JEDI_MASTA Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 It was ruled today that the pledge of allegiance is unconstitutional on religious standards. WTF is goin on with these people Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tie Guy Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 Well, i don't know what your talking about, but if someone did bring the pledge of alliegence to court they would probably win on the basis of the establishment clause, separation of church and state that is. The government is not allowed to establish a religion in any federally funded program. That means they can't talk about God, or any type of religion, and the pledge of alliegence does. They couldn't get it abolished, you can say almost whatever you want, but they could force it out of schools. There are already several court cases adressing this issue, though none were against the pledge of alliegence, that serve as precedents. Wallace vs. Jaffery comes to mind..... I bet if they really wanted to that someone could even get the "in God we trust" phrase off the currency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artoo Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 Yeah. The law that was supposed to make religion easier for people to practice, now makes it impossible in government organizations. Stupid Athiests. But the president is still allowed to pray on National TV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zygomaticus Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 Well they have a legible reason to do it. Atheists are a plenty in this country, and you can't blame them...its just them. And you can't force an Atheist student to say the pledge of Allegiance to the US and God. Its inhuman. Its like asking a Hindu to eat beef Anyway, my school never made me say it, but i wouldnt mind saying if i had to, because i believe in god, and i trust in him, and i am devoted to my country. I bet if they really wanted to that someone could even get the "in God we trust" phrase off the currency. I bet one day that will happen, because some people just can't stand it...but even if i was an Atheist, if i loved the US, i wouldnt be inclined towards changing the country's motto !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaming Nut Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 I did it when I was younger went to a new school later didn't do it their. I'd prefer you think Artoo as I can easily point out stupid things Christians have done. Their are extremes on either end and lumping all people into those extreme is not right. I see no harm in it but their are those that would disagree and apparently the Supreme Court agrees with them. He's the president and thou he’s the head technicality he has no real power to make one religion THE religion schools do they make science as we know it accepted they could do the same with a religion if allowed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artoo Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 They won't even let schools use religious texts as english or literature material. The only reason I feel so wrong about this is that I believe that the law has been misinterpreted. The law was originally designed to keep government from controlling religion. It has been interpreted so that government has to take away religion. Of course all this happens in a nation founded on the ideal that "In God We Trust". I'll stop talking now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idontlikegeorge Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 my father remembers when the pledge of allegiance did NOT have the phrase "under God"; it was added in the mid 50s i think lol thats great that someone brings it to court gotta sue over everything! hey this font is thin! im offended! no room for fat fonts on these forums? boy.... :trooper:hey! you there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwing Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 Well, there's this font, this font, this font, and this font. I feel neutral on this subject so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NerfYoda Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 As a kid I always felt uncomfortable using the "under God" phrase in the Pledge. I hope it gets taken out. Heh better yet I hope it gets placed with "under your choice or lack of diety/dieties". Lets see how well that will go over with our fancypants Judeo-Christian majority though. Moreso I hope the Pledge is abolished from schools all together. It's ludicrous to have impressionable kids spouting blind patriotism every school morning until they're 12. Let them be patriotic for the right reasons. Let them study & learn about our nation. Lets NOT indoctrinate them with flimsy propaganda. They'll get plenty of that in college. Flame away if you like. You'll probably not see me again. I post regularly in the jediknightii.net forums. I just happened to find this thread when snooping about hehe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaming Nut Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 Originally posted by Artoo They won't even let schools use religious texts as english or literature material. The only reason I feel so wrong about this is that I believe that the law has been misinterpreted. The law was originally designed to keep government from controlling religion. It has been interpreted so that government has to take away religion. Of course all this happens in a nation founded on the ideal that "In God We Trust". I'll stop talking now. Well 80% of the stuff is repent for all those that don't belive will burn in hell and so on. Stuff like David and goliath and Noah ark are told cause theirs no real religious message in it. The law wasn't so the government couldn't control the church it was so it wasn't the other way around. Europe didn't fair so well under the rule of the church no country really did. The founding fathers realized that and wanted to make sure that no matter what a church would never control the government so no one religion would become THE religion cause the result are never good. To that end anything that seems to favor one religion in government institutions such as the 10 commandments on a wall. Can be augured to unconstitutional. Also if I have the legal system right this can be applied again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolfmanNCSU Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 The term GOD in the pledge of allegiance is not specific to any singular God. They have made that statement. I think schools should say the pledge still, however, if they dont like to say that part, they can just opt not to say it. A lot of schools have been doing that already because of the separation between state and religion. Besides, to me this sounds like someone just picking reasons to start more arguments because they are never happy. What's next, all the currancy states "In GOD We Trust" Oh no!! :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryllith Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 Originally posted by WolfmanNCSU The term GOD in the pledge of allegiance is not specific to any singular God. They have made that statement. I think schools should say the pledge still, however, if they dont like to say that part, they can just opt not to say it. A lot of schools have been doing that already because of the separation between state and religion. It's easy for them to say that, but I've heard just the opposite from a multitude of Christians throughout my life--their argument being that if you're talking about "god" you could be talking about a god from any religion, but if you're talking about "God" (note the cap), you're talking about the Judeo-Christain god... Personally I think the phrase never should have been added to the pledge in the first place. The original pledge was fine without it. Kryllith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tie Guy Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 Originally posted by Artoo They won't even let schools use religious texts as english or literature material. The only reason I feel so wrong about this is that I believe that the law has been misinterpreted. The law was originally designed to keep government from controlling religion. It has been interpreted so that government has to take away religion. Of course all this happens in a nation founded on the ideal that "In God We Trust". Well, the founding fathers really didn't trust in God for anything. Most of them were deists, meaning that thye believe God created the world and then just left it to go about its way. They believed that God didn't do anything for them as they wouldn't trust in God to help them or do anything else. AS for God/god, our word "god" comes from the God, the Christian God. The two words are different in Hebrew, but translated roughly the same. One talks of the God and the other are the false imitations. The Latin for "god" is dei, the word used for the gods of mythology. They had no word for the Christian God that i am aware of. So, the english language itself is what decided the god/God rule. That is the english rule, as God is a proper noun, and the word god is a generic name for the imitations of the real God. The pledge of alliegence is talking about the Christian God, there is no doubt about that. Hmmm....Atheism is a religion too, so doesn't that mean by ridding the governement of religion they are actually establishing Atheism? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clefo Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 I should point out that the POA is really unnecessary.. If you have kids recite it ad nausem, it starts to lose its meaning. If you want to teach kids how to be patriotic teach it in classes. Besides, the Pledge of Alliegence is a slap in the face to Athiests (Under God) and Jehovah's Witnesses (Worship of an inanimate object) Another thing. We all KNOW you will stay loyal to America and uphold the constitution, so why bother saying it everyday? I think if you MUST have it then have it to be optional.. BTW athiesm by definition, is NOT a religion, its a distinct lack thereof.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 WTF is Pledge of Allegiance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heavyarms Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 in a few sentences, CD, it is something that is said at the beginning of the day in schools in the US. It is: "I pledge alliegience, 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." This Atheist challenged it and one, and a court said it was unconstitutional. Personally, I'd load up my .45 socom and knock on his door. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tie Guy Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 Originally posted by Clefo Another thing. We all KNOW you will stay loyal to America and uphold the constitution, so why bother saying it everyday? I think if you MUST have it then have it to be optional.. BTW athiesm by definition, is NOT a religion, its a distinct lack thereof.. Thats exactly my point. In not supporting any religion at all, it is supportin atheism, or a lack of religion. A belief in nothing is a belief in yourself. Let them say that they don't believe in anything, they simply don't believe in a god. But that doesn't even matter because even a belief in nothing is still a belief. BTW, It is optional Clefo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clefo Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 Don't say athiests don't "believe" in god, thats one sided. Lemme explain: Lets say you look out your window and there is a tree there, you could either believe or not believe it is there, but it IS there because you can see it with your eyes. The same cannot be said with god (No physical proof of entity or entities can be proven IMO) So when you say "Do you believe in god?" thats assuming that there is a god in the first place so your point is lost. Anywho.. Its not supporting Athiests, there are many religions that don't believe in the Christian/Muslim/Jewish god BTW, where I go to school we HAVE to stand up, which is stupid in itself. Either stand up or do it and sitdown and be respectful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEDI_MASTA Posted June 28, 2002 Author Share Posted June 28, 2002 allright... im glad somebody else cares... around here i live in a community that is extremely far to the right... and they all say it is BS i feel that if we scrap this... it is just the beginning of the dismantelment of our country... cuz then u hafta take it off the money, then u hafta scrap the declaration of independance "endowed by their CREATOR!!!!!" which is what god (notice no capital) in the pledge of allegiance stands for... its not the christian god... it is the creator... get it through ur thick skulls people... And to the guy that is bringing this before the courts... rott in heck... o yah ... u dont believe in it (sorry mods... im p*ssed) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tie Guy Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 Originally posted by Clefo Don't say athiests don't "believe" in god, thats one sided. Lemme explain: Lets say you look out your window and there is a tree there, you could either believe or not believe it is there, but it IS there because you can see it with your eyes. The same cannot be said with god (No physical proof of entity or entities can be proven IMO) So when you say "Do you believe in god?" thats assuming that there is a god in the first place so your point is lost. That doens't make any sense. Atheists don't believe in anything, (which in my opinion means they believe in themselves but that doesn't matter). If you say that you don't believe in a god then you are saying at the same time, "I believe that there is no god." So that is a belief. And just because you say "Do you believe in God?" doesn't imply that there is a god, its just a question with no definate answer. What if a said, "Do you think it will rain tommorow?" Thats not assuming that it will rain tommorow, just that it might. So when you ask, "Do you believe in God?" you assume that there might be a god to believe in. If there was no possible way for there to be a god then the question itself would be moot. Anyways....don't you guys feel mad that just because some atheists are worried that their children are being corrupted or something the rest of the country is denied a tradition long upheld. A few people here make more of a difference than tehe rest of the country, thats not democracy. The rest of the country wants it and a the very small community of atheists and other groups don't. Why don't we just screw the atheists and let the majority opinion decide. After all, in elections no one would argue that the president with the least amount of votes should win, why should the side with the least amount of supporters do so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clefo Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 It actually makes perfect sense, you just cannot see it... I should point out that next to Christians that Athiests are the second biggest "Religious" (As you so like to call it) group in the world.. few people here make more of a difference than tehe rest of the country Yeah, they're called "Rich People" they've influenced every president's decision.. BTW Tie, which god are you talking about , I mean there have been 100s. Could it be Zues, Ra, Odin, or some weird Native American one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tie Guy Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 Originally posted by Clefo It actually makes perfect sense, you just cannot see it... I should point out that next to Christians that Athiests are the second biggest "Religious" (As you so like to call it) group in the world.. Yeah, they're called "Rich People" they've influenced every president's decision.. BTW Tie, which god are you talking about , I mean there have been 100s. Could it be Zues, Ra, Odin, or some weird Native American one? Rich people's vote counts no more than anyone else's. Sure, money contributed to compaigns helps alot towards getting elected, and some of that is given by rich people, but ads don't directly effect the outcome. Most people vote by party, or by union. I'd say very few people watch the ads and decide every year. If only rich people decided the election then Republicans would win every year, which is not the case. As for presidents decision, some may be influenced by rich people. But they are also influenced by PAC's, Unions, parties, and everyday constituents. Rich people are just one of many things that effect decisions. I'm pretty sure that Islam is the second largest "religion" in the world. Do you have any stats that say atheists are second? Oh, and of course i'm talking about the God, but someone else may see it as a different god. In this context it doesn't matter which one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaming Nut Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 Many people would say that posting on forums and playing video games is silly should the masses decide that? Or should you that’s what this is some people think this is wrong and it's their right to think and act upon that. Also This is hardly the massive subversion of the our government and way of life so many think it is. All they need to do is stop saying under god or stop saying it. Which many already have cause it like a Hitler youth thing when 30 6 year olds say it they got no idea what it means hell most 3rd grade probably don't it's just a thing you do it's not going to make all the adults of the next generation traitors bent on the down fall of the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tie Guy Posted June 29, 2002 Share Posted June 29, 2002 Originally posted by Gaming Nut Many people would say that posting on forums and playing video games is silly should the masses decide that? No, because thats not a matter of the law or the constitution so nobody has a say in it anyways. If it was something like "mature" games should be banned then, yes, the majority opinion should be what is decided. Would you like it if video games were banned because some Amish people said so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEDI_MASTA Posted June 29, 2002 Author Share Posted June 29, 2002 lol even the guy that created it says it was meant to mean all religions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.