, last I saw there not doing it in "private"...

I also get a kick on how liberal thinkers want to rewrite history and tell us our founding fathers had not come here for religious freedoms. What rubbish. You people want to cut and paste history to your way of thinking. If we lie about this then we are rejecting the beliefs of our forefathers and not telling our children the truth. If you want to be Godless then your also clueless, but don't force it into a decision that makes "under God" an illegal way of thinking.

Get real your not even close about this.

 

[B00ne]

I think you dont get it. As far as I know, your constitution grants you the freedom to belief in whatever u want to. also your constitution seperates religion from the state. This in turn means you cannot force ppl in public schools to say this"under god" thing because u are taking the very constitutional rights away from the non christian ppl in public schools. And as far as I know, the american population does not just consist of white Christian. Of course christian zealots are upset about this, just as zealots from any religion are upset about everything that prevents THEIR religion from dominating or in other words that prevents their religion from being (regarded) the ONLY truth.

However, u can continue having the god part in the pledge in like christian church owned schools - they are not public state owned.

This is what rights are about - they apply to everybody. Unless u understand right as the right of the majority but thats luckily not the way it works...

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: MSNY

From AmusedOne

I've explained this so simply, a 2 year old could understand. If you come back again with comparisons of private belief instead of government endorsement, I'm going to ignore you.

You don't get it at all. I think my explanations have been simple for anyone to understand. You seem to be so hung up on this "private belief " stuff. Yet there are public demontrations everyday in government
circles of prayer in the congress and even an announcement by the highest court of the land..."and may God save this court"....

Your not getting it at all, God is NOT a private religion. People may be religious anywhere in society. And if your telling me I do not have the right to publicy proclaim and express my beliefs ANYWHERE then even our churchs according to you need to be shut down.....

After all there in a public forumn expressing a veleif in God. Ya churches are public forums, last I saw there not doing it in "private"...

I also get a kick on how liberal thinkers want to rewrite history and tell us our founding fathers had not come here for religious freedoms. What rubbish. You people want to cut and paste history to your way of thinking. If we lie about this then we are rejecting the beliefs of our forefathers and not telling our children the truth. If you want to be Godless then your also clueless, but don't force it into a decision that makes "under God" an illegal way of thinking.

Get real your not even close about this.

Again, you are mistaking private with official government endorsement, yet you come back and berate me for your mistakes.

"Private" in this context does not mean behind closed doors. I'm shocked that you can't realize this. "Private" simply means "not government." No one is trying to force your religion behind closed doors. Hell, stand on the street corner and scream it out all day. What is going on here is the difference between government and private expressions of religion. ("private" being anything "NOT government," remember???)

Senators gathering volutarily to pray is no different than students doing so. I never said it wasn't allowed. No one has. You can pray any damn time and place you want to. No one is trying to stop you.

Since this is the case, and you're too freakin' dense to understand a concept to damn simple, why even bother explaining anything to you?

The court thing is a throw back to "god save the queen." It's tradition more than anything else and needs to die.

I have not rewritten history. Please point out, using verifiable facts, exactly what historical facts I have presented are historically inaccurate.

Finally re: the last pathetic sentance in your post: NO ONE (get this through your thick freakin' skull), I mean NO ONE has EVER tried to outlaw how you think, or what you say. Only what government can officially endorse, and what it can't.

Get real? You'd need to understand simple concepts like "private" vs "government" before we can do that...

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: B00ne
I think you dont get it. As far as I know, your constitution grants you the freedom to belief in whatever u want to. also your constitution seperates religion from the state. This in turn means you cannot force ppl in public schools to say this"under god" thing because u are taking the very constitutional rights away from the non christian ppl in public schools. And as far as I know, the american population does not just consist of white Christian. Of course christian zealots are upset about this, just as zealots from any religion are upset about everything that prevents THEIR religion from dominating or in other words that prevents their religion from being (regarded) the ONLY truth.

However, u can continue having the god part in the pledge in like christian church owned schools - they are not public state owned.

This is what rights are about - they apply to everybody. Unless u understand right as the right of the majority but thats luckily not the way it works...

And there lies the problem. One of the school admins was on the news this morning, the school bent over backwards to protect this guys daughter from hearing the pledge, because the general population has no problem with their kids saying the pledge as is. The rights of the many are being trampled on because the right of the few are being offended, Give a voucher to this guy and let him send his kid where he wants. Or better yet give everyone a voucher at this school, because I am sure this school does something that offends everyone.

If we did not govt funded schools, this would not be an issue.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: B00ne
I think you dont get it. As far as I know, your constitution grants you the freedom to belief in whatever u want to. also your constitution seperates religion from the state. This in turn means you cannot force ppl in public schools to say this"under god" thing because u are taking the very constitutional rights away from the non christian ppl in public schools. And as far as I know, the american population does not just consist of white Christian. Of course christian zealots are upset about this, just as zealots from any religion are upset about everything that prevents THEIR religion from dominating or in other words that prevents their religion from being (regarded) the ONLY truth.

However, u can continue having the god part in the pledge in like christian church owned schools - they are not public state owned.

This is what rights are about - they apply to everybody. Unless u understand right as the right of the majority but thats luckily not the way it works...

And there lies the problem. One of the school admins was on the news this morning, the school bent over backwards to protect this guys daughter from hearing the pledge, because the general population has no problem with their kids saying the pledge as is. The rights of the many are being trampled on because the right of the few are being offended, Give a voucher to this guy and let him send his kid where he wants. Or better yet give everyone a voucher at this school, because I am sure this school does something that offends everyone.

If we did not govt funded schools, this would not be an issue.

From where do you derive the "right" to have your government to lead you in a pledge with religious content?

 

[Nefrodite]

You don't get it at all. I think my explanations have been simple for anyone to understand. You seem to be so hung up on this "private belief " stuff. Yet there are public demontrations everyday in government
circles of prayer in the congress and even an announcement by the highest court of the land..."and may God save this court"....

which basically is an arguement that tradition makes right, that might makes right. i'm sorry but this country doesn't work that way. else we'd still have slaves

Your not getting it at all, God is NOT a private religion. People may be religious anywhere in society. And if your telling me I do not have the right to publicy proclaim and express my beliefs ANYWHERE then even our churchs according to you need to be shut down.....

no one said that churchs need to be shutdown, simply not intertwined with the government. you have the right to state your religious beliefs. but when you insert your religious beliefs into something like a governments pledge of alliegence, you go over the line. you impose your beliefs on others through state power. because you like the message does not make it right. if "under no god" was inserted into the pledge it would be just as wrong. and certainly undefended by you.

After all there in a public forumn expressing a veleif in God. Ya churches are public forums, last I saw there not doing it in "private"...

public church forums have nothing to do with government.

I also get a kick on how liberal thinkers want to rewrite history and tell us our founding fathers had not come here for religious freedoms. What rubbish. You people want to cut and paste history to your way of thinking. If we lie about this then we are rejecting the beliefs of our forefathers and not telling our children the truth.

oh i see, anyone that doesn't agree with you gets the liberal tag. its ussually thrown in to pad a statement, and a bad habit you should break.

that being said you are totally wrong. these very people you complain about are the ones that bring up the fact that we come here for religious freedoms. and part of religious freedom is to be free from state religion as in england etc. and actually those that continue to spread the myth that we are a christian nation aren't telling their children the truth.

If you want to be Godless then your also clueless, but don't force it into a decision that makes "under God" an illegal way of thinking.

Get real your not even close about this.

ah you see, you say that as if you are all knowing. like the islamic terrorists that call us godless heathens, you said it dripping with venom. perhaps you are the clueless one. you say that taking out a specific statement of religion in a declaration of allegience for all people makes that way of thinking illegal? how absurd is that? by that reasoning the lack of "under no god" has made athiesm/agnostism/buddism/hinduism etc all "illegal thinking". because the government doesn't impose a certian belief upon all people doesn't make it illegal, just separate.

so yes, your not even close about this. turn around all your arguements and they break apart. why? because apparently you believe its ok to step on those that do not believe.

 

[Nefrodite]

Originally posted by: AmusedOne

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: B00ne
I think you dont get it. As far as I know, your constitution grants you the freedom to belief in whatever u want to. also your constitution seperates religion from the state. This in turn means you cannot force ppl in public schools to say this"under god" thing because u are taking the very constitutional rights away from the non christian ppl in public schools. And as far as I know, the american population does not just consist of white Christian. Of course christian zealots are upset about this, just as zealots from any religion are upset about everything that prevents THEIR religion from dominating or in other words that prevents their religion from being (regarded) the ONLY truth.

However, u can continue having the god part in the pledge in like christian church owned schools - they are not public state owned.

This is what rights are about - they apply to everybody. Unless u understand right as the right of the majority but thats luckily not the way it works...

And there lies the problem. One of the school admins was on the news this morning, the school bent over backwards to protect this guys daughter from hearing the pledge, because the general population has no problem with their kids saying the pledge as is. The rights of the many are being trampled on because the right of the few are being offended, Give a voucher to this guy and let him send his kid where he wants. Or better yet give everyone a voucher at this school, because I am sure this school does something that offends everyone.

If we did not govt funded schools, this would not be an issue.

From where do you derive the "right" to have your government to lead you in a pledge with religious content?

but your forget! might makes right!! frankly his arguements are no better then the arguements for separate but equal schools for blacks. segregation!!

 

[Jimbo]

oh i see, anyone that doesn't agree with you gets the liberal tag. its ussually thrown in to pad a statement, and a bad habit you should break.

You should follow your own advice before you expect anyone else to.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: Piano Man
I'm personally for this, so I hope it stands. I highly doubt; however, that the Supreme Court with its current members will let this ruling stand.

Thank God for that The Senate has already agreed unanimously that the 9th court of appeals ruling was a crock of sh1t....not in those words though, but I bet they were thinking it. You know old Rehnquist and Thomas will tell the 9th Court of Appeals to stick it. They are the only ones on there worth a damn..Scalia is ok as well, but not always

Please, let's not mess with America's documents. First was the State Constitution of one of those liberal states and now this..

I can't wait until someone takes a sharpee to the Declaration and add /woman to everywhere it mentions man.

then ten years later they can add a /child

This is beaurocratical bullsh!t
Can't wait until they ban toilet paper because it is offensive to people who worship tree spirits.

This reference is only offensive to atheists, pagans and polytheists. Every modern religion that is halfway popular believes in the existence of one God or Supreme force.
To christians it is The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit(Can't say ghost because may offend people).
To the Muslims it's Allah, otherwise known as the same God under christianity
To the Hindus they believe in one Supreme Force, although he can have numerous names..Siva, Vishnu, Brahma..etc...
Buddhism, fat guy with belly you rub for luck

Big deal if you don't like it don't say it...

 

[Zebo]

[ God in Ten commandments movie voice] Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz [ /God in Ten commandments movie voice]

 

[Michael1897]

no one said that churchs need to be shutdown, simply not intertwined with the government. you have the right to state your religious beliefs. but when you insert your religious beliefs into something like a governments pledge of alliegence, you go over the line. you impose your beliefs on others through state power. because you like the message does not make it right. if "under no god" was inserted into the pledge it would be just as wrong. and certainly undefended by you.

After all there in a public forumn expressing a veleif in God. Ya churches are public forums, last I saw there not doing it in "private"...
public church forums have nothing to do with government.

public churches do have a say in gov't if not then why are they held as tax-free entities and many religious holidays stand as nat'l holidays?
all this is quite interesting but i bet it will be appealed

 

[MSFTer]

Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional

good

 

[syzygy]

public churches do have a say in gov't if not then why are they held as tax-free entities and many religious holidays
stand as nat'l holidays?

public churches fit into a federal category to qualify for tax exemption. the mere fact they're religious has nothing to
do with their tax exempt status. mosques in iran may be free of any tax obligation because the state of iran is a
theocracy and would therefore grant special recognition to the mosque on the basis of religion. not here though.

the u.s. criteria is simply a lack of profit interest and organization around a charitable cause.

here is a long irs list of tax exempt categories:
link

 

[syzygy]

Thank God for that The Senate has already agreed unanimously that the 9th court of appeals ruling was a crock of sh1t....not in those words though, but I bet they were thinking it. You know old Rehnquist and Thomas will tell the 9th Court of Appeals to stick it. They are the only ones on there worth a damn..Scalia is ok as well, but not always

exactly. 'separation of church and state' is not a constitutional phrase. the first amendment simply forbids the establishment of
religion. an endorsement, if this practice even qualifies as that, does not constitute an establishment. the only way it could qualify
as one is if we employ the slippery slope arguement and say, well, this practice could possibly lead to the establishment of one
religion over another and we should therefore nip it in the bud to preclude that eventuality.

from an abcnews.com story:

Jamin Raskin, a law professor at American University, said "the case is going to have an explosive effect on public opinion but
from the legal perspective, I think it's firmly rooted in the logic of prior cases."

its this same inane logic fueled by over-inflated secular phobias that set these aweful precedents. assuming this lands in the
supreme court, i would think the bush adminstration will have a rare national opportunity to unmask the fallacies that lay at the
root of these boogeyman defenses and hopefully return a dose of sanity to this issue.
abc news link

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: SuperTool
I guess Dr. Peepper had some foresight when they made the "One nation, indivisible" can. And man what a fit the right wingers on Fox had over that one.
This is excellent decision. I don't want my money going to indoctrinate children. I always skipped the under God part anyways. It is irrelevant and a political hack to the real pledge which signifies unity, liberty and justice.

Doesn't our taxes go to come schools that teach kids how to be a muslim for 3 weeks?

 

[troglodytis]

Originally posted by: troglodytis

Originally posted by: glenn1

i've got $50 that says there will be NO amendment added to the US constitution that address this subject in the year.

By "in the year" do you mean by the end of 2002, or within 365 days of today?

365 days from today

come on....somebody's got to be silly enough to take this bet.

 

[jkoXP]

that is stupid...... take out everything our country was based on- GOD. no wondering this is country is turning into crap

 

[JoeBaD]

This is a great thing!

Next the courts will take it from money, oaths of office, speeches etc. etc. etc.

Just what you liberals want.

and then....

there will be such a backlash from the middle-of-the-road America that all you extremist liberals will be swept from office.

Good riddance!!

 

[Orsorum]

*sigh* I would contribute to this thread... but I simply don't want to.

It's an empty argument - neither side wants to listen, they both enjoy bashing on each other too much. If this ever actually came to a logical, rational discussion, I'll be happy to join it.

 

[JoeBaD]

Oh yeah,

by the way all you brainless liberals on this board, answer this:

Why are there no Democrats embracing this ruling?

Because they don't agree or are they spineless?

come on!

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: JoeBaD
Oh yeah,

by the way all you brainless liberals on this board, answer this:

Why are there no Democrats embracing this ruling?

Because they don't agree or are they spineless?

come on!

Dude, there are points to both sides. If you insult people, don't expect them to come back with a logical, rational answer. Just a thought.

 

[Electric Amish]

I can't believe so much energy is being wasted on such a worthless cause.

amish

 

[Tiger]

The phrase isn't going to be removed and the decision will be overturned, either by the full 9th circuit court or the SC.
Nice try though. You'd think this guy would get tired of loosing all the time. He seems to be making a career out of it, tried this crap in Florida too.
Think about the hell he's just brought down on himself and his innocent daughter.