Pledge of Allegiance
June-26th-2002, 04:11 PM
#1
D'oh!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: VA
Posts: 302
Pledge of Allegiance
Did you guys hear the news today? It was ruled out that our "Pledge of Allegiance" is unconstitutional. I think it's kinda stupid and a waste of time debating this topic in court. Apparently it endorses religion and violating the Separation of Church and State. People don't really care anyways. Tsk Tsk Tsk!
This is a good article from the Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2002Jun26.html
This is a good article from the Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2002Jun26.html
June-26th-2002, 04:23 PM
#2
Cripple Fight!!!!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 1,944
yeah, I stopped saying the pledge around 10th grade or somewhere around that. I just let the PA in the morning do it for me.... 
Even though I think this is just a petty silly case, it is a good thing that they're bringing this up. I personally wouldn't mind at all if they just change the pledge back to "one nation, indivisible..."
saves the kids from saying couple words
Even though I think this is just a petty silly case, it is a good thing that they're bringing this up. I personally wouldn't mind at all if they just change the pledge back to "one nation, indivisible..."
saves the kids from saying couple words
June-26th-2002, 04:45 PM
#3
Passion for Zoom Zoom!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 372
Apparently it endorses religion and violating the Separation of Church and State. People don't really care anyways. Tsk Tsk Tsk!
-Jerry
June-26th-2002, 04:53 PM
#4
Bruce Leroy
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 788
Although I'm a Canuck, I agree with the ruling. You cannot force people to basically forsake whatever they believe in and take on Christian beliefs.
The line "Under God" makes the assumption that all who live in the USA should believe in Judeo-Christian beliefs. This is simply insane. Reminds of a certain guy named Hitler.
And I think people do care. Do your run around throwing around racial slurs at people? I bet not. Sure it's just words, but those words mean something to a lot of people.
And sure people think it's trivial. But there are many things that were probably thought of as trivial at one time. For example, what did it matter if Black people had to ride in the back of the bus? Or that Japanese people were thrown in internment camps? At the time that was the way it was....things change and I think our society has progressed.
My $0.02
The line "Under God" makes the assumption that all who live in the USA should believe in Judeo-Christian beliefs. This is simply insane. Reminds of a certain guy named Hitler.
And I think people do care. Do your run around throwing around racial slurs at people? I bet not. Sure it's just words, but those words mean something to a lot of people.
And sure people think it's trivial. But there are many things that were probably thought of as trivial at one time. For example, what did it matter if Black people had to ride in the back of the bus? Or that Japanese people were thrown in internment camps? At the time that was the way it was....things change and I think our society has progressed.
My $0.02
June-26th-2002, 05:17 PM
#5
Protege Newbie
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 38
separation of church and state??
I wonder what you are referring to when you toss around the words "separation of church and state." If you are referring to the establishment clause in the First Amendment to our Constitution, I challenge you to try and use it within the context of the Framers and therefore as they would have meant for it to be interpreted. Simply because some Supreme Court justices have taken it upon themselves to stamp out religions they deem inappropriate, does not mean that's what we should all do. 
I firmly believe that the Framers were attempting to protect the churches from being controlled by the state: that is why the restriction is placed on the Congress ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.") not on the general public. I think that people should be free not to say the pledge if they wish, but changing it's meaning for political purposes by a California Appeal's Court seems a little overboard and I expect it to be overturned by a higher court.
My .48 worth.
I firmly believe that the Framers were attempting to protect the churches from being controlled by the state: that is why the restriction is placed on the Congress ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.") not on the general public. I think that people should be free not to say the pledge if they wish, but changing it's meaning for political purposes by a California Appeal's Court seems a little overboard and I expect it to be overturned by a higher court.
My .48 worth.
June-26th-2002, 05:29 PM
#6
Cripple Fight!!!!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 1,944
the pledge is a pledge of loyalty to the United States of America the country. As such, it should ONLY contain references to the STATE, nothing else.
reverting the pledge back to the 1942 version is more than fine IMO, and it sounds better too IMO, much more powerful ("One nation INDIVISIBLE") IMO
hehe, I sure am opinionated today!
reverting the pledge back to the 1942 version is more than fine IMO, and it sounds better too IMO, much more powerful ("One nation INDIVISIBLE") IMO
hehe, I sure am opinionated today!
Last edited by ZoomZoomH; June-26th-2002 at 05:38 PM.
June-26th-2002, 06:02 PM
#7
D'oh!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: VA
Posts: 302
Originally posted by Pro_fan
Although I'm a Canuck, I agree with the ruling. You cannot force people to basically forsake whatever they believe in and take on Christian beliefs.
Although I'm a Canuck, I agree with the ruling. You cannot force people to basically forsake whatever they believe in and take on Christian beliefs.
The line "Under God" makes the assumption that all who live in the USA should believe in Judeo-Christian beliefs. This is simply insane. Reminds of a certain guy named Hitler.
Again.. see above
And I think people do care. Do your run around throwing around racial slurs at people? I bet not. Sure it's just words, but those words mean something to a lot of people.
I sure don't. Throwing around racial slurs to people is totally differnt from the "Under God" phrase. There's no comparison at all.
And sure people think it's trivial. But there are many things that were probably thought of as trivial at one time. For example, what did it matter if Black people had to ride in the back of the bus? Or that Japanese people were thrown in internment camps? At the time that was the way it was....things change and I think our society has progressed.
Our country was founded by God fearing people. If yall don't like it, don't use it. Political correctness is getting out of hand. What would be next? MONEY is unconstitutional too since it has "In God We Trust." Oh dear God..
My $0.02
Yall can keep my change!
June-26th-2002, 06:15 PM
#8
Passion for Zoom Zoom!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 372
Separation of Church and State was created to protect the government (thus, the People) from the church. It is not the other way around! The original settlers left Europe to escape religious persecution... in other words, the church-controlled governments were forcing a particular religion down their throats.
As for "In God We Trust", I bet you would feel really differently if it said "In Allah We Trust" or "In Buddha We Trust." Guess what? In the United States, people can practive any religion they want, or no religion at all. Meanwhile, our currency, our oathes, and our Pledge all refer to a particular god. It would be different if it was a private organization that was doing this. However, the Government is supposed to be for the people, by the people. You cannot represent the people with a single god. Therefore, a full separation of church (religion) and state (government) should be heeded.
"...millions of our school children will daily proclaim in every city and town, every village and rural schoolhouse, the dedication of our Nation and our people to the Almighty." -President Dwight Eisenhower on the addition of "under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance
Sounds like the very purpose of that Congressional ruling to add that phrase to dedicate the American people to a single God. Sounds like a total violation of the Separation of Church and State to me!
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
And what did Congress do in 1954? They made a law respecting an establishment of religion! And, yes, this restriction is placed on Congress. However, as I have stated before, Congress is the People!
-Jerry
As for "In God We Trust", I bet you would feel really differently if it said "In Allah We Trust" or "In Buddha We Trust." Guess what? In the United States, people can practive any religion they want, or no religion at all. Meanwhile, our currency, our oathes, and our Pledge all refer to a particular god. It would be different if it was a private organization that was doing this. However, the Government is supposed to be for the people, by the people. You cannot represent the people with a single god. Therefore, a full separation of church (religion) and state (government) should be heeded.
"...millions of our school children will daily proclaim in every city and town, every village and rural schoolhouse, the dedication of our Nation and our people to the Almighty." -President Dwight Eisenhower on the addition of "under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance
Sounds like the very purpose of that Congressional ruling to add that phrase to dedicate the American people to a single God. Sounds like a total violation of the Separation of Church and State to me!
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
And what did Congress do in 1954? They made a law respecting an establishment of religion! And, yes, this restriction is placed on Congress. However, as I have stated before, Congress is the People!
-Jerry
Last edited by jstand6; June-26th-2002 at 06:34 PM.
June-26th-2002, 08:08 PM
#9
Boost!
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Hampton, VA
Posts: 508
So basically the world is in shambles and this is all Americans can think about? We are some self righteous pitiful people, no wonder the rest of the world hates us.
Soon we'll be saying: "If you are constitutional, you support terrorism"
Soon we'll be saying: "If you are constitutional, you support terrorism"
June-26th-2002, 09:06 PM
#10
Protege Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 227
I agree with much of what has been said here already.
When I was a classroom teacher, I always had a bit of a problem with leading the kids in the Pledge every day. After the 9 millionth recitation, it really loses its meaning.
And I also had students from a variety of religious backgrounds, some of whom were expressly forbidden from participating in the whole Pledge routine, for a variety of reasons. This often led to some awkwardness.
So I actually skipped it as often as I could without getting myself into trouble with the administration.
No, I'm not 'un-American'...I think discussing concepts of country and patriotism with children is fine, when it is in a meaningful context.
And if you want to talk about supreme beings, that's fine too, although I think those conversations are better held at home or in houses of worship.
When I was a classroom teacher, I always had a bit of a problem with leading the kids in the Pledge every day. After the 9 millionth recitation, it really loses its meaning.
And I also had students from a variety of religious backgrounds, some of whom were expressly forbidden from participating in the whole Pledge routine, for a variety of reasons. This often led to some awkwardness.
So I actually skipped it as often as I could without getting myself into trouble with the administration.
No, I'm not 'un-American'...I think discussing concepts of country and patriotism with children is fine, when it is in a meaningful context.
And if you want to talk about supreme beings, that's fine too, although I think those conversations are better held at home or in houses of worship.
June-26th-2002, 10:03 PM
#12
Certified Sick Individual
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Houston, TX.
Posts: 1,141
My only question is this:
How long until the American dollar itself is declared unconstitutional?
Truth be told it has always bothered me, since I am a pointy headed liberal type, that our money says "In God We Trust". The United States was formed to protect people from religious persecution, not perpetuate it.
I am from West Texas and I did not agree when a Christian prayer was held:
A. At school assemblies (pep rally's etc.).
B. At every single school football game.
C. At our graduation.
I knew people from at least 3 non-Christian religions (some with none at all) when I was in high school. Since when did it become Christianity's right to shove God down everyones throat?
How long until the American dollar itself is declared unconstitutional?
Truth be told it has always bothered me, since I am a pointy headed liberal type, that our money says "In God We Trust". The United States was formed to protect people from religious persecution, not perpetuate it.
I am from West Texas and I did not agree when a Christian prayer was held:
A. At school assemblies (pep rally's etc.).
B. At every single school football game.
C. At our graduation.
I knew people from at least 3 non-Christian religions (some with none at all) when I was in high school. Since when did it become Christianity's right to shove God down everyones throat?
June-26th-2002, 11:34 PM
#13
...and loving it!
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Texas, US
Posts: 286
I concur with kc5zom--it also bothers me a great deal that our money says "In God We Trust" on it. And I don't think the dollar itself will be declared unconstitutional, but I'd be happy if the Court declared putting that phrase on the dollar unconstitutional. Frankly, I'm surprised it's still there--putting religious phrases on the currency is pretty clearly an endorsement of judeo-christian religion by the state, which certainly seems to violate the First Amendment.
June-26th-2002, 11:47 PM
#14
**Punani Lover**
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Hawaii (duh!)
Posts: 1,861
honestly, who really cares? constitutional or not, it is not forcing anything on anyone, unlike ciggarette smoke which is not a pleasant smell... and oh yeah, it seems it's unhealthy too, which may shorten our lives. hmmm, all these babies crying about whether or not my child should have to say "the pledge" should just shut the f#ck up and concentrate on more important issues. what would those be you ask?
-gun control
-violence (sex, racial, bullying)
-drugs
-actually preparing out kids to worry and b!tch about important issues
no one forces anyone to say the pledge. and believe me, these kids hear a lot worse than "under God"...
-gun control
-violence (sex, racial, bullying)
-drugs
-actually preparing out kids to worry and b!tch about important issues
no one forces anyone to say the pledge. and believe me, these kids hear a lot worse than "under God"...
June-27th-2002, 12:32 AM
#15
Ya'll Come Back Now
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 241
Originally posted by flip703
"Under God" doesn't not force people people to take on Christian beliefs..
The line "Under God" makes the assumption that all who live in the USA should believe in Judeo-Christian beliefs. This is simply insane. Reminds of a certain guy named Hitler.
Again.. see above
And I think people do care. Do your run around throwing around racial slurs at people? I bet not. Sure it's just words, but those words mean something to a lot of people.
I sure don't. Throwing around racial slurs to people is totally differnt from the "Under God" phrase. There's no comparison at all.
And sure people think it's trivial. But there are many things that were probably thought of as trivial at one time. For example, what did it matter if Black people had to ride in the back of the bus? Or that Japanese people were thrown in internment camps? At the time that was the way it was....things change and I think our society has progressed.
Our country was founded by God fearing people. If yall don't like it, don't use it. Political correctness is getting out of hand. What would be next? MONEY is unconstitutional too since it has "In God We Trust." Oh dear God..
My $0.02
Yall can keep my change!
"Under God" doesn't not force people people to take on Christian beliefs..
The line "Under God" makes the assumption that all who live in the USA should believe in Judeo-Christian beliefs. This is simply insane. Reminds of a certain guy named Hitler.
Again.. see above
And I think people do care. Do your run around throwing around racial slurs at people? I bet not. Sure it's just words, but those words mean something to a lot of people.
I sure don't. Throwing around racial slurs to people is totally differnt from the "Under God" phrase. There's no comparison at all.
And sure people think it's trivial. But there are many things that were probably thought of as trivial at one time. For example, what did it matter if Black people had to ride in the back of the bus? Or that Japanese people were thrown in internment camps? At the time that was the way it was....things change and I think our society has progressed.
Our country was founded by God fearing people. If yall don't like it, don't use it. Political correctness is getting out of hand. What would be next? MONEY is unconstitutional too since it has "In God We Trust." Oh dear God..
My $0.02
Yall can keep my change!
My $0.02