Federal Judge Rules Pledge in School Unconstitutional

"pressured" ????? How and by whom ?
And you still have proven nothing except that you believe a certain way . Once again , simply restating your belief is not proof .
It has been debated many times and is still on the money and in the Pledge because of its historical importance and because it is the will of a vast majority of the people .

how can saying the PLEGE OF ALLEGIANCE in school be found unconstitutional???

just hearing that sounds about as retarted as someone saying that somebody blew up the walls that held all the water back in new orleans....

i just dont see how people could get so pissed about two words...

if you dont like it just say it and not mean it....

wouldnt that kinda be like lying???nobodys really ever had too much of a problem doin that when they had too(Bill Clinton)...

and its not like UNDER GOD is combining church and state in some huge way...

i mean come on...if people are gettin so tore up about two words maybe we should look around and realize we have a serious problem with weak little panzies creeping into the mainstream....

get over it...its not that much of a inconvienience.... its not killing somebody although you might die in some countries for saying it...

Ok then should they be promoting a religion... basically the same thing it just isnt on the books :wink:

Because "Under God" = Promoting a religion

I have defined Religion in this thread more than enough times where this question should not be asked again. :rolleyes:



No it doesn't.



I don't understand how people can get pissed over the removal of two words



Give me a break, it should have never been there in the first place.



What Bill Clinton did has nothing to do with the legality of those words in the pledge. We are not debating why people are pissed off over two words we are debating on whether these two words are constitutional.



It is promoting religion, period. If you do not believe in religion you are required to hear "Under God" everyday during school due to the pledge being required by the government.

I'm sorry but a person that does not believe in God is an American as well and have the right to pledge to their country without religion being brought into it.

You seem to think that the every person that does not believe in God thanks the way this guy does (The guy pushing for it to be removed) This is simply not true. I do not believe there is some god watching my every move and I should not have to say "Under God" when pledging allegiance to my country.

Is it that big of a deal to me? Nope you wont see me bitching about it but it is not needed and since the issue is upon us I am speaking my mind on it.



Maybe just maybe we have a problem with the religous right not being able to accept people that do not believe what they believe and want to somehow push their beliefs onto others? This is not just a country for religous people... it is "The Land of the Free" is it not? or is it "The Land of the Free... unless you are atheist, gay...."



I will not get over it.

Your right it is not that big of a deal in todays time with other issues facing us that are so much more important.

But what does that have to do with the legality of this? Just because it is not that important you want to throw it aside even though promotes a religion just because you dont want to let some left wing win a case?

You know liberals arent wrong 100% of the time :rolleyes:

And conservatives sure as hell ain't right 100% of the time.

A liberal can have a valid point just like a conservative. Until you accept that fact this country will continue to SUCK ASS and will go no where because we still have people bitching over party lines :rolleyes:

I agree with people I believe are right, not that are a member of a certain party

"Because "Under God" = Promoting a religion"

A religion being all of them right? LOL.

"I have defined Religion in this thread more than enough times where this question should not be asked again. :rolleyes: "

Sorry i have to ask again? Which religion are you talking about?

"We are not debating why people are pissed off over two words we are debating on whether these two words are constitutional. "

By the definitions that were quoted one page one. Unconstitutional comes from the Supreme Court not a Federal Judge. So tell me again how it is unconstitutional?

"Maybe just maybe we have a problem with the religous right not being able to accept people that do not believe what they believe and want to somehow push their beliefs onto others? This is not just a country for religous people... it is "The Land of the Free" is it not? or is it "The Land of the Free... unless you are atheist, gay...."


Push their beliefs onto others? That must be that freedom from religion clause i have yet to see?

I guess you extreme right wing religous people will never grasp the fact that there are people in this country that are Americans too and that do not want to have GOD shoved in their face by the government.

God = a religous supernatural being

Religion = read the definition I have posted over and over again.

God has no place in the government period. Especially with people like Bush who seem to want to push it on to EVERYONE.

Your attitude is what is wrong with this country today.

The constitution is not perfect and until you realize that and get off your high horse this country will continue to be set back in the future.

It is time we stop pushing religion within the government just because of some 229 year old outdated.

Times change sir and its time to ammend it once again.

So with your last statement then it seems to me that you have no problem with the government pushing their religous beliefs onto us... since it is not freedom from religion....

If so then I am done discussing this with you, your stubborn and nothing I say within this thread will make it sink through that this country does not revolve around religous people.

He won by majority, quite whining you lost.

Nope, not if i have anything to do with it. Majority rules and we say no.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion

How did I lose if I voted for him :confused:

Assumption owns you.

Apparently if you disagree with one thing Bush does you automatically voted for the other guy?

Weird how that works with you people.



Sad day....

I do not see establishment of a religion I see establishment of religion.

"Under God" Establishes Religion within the Federal Government.

How is that for legit

If you voted for him then you must regret your choice? All i have seen is you complain about him. Most fans aren't that critical of there pick? Yes us people against you people, LOL. Did you vote for him in both elections or just one?

In your opinion is establishes religion. Not in ours, hence the way it is!

I could not vote in the first election due to age but had I of been able to yes I would have voted for him over Gore.

I am critical of him because I can be and he deserves it just as much as Kerry and everyone in the Senate and House deserve it.

Bush is far from perfect and just because you vote for a person does not mean you are therefore prohibited of being highly critical of him. It does not mean you agree with everything he does. Cause I sure do not.

If you would take a step outside the two threads all your posts are within and look at say the New Orleans disaster you would see me defending him from the critism he has taken on from the far left.

I agree and like I said its a sad day....