Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional

[Amused]

Originally posted by: BreakApart
AmusedOne,
The Atheist comment was not ment to target you... my bad, i should have clearly separated that remark. It was simply an observation that has become very clear lately.

I see no point debating the separation issue further as you continue to fabricate/twist the wording to suit your agenda. Nothing more i can do, as i have already established your complete fabrications of the facts. Remember this tho, once this ruling is over-turned it will have created a precedent for further clarification of what the Constitution actually says; and it won't be the twisted version you have created.

On a side note:
School vouchers passed today which also goes DIRECTLY against this fabricated separation you keep spouting. Seems it will be twice in (1) week where your fabricated separation is dismissed, and my position is supported.

;P

AmusedOne, you and Red always seem to make me laugh, perhaps it's the wacky agendas you have.

I am waiting to see exactly what it is you think I've "fabricated." You are, in effect, calling me a fraud. I have simply posted Jefferson's own words. None of them fabricated and all with cites. They speak for themselves. No twisting needed. You cannot separate church and state when the state endorses a religion, any religion.

I'm all for Vouchers. In fact, I'm for abolishing public education altogether. See what you get for assuming stuff yet again?

I see no establishment violation in vouchers whatsoever. It is simply a refund of tax money so you may opt out of the farce that is public education.

Maybe, just maybe, if you stopped assuming things about me and approached this debate objectively, you might see my arguments in a different light.

 

[Ramsnake]

Poll @ CNN.COM


Do you agree with the U.S. Constitution's separation of church and state?
Yes 73% 13577 votes
No 27% 5095 votes
Total: 18,672 votes

 

[Red Dawn]

Poll @ CNN.COM


Do you agree with the U.S. Constitution's separation of church and state?
Yes 73% 13577 votes
No 27% 5095 votes
Total: 18,672 votes

That's a dangerous 27%. Luckily they aren't wild eyed crazed Islamic Extremist.

 

[dhans1]

Originally posted by: AmusedOne

Originally posted by: JoeBaD


The most hillarious thing here, is that you think I'm "liberal."

Ask around, I think you'll be surprised. Most liberals here think I'm hardcore conservative.

In fact, I'm libertarian.

One need not be liberal to be agnostic, and support the separation of the church from the state.

I, for one, am a conservative politically but would consider myself an atheist. Posting things like "Those atheist liberals!" or "Those conservative religious freaks" have no merit here and show a lack of intelligence, and more so, class, on behalf of the poster. Or, perhaps, these are actual school children posting on their summer vacation and since they have no classmates to call names they have to resort to message boards.

 

[apoppin]

-The facts are the pledge was already voluntary... (voluntary is not forcing by ANY stretch of the imagination)

Actually it WAS mandatory during WWII. Many of the children of Jehovah's witnesses were kicked out of public schools for their refusal to say the Pledge. (I'd call that FORCING.) Even the Supreme Court ruled it was mandatory. After the war ended, the supreme court REVERSED ITSELF and agreed the Pledge should be voluntary. THEN the words "under God" were added the next decade.

Thought you'd like a clarification on history.

 

[Nefrodite]

ah so the thread continues, with amused one using facts and logic to make his case, while others spend their time spewing demagoguery. i thought liberals were the ones ruled by only their heart, lacking logic. i guess thats not true.

i think you guys gotta stop with the victimhood. taking away words that only promote your group of faiths through government has nothing to do with pushing athiesm, buddism or anything else.



as others have said, change the words to "under allah", or "under no god" and you won't defend them anymore.


and saying the official state pledge of alliegiance is voluntary is like saying your school graduation is voluntary. your not free to hijack the government to promote your religion. a pledge of alliegience to your own country that you love should not be written to exclude people.

people on your side are the ones that continuouly quote "there are no athiests in foxholes". now think about that for a momment. are you calling all that don't believe in god cowards? morally corrupt? that only god fearing people are any good. you are in effect saying that if your godless, you aren't worthy of being listened to, you are unamerican, so we'lll just steam roll over your rights as an american since we don't consider you one really.

its completely absurd. if people walked around saying that christians are godless infidels that are morally corrupt in public and on radio they would get creamed. yet its "pc" to disparage nonbelievers. its part of the culture you speak of, tradition. f*ck the godless, they shouldn't be that way anyways, so don't have a 2nd thought about imposing your faith on them.

i'm sure every deserter was an athiest? every commiter of war crimes was christian. right? don't make claims you can't support. a man will die for his country, his family if there is just cause. its that simple. and on another note, if belief in god also allows people to send their children as suicide bombers against innocent women and children, what good is it


frankly many religious people rate the godless only about half a notch higher then homosexuals on their scorn meter it doesn't work the other way around.


u see how ugly this gets? thats why any mention of religion or lack of it should not be in government. a neutral party is good for all.



E Pluribus Unum" (From Many, One)

 

[EXman]

blah blah blah the judge backed down to a ruling with another court of appeals.

Bush said "We need judges with common sense" pretty good rip on that judge. Guess he'll never move up in the judicary ranks kinda ruined his chances.

And to the Dad that wanted this case to begin with, your living in a dream world if you think your child will never be exposed to God in some respect. Probably an ACLU card carring member.

 

[gopunk]

Bush said "We need judges with common sense" pretty good rip on that judge. Guess he'll never move up in the judicary ranks kinda ruined his chances.

it's sad that a just ruling is rewarded with hostility.

And to the Dad that wanted this case to begin with, your living in a dream world if you think your child will never be exposed to God in some respect. Probably an ACLU card carring member.

it's not about being *exposed* it's about being FORCED to repeat ad nauseum that your beloved country is under some entity that you don't even believe in.

 

[gopunk]

-The Constitution states congress may NOT establish a state religion. (NOWHERE does it say separation of church and state)

it prevents a lot more than that: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"

The funniest part of all this is the fervor Athiests have taken in pushing their beliefs on the rest of us. Intolerance has become the religion of Athiests, simple as that.

let me ask you something, who fights to have their religious beliefs kept on our money and on the tongues of our children? when's the last time you heard atheists say "i think we should put "god doesn't exist" on all of our currency?"

just SHOW me how atheists are pushing their beliefs on you! and those little old atheist ladies that knock on your door don't count.

 

[Nefrodite]

it doesn't matter if you think the kids suffering is irrelevant. the fact is the pledge was modified for corrupt reasons.


the man stated that he didn't bring the case to court just because of his daughter. injustice is injustice.


having to repeat from the time of a small child a pledge that shows that you aren't really an "american" like everyone else is not justifiable. indivisible? and right after saying that you divide, its hipocrisy. its government. and you'd change your tune in a blink of an eye if it was "under allah" or "under satan", or "under no god" that was endorced by the government. it has nothing to do with the aclu and just having your feelings hurt as you'd love to pretend.



and yes, guess whos recieving death threats? yes the dad, from god fearing people. wonderful eh? sorta like in the middle east eh? scream infidel! he must die!! do you think agnostics and athiests would dial in death threats if "under no god" were being taken out? probably not. then again it seems we're less violent and irrational most of the time


as for the judge, one was selected by Nixon. and he has the guts to stand up for what is right, even if it is unpopular. and he deserves respect for that.


it was not all that long ago when students were required to recite the lords prayer in school. that was struck down by the courts banning prayer in school. and guess what? politicians at the time reacted in much the same way as they did just yesterday. people were outraged, they listed basically the exact arguements that are being said now.


and now we look back and it looks very silly. of course there shouldn't be state sanctioned school prayer.

 

[gopunk]

btw, go amusedone and red dawn... the voice of reason

 

[lowtechguy]

Big Black 'Wood

On September 11, 2001, 19 Arab, Muslim, non-citizen men killed 3,000 Americans. Don't forget it. Big Black 'Wood

No, I am not forgetting it and by God I am going to take my revenge!! An eye for an eye, a nose for a nose

What is your point. Black Wood? Are you upset that those killers were muslims, or are you upset that those killers were Arabs, or are you upset because those killers were non-citizens.

I don't know about you but I am upset because there were 3000 people who were killed. The color, national origin, and religion do not concern me. As far as crime is concerned, I believe in equal opportunity punishment irrespective of color, national origin, and religion.

The killers certainly didn't discriminate. There were at least a hundred muslim, and hundreds of non-citizen foreign nationals that were killed in that attack.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: gopunk
btw, go amusedone and red dawn... the voice of reason

Sh1T! I've been warning Red Dawn that we had better stop agreeing like this on issues. It's down right civilized, for cripes sake!

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: lowtechguy

Big Black 'Wood

On September 11, 2001, 19 Arab, Muslim, non-citizen men killed 3,000 Americans. Don't forget it. Big Black 'Wood

No, I am not forgetting it and by God I am going to take my revenge!! An eye for an eye, a nose for a nose

What is your point. Black Wood? Are you upset that those killers were muslims, or are you upset that those killers were Arabs, or are you upset because those killers were non-citizens.

I don't know about you but I am upset because there were 3000 people who were killed. The color, national origin, and religion do not concern me. As far as crime is concerned, I believe in equal opportunity punishment irrespective of color, national origin, and religion.

The killers certainly didn't discriminate. There were at least a hundred muslim, and hundreds of non-citizen foreign nationals that were killed in that attack.

You left out "men."

Anywho, I think the point is the new security checks at airports strip searching 90 year old white/black/asian/latin ladies is ridiculous. We KNOW who the threat is coming from, and it sure as hell ain't 90 year old ladies. Or 75 year old WWII medal of honor recipients (did you hear about that one??? They took his freakin' medal from him claiming it could be used as a weapon!!!).

 

[xirtam]

I think we should make it, "...one nation under the stars..."

I think we could get more people to agree on it. The astronomers and astrologers alike would be happy, and the rest of us would have to accept the validity of the statement based on the scientific verifiability of the existence of the heavenly bodies.

 

[LordMaul]

Originally posted by: AmusedOne

Originally posted by: gopunk
btw, go amusedone and red dawn... the voice of reason

Sh1T! I've been warning Red Dawn that we had better stop agreeing like this on issues. It's down right civilized, for cripes sake!

Now you soun dlike Texmaster and Elledan!

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: LordMaul

Originally posted by: AmusedOne

Originally posted by: gopunk
btw, go amusedone and red dawn... the voice of reason

Sh1T! I've been warning Red Dawn that we had better stop agreeing like this on issues. It's down right civilized, for cripes sake!

Now you soun dlike Texmaster and Elledan!

OK, you can shoot me now.

 

[Lucky]

Originally posted by: Lucky

Originally posted by: AmusedOne

Originally posted by: NightFlyerGTI

Originally posted by: pyonir
So,
Believing in god = intelligence?

Lol, no- I should have rephrased that, sorry. Make that "level of patriotism".

So because I'm agnostic, and believe our great nation should have a religiously neutral government as per the original intent of our Founding Fathers, you think to question my patriotism?

Tell me, what have you done to defend our nation? I served four years in the Army as an anti-tank gunner. How dare you think to question my love for this country simply because I wish to maintain what our Founding Fathers intended.

Still waiting on a response from the ever-almighty
NightFlyerGTI on this...

?

 

[Nefrodite]

Originally posted by: Lucky

Originally posted by: Lucky

Originally posted by: AmusedOne

Originally posted by: NightFlyerGTI

Originally posted by: pyonir
So,
Believing in god = intelligence?

Lol, no- I should have rephrased that, sorry. Make that "level of patriotism".

So because I'm agnostic, and believe our great nation should have a religiously neutral government as per the original intent of our Founding Fathers, you think to question my patriotism?

Tell me, what have you done to defend our nation? I served four years in the Army as an anti-tank gunner. How dare you think to question my love for this country simply because I wish to maintain what our Founding Fathers intended.

Still waiting on a response from the ever-almighty
NightFlyerGTI on this...

?

eh, didn't Judge Alfred T. Goodwin serve in world war 2?

 

[StattlichPassat]

How ironic- I felt my presense being needed in this thread for some reason... it's incredible that it is still going, but given some of the later posts I've seen here, I'd rather stay out of the fields of bias, ignorance and bad judgement rather than dive back in.

First off, I shouldn't judge your patriotism, especially on the grounds that you have served in the Armed Services. Normally I would offer you a cookie, but not over stuff like serving- I am honestly and truthfully proud of people like you. Seriously, good job.

Our Founding Fathers were personally, religiously Christian people. Just because our nation was formed for the sake of religious neutrality for all citizens in general doesn't mean it wasn't founded under a belief in God. It was (you think the Founding Fathers didn't praise The Lord after America came into being in its very early stages? You think they didn't pray?), and religion is as much a part of our beginnings as just about anything else, whether you like to believe that or not. That's America. Put it on the back burner if you will, but don't try to be one to turn the stove off. It's there forever.

 

[Lucky]

Well Im off to bed but I'd encourage you to re-read the thread (yea, i know, torture), specifically some of amused one's posts regarding the religious affinity of our founding fathers.

 

[StattlichPassat]

given some of the later posts I've seen here, I'd rather stay out of the fields of bias, ignorance and bad judgement rather than dive back in.

 

[Lucky]

Originally posted by: NightFlyerGTI

given some of the later posts I've seen here, I'd rather stay out of the fields of bias, ignorance and bad judgement rather than dive back in.

LOL, ok, but you just contradicted yourself by spreading the ignorance yourself three posts up!

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: NightFlyerGTI
How ironic- I felt my presense being needed in this thread for some reason... it's incredible that it is still going, but given some of the later posts I've seen here, I'd rather stay out of the fields of bias, ignorance and bad judgement rather than dive back in.

First off, I shouldn't judge your patriotism, especially on the grounds that you have served in the Armed Services. Normally I would offer you a cookie, but not over stuff like serving- I am honestly and truthfully proud of people like you. Seriously, good job.

Our Founding Fathers were personally, religiously Christian people. Just because our nation was formed for the sake of religious neutrality for all citizens in general doesn't mean it wasn't founded under a belief in God. It was (you think the Founding Fathers didn't praise The Lord after America came into being in its very early stages? You think they didn't pray?), and religion is as much a part of our beginnings as just about anything else, whether you like to believe that or not. That's America. Put it on the back burner if you will, but don't try to be one to turn the stove off. It's there forever.

Thank you for your recognition. I was highly insulted when you implied someone taking my stance was not patriotic. I'm glad you've reconsidered.

I never denied the founders were religious men (Jefferson and Paine could hardly be called "Christian," though, since they seriously doubted the divinity of Christ [as did Franklin on more than one occation], but that's another matter). I simply stated that they believed a man's religion was strictly between him and his god. ALL the major players in the Constitution and BofI were very adamant in their belief that church and state should remain separate, thus ensuring government neutrality on religious matters to preserve religious freedom.

That the founders may have prayed or not, or been religious or not is irrelevant. What is relevant is what they intended the roll of government be in regard to religion. I believe their writings make that perfectly clear. The structure and basis of our country is NOT --in any way-- rooted in Christianity, but in Age of Reason philosophy and pre-Christian, pre-Ceasar Roman government structure. The fact that a man is religious does not mean that everything he creates is, by default, a product of his religion.

Were our country rooted in Christianity, you'd be able to draw some parallel between the Constitution/BofI and the bible. You cannot. In fact, much of the BofI is anathema to traditional Christian ideals at the time.

Finally, if you believe any of the subject matter in my posts is "of the fields of bias, ignorance and bad judgement" please feel free to point out what factual evidence I've presented is wrong.

 

[Format C:]

Originally posted by: Lucky
Well Im off to bed but I'd encourage you to re-read the thread (yea, i know, torture), specifically some of amused one's posts regarding the religious affinity of our founding fathers.

I'd encourage you to do some research for yourself and NOT rely on the biased postings of anyone on a bulletin board.