1
   

Federal Judge Rules Pledge in School Unconstitutional

 
 
Brent cv
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Sep, 2005 03:41 pm
@ndjs,
ndjs wrote:
They try to make a point but hyprocritize (is that a word?) themselves by only bitching about certain issues, while the 'problem' is in other places as well.

I agree 100% with that.

However it still remains my opinion that the current move to get it removed should suceed regardless of their motivations.
0 Replies
 
lowflyn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Sep, 2005 05:44 pm
@Brent cv,
There are bigger fish to fry at this moment in time. But as far as the phrase "under God", it was simply showing how our country was founded on Christian principles. This is the same reason the money says "In God we trust". If we forget where this country came from, how can we lead it in the right direction. It is part of our history, our heritage. If we should forget it, then the african americans should drop the slavery issue, anyone who was harmed by anything in the past should just drop it because it's the past and doesn't matter.
History is there to learn lessons from, the lesson I learn from this country being started by people who trust in God shows one thing, we should continue to be "one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all".
Curmudgeon
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Sep, 2005 06:00 pm
@Brent cv,
Brent - tell me how removing God references will do any good at all , and how will it make the ones who want it removed feel better ? I see no damage done to anyone by it .
Brent cv
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Sep, 2005 06:03 pm
@lowflyn,
lowflyn wrote:
There are bigger fish to fry at this moment in time.


I agree for the eleventy billionth time

Quote:

But as far as the phrase "under God", it was simply showing how our country was founded on Christian principles.


The reason it was put in the Pledge was to counter our then rival (and I believe still rival) Soviet Union and their socialist non religous country.

Quote:
This is the same reason the money says "In God we trust".


Is Money not the root of all evil? Is that not like a insult to God putting that on the very thing we use to ruin his name?

Quote:

If we forget where this country came from, how can we lead it in the right direction.


Read my post in response to Nate on the founders of this country

Quote:
It is part of our history, our heritage. If we should forget it, then the african americans should drop the slavery issue, anyone who was harmed by anything in the past should just drop it because it's the past and doesn't matter.


This has nothing to do with this. It is not about our history.

Nate said it himself, seperation of state NOR god is mentioned in our Constitution... just because the founding fathers were religous and might I had of different beliefs does not mean that we should go around putting In God We Trust on government buildings, money, and in a pledge that is said everyday in schools.
0 Replies
 
Brent cv
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Sep, 2005 06:07 pm
@Curmudgeon,
Curmudgeon wrote:
Brent - tell me how removing God references will do any good at all , and how will it make the ones who want it removed feel better ? I see no damage done to anyone by it .

That is not the point I am making. Regardless of whether it is hurting anyone or not it should not be there to begin with.

The religous people are putting up as big of a fight as the Atheist that want it removed... so to those supporting it remaining within there... what is it going to hurt if it is removed to the original form.. I bet your going to say this country will lose its way... NEWS FLASH.. its already happening... no amount of IN GOD WE TRUST or UNDER GOD is going to save this country... COMMON SENSE will....

A Government should not be placing Religion anywhere on its Money or a Pledge that to begin with was not intended to say anything about God.

You can not debate politics with religion as a god can not be proven. If you allow that then why even debate if you are not going to use facts?

So why should we promote a God within our government?


The Government's job is to provide for its citizens and protect them from threats to our rights. It is not to promote a God.
Curmudgeon
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Sep, 2005 06:09 pm
@Brent cv,
Do you deny the influence of a belief in God on the founding fathers? And the influence of our freedom of religion on the development of our country ?
Brent cv
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Sep, 2005 06:12 pm
@Curmudgeon,
Curmudgeon wrote:
Do you deny the influence of a belief in God on the founding fathers? And the influence of our freedom of religion on the development of our country ?

Nope no denial there.

You are afforded the Freedom of Religion are you not?

Were you afforded this freedom before those two words were added to the Pledge? I believe so.

Will you still be afforded this freedom if they are removed? Yes...

The founding fathers did not set up this country on one religion for a reason and our current government should keep religion out of its daily routine.

Thomas Jefferson wrote:

I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition (Christianity) one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology.
0 Replies
 
Curmudgeon
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Sep, 2005 06:12 pm
@Brent cv,
I have no problem with removing the phrase from the pledge . I have a problem with a small number of our citizens forcing changes in law to suit their ideology . If they are the majority , it is a different story .
0 Replies
 
Curmudgeon
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Sep, 2005 06:13 pm
@Brent cv,
If we change a law because it makes some people uncomfortable , we will change them daily in the future .
Brent cv
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Sep, 2005 06:16 pm
@Curmudgeon,
Curmudgeon wrote:
If we change a law because it makes some people uncomfortable , we will change them daily in the future .

I disagree, we are not changing law left and right to please a few people. This is someone attempting to remove something that should never have been there in the first place.

This is something that affects a lot of people across the nation.
0 Replies
 
Curmudgeon
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Sep, 2005 06:22 pm
@Brent cv,
A lot is nowhere near a majority , nor near enough for a referendum . Those opposed have the right to oppose and attempt to effect change , but our system is designed to be fair to all . That small number is not entitled to speak for all of us .
Once again ,
If they achieve a majority or near it , changes may be warranted . I think our discussion is based on something deeper than just the Pledge or the Money .
Brent cv
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Sep, 2005 06:28 pm
@Curmudgeon,
Curmudgeon wrote:
A lot is nowhere near a majority , nor near enough for a referendum . Those opposed have the right to oppose and attempt to effect change , but our system is designed to be fair to all . That small number is not entitled to speak for all of us .
Once again ,
If they achieve a majority or near it , changes may be warranted . I think our discussion is based on something deeper than just the Pledge or the Money .

It is.. I believe that Religion should be left out of Government period.
0 Replies
 
Curmudgeon
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Sep, 2005 06:31 pm
@Brent cv,
You are missing my point altogether - The government is NOT establishing a religion , nor is it favoring one over any other . Historical perspective is what we are seeing , not establishment .
0 Replies
 
Curmudgeon
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Sep, 2005 06:33 pm
@Brent cv,
You have yet to show that government is promoting a religion .
Brent cv
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Sep, 2005 06:46 pm
@Brent cv,
I have to go back to class now. I will be back later to continue
0 Replies
 
Brent cv
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Sep, 2005 09:08 pm
@Curmudgeon,
Curmudgeon wrote:
You have yet to show that government is promoting a religion .

It is indeed establishing a religion. Theism is a religion, even if it has no other doctrine than "God exists". The very definition of religion is "Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe." By saying the U.S. is "one nation under God", the pledge affirms that God exists (which a god may or may not), therefore, it is religious in nature.
0 Replies
 
lowflyn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Sep, 2005 10:30 pm
@Brent cv,
I agree with brent on this one, the government has no business putting God on anything related to the government. Taking it out of the pledge of allegiance...ok. Taking it off the money? No..that would involve spending more money than it's worth. You have to look at this also from an economists standpoint, the monetary costs far outweigh the marginal benefits achieved by removing "In God we trust" from all money. This is something that should be left alone. Maybe remove it from future prntings and molds if these costs do not outweigh the beforementioned marginal benefits. I say, it's been on the money from the beginning, why change it now.
Brent cv
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Sep, 2005 10:36 pm
@lowflyn,
lowflyn wrote:
I agree with brent on this one, the government has no business putting God on anything related to the government.


Thank you....

Quote:

Taking it out of the pledge of allegiance...ok. Taking it off the money? No..that would involve spending more money than it's worth.


I am not saying do it now, but we do change the design of our money every 10 years or so... next time around it goes away is what I am saying. The government can do things in steps contrary to what we see everyday.

Quote:

You have to look at this also from an economists standpoint, the monetary costs far outweigh the marginal benefits achieved by removing "In God we trust" from all money. This is something that should be left alone. Maybe remove it from future prntings and molds if these costs do not outweigh the beforementioned marginal benefits. I say, it's been on the money from the beginning, why change it now.


Agreed, as I said above
0 Replies
 
ndjs
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Sep, 2005 11:10 pm
@Brent cv,
Brent wrote:
The religous people are putting up as big of a fight as the Atheist that want it removed... so to those supporting it remaining within there... what is it going to hurt if it is removed to the original form.. I bet your going to say this country will lose its way... NEWS FLASH.. its already happening... no amount of IN GOD WE TRUST or UNDER GOD is going to save this country... COMMON SENSE will....

In Common Sense We Trust...

That would be about as hyprocitical as a nigra at a Klan meeting. (no offense meant for "african" americans)
ndjs
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Sep, 2005 11:12 pm
@Brent cv,
All I really have to say about this is silent majority.

All we hear about are those outspoken "gimme my 15 seconds of fame" people.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/02/2024 at 07:31:08