Under God With Liberty

Momma Angel wrote:

Debra_Law wrote:
Momma Angel wrote:
I said if something could be come up with that would satisfy boths sides I am all for that.

I am just not one side getting what they want and the other not.

Officially? What the heck does that have to do with it? It's there, it's been there for as long as I can remember. It's two words. Yes, they mean something different to me than they do you, but, just as you have the right not to practice religion, you have the right to not recognize those two words. Can you suggest something that would satisfy both sides?

It is so very true. YOU don't understand.

We are a government of LAWS, not of men. I'm sure you don't understand that either.

Our CONSTITUTION, the supreme LAW of the land, protects INDIVIDUAL liberties. I'm sure you don't understand that either.

We are NOT one nation "under God." The individuals who comprise this country are diverse in their beliefs. Some believe in God; some do not. Our government is SECULAR. It is supposed to be NEUTRAL with respect to religion. I'm sure you don't understand that either.

FEDERAL LAWS are enacted by the legislative branch of government--by CONGRESS. The LAWS are required to be secular--religion neutral.

The pledge of allegiance:

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands; one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

In 1954, Congress enacted a LAW to add the words "under God" as follows:

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands; one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

THEREFORE--OFFICIALLY--by the mandate of LAW--the pledge states we are one nation, under God. This official congressional mandate conflicts with the supreme LAW that ALL of us have the LIBERTY to believe in God or NOT believe in God as WE choose. It is a personal choice--it is one that CANNOT be imposed upon us through an official endorsement of God in OUR--not just your's or the religious folks'--PLEDGE of allegiance.

If we are truly ONE NATION, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL . . . then that nation includes the deists and the non-deists alike. NONE of us should tolerate an OFFICIAL version of the national pledge enacted by LAW that places all of us as one nation "under God" when it's our duty to respect the liberty of ALL. The liberty of all requires a secular government.

It is YOUR DUTY as an American citizen to ensure liberty and justice for ALL Americans by demanding a secular, neutral government.

If you don't understand the "big deal" of two little words in our OFFICIAL PLEDGE of allegiance enacted by LAW and imposed on EVERYONE--then you have no understanding of what it truly means to be an American. And that's embarrassing.

Well, you don't have to be so rude about it. You have no idea what I am like. You have no idea what I think it means to be an American. I would suggest that if there was a problem with putting Under God in there then that should have been taken up at the time, don't you? There were obviously enough people wanting it in there.

You have no clue as to what I understand or what I don't understand. I may not understand things the way you do but that doesn't make me any less an American, human being, or anything else for that matter.

And who are you to decide what MY DUTY is?

By the way, just how often do you recite the Pledge of Allegiance?

MA, with IMHO you have a knack of bringing out rudeness in people that are otherwise not that way. Debra Law on this thread and Farmerman on the Evolution How thread are just two recent examples.

0 Replies

Does it seem funny to anyone else that many of those who claim to want freedom from religion spend a considerable amount of time in a Religion Forum?

If I wanted to steer clear of politics, for instance, do you think I would bother to log on to Democrats.com or Republicans.com and banter with the locals, discuss issues and argue policy?

No way. I'd spend my time at the ball game or building my business or doing something that I enjoy or find valuable and I'd ignore those with whom I wanted no conversation.

Just seems odd. When I say 'I don't want any. Thanks.' then I don't go looking for it.

0 Replies

What's odd about responding to people intent on forcing their beliefs of you?

0 Replies

edgarblythe wrote:

What's odd about responding to people intent on forcing their beliefs of you?

Define 'force' as you are using the term, EB.

Have you lost your job because you wouldn't attend Sunday school or a Bible study? I can introduce you to folks who have lost their jobs when they wouldn't attend secular 'sensitivity training' classes on the company dime and have their beliefs watered down to fit the rest of the crowd.

Have you been imprisoned for not going to church? Let's go to China, my friend, and observe the Atheist Utopia that has been built there in the last 50 years. I'll introduce you to some folks who have been imprisoned for going to church.

Or do you simply mean you get annoyed when folks talk about religion?

0 Replies

RexRed wrote:

edgarblythe wrote:
Always with the "Why don't atheists want us to cram our religion down their throats?" real innocent like.

More like, why are liberals so hostile when those who are "religious" give their opinion?

Jesus was a liberal.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Does it seem funny to anyone else that many of those who claim to want freedom from religion spend a considerable amount of time in a Religion Forum?

It is sort of like a creationist puttering around in an evolution forum. Very Happy

0 Replies

What's the BIG DEAL?

MA wrote:

I guess I just don't understand the big deal about two words....

Frank wrote:

We all understand that you do not understand why we have a problem with this issue, MA.

That is a significant part of the problem, as a matter of fact.

What's the BIG DEAL about forming a more perfect union to secure the blessings of LIBERTY for ourselves and our progeny? It was and is a BIG DEAL--it was so big that we fought a revolutionary war against our former king to win liberty from tyranny and oppression. Give me liberty or give me death.

We are sending our soldiers overseas to fight and to DIE in order to preserve OUR more perfect union. How ironic that they are dying while some at home don't understand the big deal about liberty and justice for all. Some don't understand the meaning of oppression and tyranny when they're doling it out in smelly piles.

Frank is correct: Their inability to understand the magnificent concepts upon which this country was founded and to respect the liberty interests of all persons is the problem. IT IS WRONG to use the lawmaking power of the government to impose one's religious beliefs on others. The threat to American values and individual rights isn't from without--it's from within. It emanates from the embarrassing ignorance and arrogance of some of our own citizens who appear to be waging their own jihad against the fundamental right of ALL PERSONS in this nation to have a secular government.

"I just don't understand the big deal about two words."

Yes, that's the problem.

MA wrote:

If you don't want to say those words, don't say them. But, is it right to take them out and only have your wants recognized? If someone could come up with a way for both sides to be happy that would be great. But, how do you satisfy both sides of this coin? You take it out and you take away the wants of one side. You leave it in and you feel your side is missing out. . . .

I said if something could be come up with that would satisfy boths sides I am all for that.

I am just not one side getting what they want and the other not. . . .

Can you suggest something that would satisfy both sides?

Why can't we all just get along? Can't we come to SOME compromise over these liberty issues that I just don't understand?

Okay, I'll try:

Why don't we draw a line across America and call it . . . hmmmm . . . the Mason-Dixon line.

All the people who live SOUTH of the line can have "one nation UNDER GOD" in their official pledge of allegiance; those who live NORTH of the line can have an official pledge that is secular.

OR we could place the atheists in the back of the bus and the Christians in the front of the bus and pledge allegiance to one nation, INDIVISIBLE except by bus compartment, UNDER GOD to those in the front of the bus, with liberty and justice for all as a general rule but with profound exceptions.

MA wrote:

You have no idea what I am like. You have no idea what I think it means to be an American. . . .You have no clue as to what I understand or what I don't understand.

I have no idea? I have no clue? Why should I conjure up ideas or grasp at clues when you specifically told us what you think and what you understand or don't understand:

You just don't understand the big deal about two words (under God) that YOU want to impose on EVERYONE ELSE in OUR official pledge of allegiance to OUR flag and OUR nation.

As an American, you don't think LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL is very important so long as YOU get what you want through tyranny and oppression (using governmental power to enact laws that impose your religious views on others). To be clear, I think that's very UNAMERICAN.

Quote:

I would suggest that if there was a problem with putting Under God in there then that should have been taken up at the time, don't you? There were obviously enough people wanting it in there.

Why didn't I think of that?

Gee, if I had been around at the time of the American Revolution, I would have taken up the problem of slavery. Perhaps someone did address the problem of slavery at the time. "There were obviously enough people wanting it in there."

Gosh, if the problem of slavery was taken up at the time our more perfect union was formed, why did the slave states and the non-slave states keep angrily debating the issue for decades and drive our country into a bloody civil war that resulted in massive casualties for both sides?

There might be a lesson here--what can it be? Perhaps future generations can rectify the errors of past generations that oppress and infringe upon the liberty interests of others.

YES! That's the lesson! Obviously, enough Christian people believed in white supremacy and wanted racial segregation to "justify" laws that oppressed black people for generations, but we eventually figured out that the tyranny of the moral majority was wrong. How many times do we have to learn that lesson?

MA wrote:

Well, you don't have to be so rude about it.

It's NOT RUDE to inform you about LIBERTY when you claim to have no understanding. People--our soldiers--are fighting and dying to preserve our LIBERTY as we debate. How rude is it to THEM that you don't even understand the fundamental concept for which THEY are sacrificing THEIR lives?

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Does it seem funny to anyone else that many of those who claim to want freedom from religion spend a considerable amount of time in a Religion Forum?

And where should we fight our battles against religious zealotry...in the Cooking Forum?

Quote:

If I wanted to steer clear of politics, for instance, do you think I would bother to log on to Democrats.com or Republicans.com and banter with the locals, discuss issues and argue policy?

I have no idea. But what gives you the idea that we want to "steer clear" of debate about relgion?

Quote:

No way. I'd spend my time at the ball game or building my business or doing something that I enjoy or find valuable and I'd ignore those with whom I wanted no conversation.

Really. Funny you should say that. I notice you engaged in discussions with atheists and agnostics almost every day.

Now I wonder why that is???

Quote:

Just seems odd. When I say 'I don't want any. Thanks.' then I don't go looking for it.

Like I said up above...I wonder why Life is out there talking and debating with the agnostics and theists in this Forum????

Especially since Life makes such a pretence of saying it is a foolish thing to do.

0 Replies

MA wrote:

I would suggest that if there was a problem with putting Under God in there then that should have been taken up at the time, don't you? There were obviously enough people wanting it in there.

Perhaps you will appreciate Justice Rutledge's dissent in WOLF V. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLO. , 338 U.S. 25 (1949)

Justice Rutledge wrote:

'Wisdom too often never comes, and so one ought not to reject it merely because it comes late.' Similarly, one should not reject a piecemeal wisdom, merely because it hobbles toward the truth with backward glances.

0 Replies

real life
The original post of this thread specifically targeted atheists. Why do you people target us and then get an attitude when we respond?
And, although it happens that people are discriminated against or even murdered by religious zealots of all persuasions, we are talking here of the more insidious oppression of putting religion into as many aspects of public life as possible; forcing it upon the unwilling with a vengeance.

0 Replies

Debra_Law wrote:

RexRed:

This is not about the religious folk stating an opinion. This is about the religious folk injecting the words "one nation, under God" into our national pledge and imposing their beliefs onto every member of this diverse country.

The foundation of this country is not built upon majority rule--but rather individual rights. It is not the devine or national privilege of the religious majority to impose their religious or moral beliefs on others; but rather, it is their DUTY to respect the liberty of ALL.

No it is about a small minority roughly ten percent that disagree and would rather have "under government with law" instead of "under God with liberty"... They do not see that they are trading a faith based God for a human based tyranny...

Minstrel [02 Oct 2005|11:45am]
I had a dream of a strange dark skinned minstrel. He was a short man dressed in silks and lace. His hair was long and he played on a stringed instrument made from a gourd. Then the music stopped as he held up his hands palm out. He had suspended between his thumbs and index fingers a scorpion in each hand. They did not bite him as he danced slowly twisting his wrists waving his hands ever so slightly while smiling and still dancing. Then this train arrived yet there were no tracks only white air surrounded this train. We all floated up and boarded the train as this minstrel became another man. A kind of gentle guide... Once on this train it seemed to never stop moving forward until I found fear in this dream. Each room on the train was another type of fear. I realized that fear has the world transfixed and frozen till they board the train and they are changed into other beings. Some beings overcome their fear and some succumb. Yet life has no tracks but only air and the train stops only once for you to get on. You do not leave the train until you have overcome the many fears of life.

Eric (rexred) Pedersen

I know my dream is somehow unrelated but it is the freedom to dream that we have... To dream the American dream, under God with liberty and (true) justice. Do not let go of your dreams without a fight.

0 Replies

RexRed wrote:

Debra_Law wrote:
RexRed:

This is not about the religious folk stating an opinion. This is about the religious folk injecting the words "one nation, under God" into our national pledge and imposing their beliefs onto every member of this diverse country.

The foundation of this country is not built upon majority rule--but rather individual rights. It is not the devine or national privilege of the religious majority to impose their religious or moral beliefs on others; but rather, it is their DUTY to respect the liberty of ALL.

No it is about a small minority roughly ten percent that disagree and would rather have "under government with law" instead of "under God with liberty"... They do not see that they are trading a faith based God for a human based tyranny...

This thread is about the people who who demand the secular government guaranteed by the Constitution disagreeing with the religious people who want a faith-based government? And to think we're fighting the religious fanatics and jihadists overseas when they're sitting right here on A2K. . . .

FYI: It's the people "of faith" who use God or Allah as an excuse to inflict tyranny, oppression, and yes . . . terror on others. Thousands of atrocities have been committed in God's name, so you have to forgive those of us who shudder at the thought of living in a religious-based regime.

Quote:

Minstrel [02 Oct 2005|11:45am]
I had a dream of a strange dark skinned minstrel. He was a short man dressed in silks and lace. His hair was long and he played on a stringed instrument made from a gourd. Then the music stopped as he held up his hands palm out. He had suspended between his thumbs and index fingers a scorpion in each hand. They did not bite him as he danced slowly twisting his wrists waving his hands ever so slightly while smiling and still dancing. Then this train arrived yet there were no tracks only white air surrounded this train. We all floated up and boarded the train as this minstrel became another man. A kind of gentle guide... Once on this train it seemed to never stop moving forward until I found fear in this dream. Each room on the train was another type of fear. I realized that fear has the world transfixed and frozen till they board the train and they are changed into other beings. Some beings overcome their fear and some succumb. Yet life has no tracks but only air and the train stops only once for you to get on. You do not leave the train until you have overcome the many fears of life.

Eric (rexred) Pedersen

I know my dream is somehow unrelated but it is the freedom to dream that we have... To dream the American dream, under God with liberty and (true) justice. Do not let go of your dreams without a fight.

What's the deal with the "dream" you posted? Are you a religious prophet, recording your visions and encouraging your followers to FIGHT for a faith-based government in America? Isn't that the same thing that Osama bin Laden wants for us? Scary....

0 Replies

Debra_Law wrote:

RexRed wrote:
Debra_Law wrote:
RexRed:

This is not about the religious folk stating an opinion. This is about the religious folk injecting the words "one nation, under God" into our national pledge and imposing their beliefs onto every member of this diverse country.

The foundation of this country is not built upon majority rule--but rather individual rights. It is not the devine or national privilege of the religious majority to impose their religious or moral beliefs on others; but rather, it is their DUTY to respect the liberty of ALL.

No it is about a small minority roughly ten percent that disagree and would rather have "under government with law" instead of "under God with liberty"... They do not see that they are trading a faith based God for a human based tyranny...

This thread is about the people who who demand the secular government guaranteed by the Constitution disagreeing with the religious people who want a faith-based government? And to think we're fighting the religious fanatics and jihadists overseas when they're sitting right here on A2K. . . .

FYI: It's the people "of faith" who use God or Allah as an excuse to inflict tyranny, oppression, and yes . . . terror on others. Thousands of atrocities have been committed in God's name, so you have to forgive those of us who shudder at the thought of living in a religious-based regime.

Quote:

Minstrel [02 Oct 2005|11:45am]
I had a dream of a strange dark skinned minstrel. He was a short man dressed in silks and lace. His hair was long and he played on a stringed instrument made from a gourd. Then the music stopped as he held up his hands palm out. He had suspended between his thumbs and index fingers a scorpion in each hand. They did not bite him as he danced slowly twisting his wrists waving his hands ever so slightly while smiling and still dancing. Then this train arrived yet there were no tracks only white air surrounded this train. We all floated up and boarded the train as this minstrel became another man. A kind of gentle guide... Once on this train it seemed to never stop moving forward until I found fear in this dream. Each room on the train was another type of fear. I realized that fear has the world transfixed and frozen till they board the train and they are changed into other beings. Some beings overcome their fear and some succumb. Yet life has no tracks but only air and the train stops only once for you to get on. You do not leave the train until you have overcome the many fears of life.

Eric (rexred) Pedersen

I know my dream is somehow unrelated but it is the freedom to dream that we have... To dream the American dream, under God with liberty and (true) justice. Do not let go of your dreams without a fight.

What's the deal with the "dream" you posted? Are you a religious prophet, recording your visions and encouraging your followers to FIGHT for a faith-based government in America? Isn't that the same thing that Osama bin Laden wants for us? Scary....

No you're scary because you want a government blind to God. Which then translates to a government that is intolerant of God or even the mention of God or the acknowledgment of God. Not a government under God but a government OVER and ABOVE God... That is fanatic and a travesty. Not a government of the people but of only a certain few people. Not a religion in the hands of the people but a religion in the form a government, as you, who fears religion shall fear your government...

There are religious fanatics and then there is this mysterious thing called love and liberty that many religious people believe emanates and is unobtainable without God. Where are your secular "charities"? "Radical" left winger secularists are not a "myth" and are mostly made up of anarchists and self made judmentalists...

The government can acknowledge God without having to adhere to any particular sect. Governments can be secular and still be tyrannical. Saddam claimed his government was secular... So he could commit genocide without a conscience. His people had no "liberty" they were afraid to speak their minds and "dream".

You are scared of words like prophets... prophets foretell or forth tell. You are scared of many words even the word, "God"... Why are you so afraid? Do you have something to hide? Are you afraid to dream because you may find a loving God that you may be beholden to?

0 Replies

RexRed wrote:

Debra_Law wrote:
RexRed wrote:
Debra_Law wrote:
RexRed:

This is not about the religious folk stating an opinion. This is about the religious folk injecting the words "one nation, under God" into our national pledge and imposing their beliefs onto every member of this diverse country.

The foundation of this country is not built upon majority rule--but rather individual rights. It is not the devine or national privilege of the religious majority to impose their religious or moral beliefs on others; but rather, it is their DUTY to respect the liberty of ALL.

No it is about a small minority roughly ten percent that disagree and would rather have "under government with law" instead of "under God with liberty"... They do not see that they are trading a faith based God for a human based tyranny...

This thread is about the people who who demand the secular government guaranteed by the Constitution disagreeing with the religious people who want a faith-based government? And to think we're fighting the religious fanatics and jihadists overseas when they're sitting right here on A2K. . . .

FYI: It's the people "of faith" who use God or Allah as an excuse to inflict tyranny, oppression, and yes . . . terror on others. Thousands of atrocities have been committed in God's name, so you have to forgive those of us who shudder at the thought of living in a religious-based regime.

Quote:

Minstrel [02 Oct 2005|11:45am]
I had a dream of a strange dark skinned minstrel. He was a short man dressed in silks and lace. His hair was long and he played on a stringed instrument made from a gourd. Then the music stopped as he held up his hands palm out. He had suspended between his thumbs and index fingers a scorpion in each hand. They did not bite him as he danced slowly twisting his wrists waving his hands ever so slightly while smiling and still dancing. Then this train arrived yet there were no tracks only white air surrounded this train. We all floated up and boarded the train as this minstrel became another man. A kind of gentle guide... Once on this train it seemed to never stop moving forward until I found fear in this dream. Each room on the train was another type of fear. I realized that fear has the world transfixed and frozen till they board the train and they are changed into other beings. Some beings overcome their fear and some succumb. Yet life has no tracks but only air and the train stops only once for you to get on. You do not leave the train until you have overcome the many fears of life.

Eric (rexred) Pedersen

I know my dream is somehow unrelated but it is the freedom to dream that we have... To dream the American dream, under God with liberty and (true) justice. Do not let go of your dreams without a fight.

What's the deal with the "dream" you posted? Are you a religious prophet, recording your visions and encouraging your followers to FIGHT for a faith-based government in America? Isn't that the same thing that Osama bin Laden wants for us? Scary....

No you're scary because you want a government blind to God. Which then translates to a government that is intolerant of God or even the mention of God or the acknowledgment of God. Not a government under God but a government OVER and ABOVE God... That is fanatic and a travesty.

You didn't answer my questions, you evaded and made things up.

You can have freedom of religion--you can have as much God as you want in your personal life and in your personal associations. When it comes to the PUBLIC sector--to government--I want the secular government that our Constiution guaranteed.

We don't have a government under God; we don't have a government over God; we have a government SEPARATE from God.

Do you understand why we separate church and state? You can have freedom of religion, but our supreme law does not allow you to use the power of our government to impose your religious beliefs on everyone else. Separation of church and state is simple concept that serves freedom; it is neither "fanatic" nor a "travesty" as you claim. Living in a religious regime where we would be ruled by religious fanatics would be the travesty that our separation of church and state was designed to prevent.

Again, you're the scary one that wants our government and our people to be ruled by YOUR GOD in accordance with YOUR DREAMS about what God wants. Are you applying for the position as our new leader?

Quote:

Not a government of the people but of only a certain few people. Not a religion in the hands of the people but a religion in the form a government, as you, who fears religion shall fear your government...

You have things twisted and turned around. Why should I be placed in a position where I have to fear my government due to religious persecution? Liberty, including freedom from religious persecution, is for EVERYONE; religion is for people who want it. Religious people, however, cannot use the power of the government to persecute and oppress those who don't believe the same things.

Separation of church and state--the cornerstone of a free society.

Quote:

There are religious fanatics and then there is this mysterious thing called love and liberty that many religious people believe emanates and is unobtainable without God. Where are your secular "charities"? "Radical" left winger secularists are not a "myth" and are mostly made up of anarchists and self made judmentalists...

HUH?

You can have freedom of religion. You can have God. You can have love and liberty. You just can't force your religious beliefs onto others through the power of the government. It's pretty hypocritical of you to want to take away my liberty in the name of your God of liberty. You don't make any sense.

Quote:

The government can acknowledge God without having to adhere to any particular sect. Governments can be secular and still be tyrannical. Saddam claimed his government was secular... So he could commit genocide without a conscience. His people had no "liberty" they were afraid to speak their minds and "dream".

NO, the government is required to be secular and represent ALL the people--not just the people who believe in God.

It doesn't matter what you think Saddam said or did or what you speculate his motives were for being a tyrant. The United States of America and Saddam Hussein's Iraq didn't share the same government. Ours is a constitutional republic that honors and respects individual rights. Why can't you respect the right of your fellow citizens to separate church and state in order to live in a country with a secular government rather than a faith-based government?

Quote:

You are scared of words like prophets... prophets foretell or forth tell. You are scared of many words even the word, "God"... Why are you so afraid? Do you have something to hide? Are you afraid to dream because you may find a loving God that you may be beholden to?

Are you claiming to be a prophet? Is God sending you dreams and visions to share with the rest of us? Are you applying to be our national religious leader and to bring this country under God's rule according to your prophesies?

If so . . . I reject your application, Osama . . . I mean, RexRed.

0 Replies

It was a democrat who wrote "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, LIBERTY and the pursuit of happiness.

Who "created" them? Their creator? How can you in any way call this document secular?

The power is in the hands of the people because of their creator who is FIRST a God of liberty and not an institution.

This is why the institution is UNDER GOD... and not OVER God or on par with God. Why don't you want to address that? Do you want another tyranny? Do you want a runaway government like Saddam? The Government must acknowledge that God exists and that they are under God and cannot make religious rules that obstruct these inalienable rights as a God. This is why these rights are God give and not government given. It seems that you want these rights to be lowered to the level of governing powers that be. You seem to have no knowledge of history and governments that have abused these rights of the people because they perceived themselves as the rule of God in themselves. We the Queen of England...

You can have freedom of religion but not freedom from religion. Unless you want to go live in a void, then who is dreaming... Freedom from religion is where people are no longer given their rights to practice religion and government becomes the "highest" power in the land forbidding the right. The government cannot guarantee a liberty they cannot see. Whether you like it or not most people in this country are religious. I do not want religion in my government but I most certainly want my government to know they are under God and not above God. They they are servants of the people's inalienable rights because they have the duty to protect religious freedom and not make religion. Religion is a philosophy, truth is God given. This is why words like inalienable rights are used. No government can give you liberty it is a right that we are "created" with.

Freedom from religion means the government is the highest power. The UNDER God shows the government that the concept of God or non God is not something they are empowered to be above.

There are higher powers that the government must acknowledge. This higher power is a right of the people. Even though you seem sacred of the word God does not mean you do not have a "religion". Your anti religion is still a religious belief concerning "God" and a religion even if you are in denial of that fact. Your anti God it is protected by a government that is UNDER GOD WITH LIBERTY. This God include both atheism and agnosticism. You have perverted the word God in your belief system to mean a certain radical "thing" and that is not one single bit different than the Jew, Muslim or the Christian that perceives God in their "own" way... Your perverted view of God is "protected" by a government that is UNDER GOD WITH LIBERTY.

Also where have I once stated I was "a" prophet let alone "the" prophet? I am just exercising my right to have my head in the clouds if I so choose. You have your own head in the clouds by your anti God "beliefs". You can call it what you want. It is a free country... Do you think I am the only one who has dreams? Who is twisting words now? You are... Even agnostics have a belief in God... they "believe" they cannot know... This is just as much a religious belief "regarding God" as and other religion. This is why government is UNDER God because they are the protector of these human rights for people to perceive God in their own way even if it is considered radical by the majority. The Government is still UNDER God and cannot make religious decisions that usurp the rights of the people. What other word could we put in the pledge to relay the same truth that the government is NOT God but a protector of the people rights to their own God? You just want to elevate your own cause/religion ABOVE God by denying God. It make you feel BIG to insult God in front of so many people so be it... Do you think that by turning your back on God that God will go away? No, the only thing is the wolves will rush in and take any remnant of religious rights and trade them for a government that is OVER God with LAW and sits in the throne AS God.

The separation of church and state does not guarantee you a secular country... It does not guarantee you government that does not acknowledge God but a government that acknowledges that they are under this creator of human rights and dignities.

0 Replies

As I am fond of stating, the religious fanatics will not rest until we are all subjected to religious icons and rules in every aspect of our being.

0 Replies

RexRed wrote:

It was a democrat who wrote "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, LIBERTY and the pursuit of happiness.

Who "created" them? Their creator? How can you in any way call this document secular?

You're evading and making things up again.

OUR GOVERNMENT is supposed to be SECULAR. OUR GOVERNMENT is a constitutional republic. OUR Constitution guarantees ALL OF US a secular goverment. OUR GOVERNMENT is not under God; it is not over God; it is SEPARATE from God.

How simple can I make it?

Continue with the Declaration of Independence where you left off:

--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

OUR GOVERNMENT was formed among by people to secure their rights--including liberty--which includes the right to believe in God or NOT believe in God. We are NOT one nation under God, we are one nation of people joined together for our common good to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our progeny. I will NOT consent to a faith-based government when I was guaranteed the separation of church and state.

Look at the preamble of our Constitution:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

We instituted a government among the people for the purpose of SECURING our rights. Our government is not God's government no matter how you want to spin it.

0 Replies

edgarblythe wrote:

As I am fond of stating, the religious fanatics will not rest until we are all subjected to religious icons and rules in every aspect of our being.

Until we are all as superstitious as they are...and as fearful.

It is too bad that this state of affairs still holds.

0 Replies

Philip Wtlie wrote, in the 1950s, that it may take another five hundred years for humans to shed the yoke of religion. Lately I have begun to think him overly optimistic.

0 Replies

edgarblythe wrote:

Philip Wtlie wrote, in the 1950s, that it may take another five hundred years for humans to shed the yoke of religion. Lately I have begun to think him overly optimistic.

Why shed a (Christian) God that has brought so much liberty and grace to so may for so long?

Are you suggesting we go back to tyranny and kingship?

0 Replies

Under God With Liberty

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know