I'm Not Really Sure but Maybe You Are

mesquite wrote:

Momma Angel wrote:

Well, seems like you didn't need me to elaboarate at all.

I was asking for you to ellaborate to get your opinion since you had written...

Quote:

I would have a problem changing it, yes. It was written the way it was written for a reason.

I then provided the history because the change had occurred before your time and you appeared to be under the impression that it had always been that way.

You are one who says that you are always looking for a compromise. It seems to me that the best compromise for the pledge problem is to return it to is original form "one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all" or even to add "equality" since our nation has now progressed past the unequal treatment of women and non whites. That way the pledge will be neutral toward religion and atheists cannot be asking for it to say "under no god' and those of other religious faiths will also not be slighted.

Sounds good to me. I can certainly live with that. Wouldn't be nice if it were this easy for compromises to be reached on all issues?

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?

Perhaps she meant that none have been excempt, which is different than being above.

MA, I thought we were discussing the Pledge of Allegiance, not personalities.

Does your opinion on issues vary according to who you are discussing with?

I did not ask if I had the right to WANT it there. I asked if it was my right to HAVE it there. Please understand the difference. That is the reason that the only true compromise is to return the pledge to its original form which was NEUTRAL toward religion.

mesquite wrote:

I did not ask if I had the right to WANT it there. I asked if it was my right to HAVE it there. Please understand the difference. That is the reason that the only true compromise is to return the pledge to its original form which was NEUTRAL toward religion.

Mesquite,

Quote:

Actually, I don't see the difference. It is my right to have Under God there as it is your right to have Under No God there. However, stated either of these two ways, only one side is satisfied. That's where we differ, I believe.

Actually, it's not your right to have Under God there. The laws concerning the seperation of church and state are rather clear on that. So in that essence, the only TRUE compromise between having Under God in the pledge, and having Under NO God in it is to have neither, or as was earlier stated, to go back to the way it was originally penned.