Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    3:46 PM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Pledge Alligance Back to Topics
mexicomaria

Champion Author
Minnesota

Posts:26,829
Points:1,797,215
Joined:May 2007
Message Posted: Oct 31, 2012 1:10:57 PM

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.
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:30,674
Points:3,402,020
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Mar 24, 2013 11:03:42 AM

MexicoMaria asks: "I do not see the Pledge of Allegiance as Congress "making a law to establish of religion".

--While I see your point, let's think of it in a different light. The "establishment clause" (You know, that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" bit..) has also been interpreted that not only can the government not "establish" a religion, but they also cannot promote religion versus non-belief. That is to say, that they cannot promote a belief in any "supreme being" vs. not believing in one at all. IMHO, read through that prism, I have to believe that the "under God" bit ought to be removed. And again, IMHO, the words really don't have a lot of history, since they were inserted during the Cold War.

Heck, I have a friend (an attorney, he's getting on 80 or so), who came to the US from Germany before WW-II (family emigrated from Hamburg presumably to escape persecution..hmm.. would that make him a Hamburger?). Anyway, when he immigrated to the US and became a citizen, the Pledge didn't include the words "under God". So sometimes he doesn't say them - can't blame him - he didn't learn it that way when he was a kid.
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,475
Points:1,833,695
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Mar 24, 2013 10:44:25 AM

reb4, >>No, not at all. The flag is the symbol of our country. you even have it in your avatar... which national problems do you honestly believe would be solved by your suggestion?<<
***
The act itself would not solve any problems but it would bring awareness that we, the citizenry, are the ultimate caretakers of freedom and justice. Once we realize this responsibility, we, via being informed about who and what our candidates stand for, would correct most, if not all, problems.

All of our Government officials take an oath to uphold the US Constitution. The moment they lower their hand, the oath is forgotten in many cases. (This is especially evident at the Federal and State levels.)

Were they to make decisions based upon the Constitutionality of their actions rather than the political outcome, we would have a totally different society.

Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:23,845
Points:2,369,975
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Mar 24, 2013 8:24:27 AM

"Wouldn't be more appropriate to pledge our alliance to the United States Constitution rather than country that sometimes does not live within the law of the land? Wouldn't this action be a giant step towards solving our multitude of national problems?"

No, not at all. The flag is the symbol of our country. you even have it in your avatar... which national problems do you honestly believe would be solved by your suggestion?
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,475
Points:1,833,695
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Mar 23, 2013 9:22:52 PM

reb4, >>MahopacJack, I believe there have been topics about these issues. <<
***
Wouldn't be more appropriate to pledge our alliance to the United States Constitution rather than country that sometimes does not live within the law of the land? Wouldn't this action be a giant step towards solving our multitude of national problems?
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:23,845
Points:2,369,975
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Mar 23, 2013 11:39:59 AM

ropegun, I also am thankfull that my grandaughter has the ability to pledge allegiance to the flag every day at her school.

MahopacJack, I believe there have been topics about these issues.



Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,475
Points:1,833,695
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2013 9:04:27 AM

The question I have is, "If or when the Government acts against the the US Constitution or against the teachings of our religions, or denies US citizens Life or Liberty or Justice, why is the not an uproar from the people?"

Examples:

Compare our actions to how we are looked upon in the Mid-East.

Its legal but is it Constitutional?

In just these two instances, compare our actions to those of another country like the Swiss.
Profile Pic
eldiablopoco
Champion Author Grand Rapids

Posts:1,055
Points:57,080
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2013 4:21:42 AM

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

Don't you wish that was true.
Profile Pic
ropegun11
All-Star Author Illinois

Posts:775
Points:563,485
Joined:Sep 2011
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2013 1:31:57 AM

...I am grateful that the Pledge is recited every morning in my child's public elementary school and I did serve my country for 16 yrs in the USAF until I could no longer do so when I found out I was carrying my only child (& was about to be a solo parent). However, I agree with michaelphoenix2 when he said: "This is one of those topics that i read about and i can't help but feel its just both sides getting upset just to get upset at one another." Yep, fully agree brother.
Profile Pic
mexicomaria
Champion Author Minnesota

Posts:26,829
Points:1,797,215
Joined:May 2007
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2013 12:25:07 AM

"Can Muslims then say "under Allah"?"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thought it time to have a little lesson about Muslims...

In the seventh century, Muhammad claimed the angel Gabriel visited him. During these angelic visitations, which continued for about 23 years until Muhammad's death, the angel purportedly revealed to Muhammad the words of Allah (the Arabic word for “God” used by Muslims). These dictated revelations compose the Qur'an, Islam's holy book. Islam means “submission,” deriving from a root word that means “peace.” The word Muslim means “one who submits to Allah.” So Muslims believe in God.

Jews also believe in God.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Profile Pic
gas_too_high
Champion Author Columbus

Posts:14,799
Points:2,468,510
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2013 7:11:10 PM

mexicomaria: 'I do not see the Pledge of Allegiance as Congress "making a law to establish of religion". '

Neither would the framers of the Constitution. To them, "an establishment of religion" was establishing an official state church, which existed in several states at the time the First Amendment was adopted.

Merely repeating the phrase "under God" in public is a far cry from an established religious denomination.

GTH
Profile Pic
mexicomaria
Champion Author Minnesota

Posts:26,829
Points:1,797,215
Joined:May 2007
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2013 1:13:40 PM

The phrase "separation of church and state" is not found in the First Amendment or in the Constitution as a whole, where did it come from?

In 1802, Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury, Connecticut Baptists explaining the wall of separation of church and state was essentially erected to protect them.

To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What does the 1st amendment actually say?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I do not see the Pledge of Allegiance as Congress "making a law to establish of religion".

Profile Pic
jdhelm
Champion Author Iowa

Posts:15,665
Points:1,737,815
Joined:Dec 2009
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2013 12:00:10 PM

I always get stared at when I say the pledge -

most people say this:
one Nation
-
under god

--

I say it like this:
one Nation under God

(all one verse if you will, with no pause between , unlike most)
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:30,674
Points:3,402,020
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2013 11:26:38 AM

Personally, I believe if we believe that separation of church and state bit, then we bloody well ought to take out "under God" from the pledge. Can Muslims then say "under Allah"? Can Zoroastrians say "under Zoroaster"? Will you allow Jews to say "under Adonai"? How about pagans to say "under Zeus"?

The words "under God" were put in in the 1950s under the Eisenhower administration. This was done, in part, as an "in your eye" to those "God-less communists, the Russians". It wasn't done for reasons of heritage, and since the words are only like 50 or 60 years old, IMHO, that's not history.

The "indivisible" part came in immediately after the Civil War, and with some reason.
Profile Pic
HELLRAZOR
Champion Author Las Vegas

Posts:10,812
Points:1,611,785
Joined:Jan 2010
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2013 11:16:26 AM

I pledge allegiance - I promise to be true
to the flag - to the symbol of our country
of the United States of America - each state that has joined to make our country
and to the Republic - a republic is a country where the people choose their representatives, to make laws for them, that is the government is for the people
for which it stands - the flag, meaning the country
one nation - a single nation
under God - the people believe in a supreme being
indivisible - the country cannot be split into parts
with liberty and justice - with freedom and fairness
for all - for each person in the country, you and me!


[Edited by: HELLRAZOR at 2/24/2013 11:17:17 AM EST]
Profile Pic
HELLRAZOR
Champion Author Las Vegas

Posts:10,812
Points:1,611,785
Joined:Jan 2010
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2013 11:15:28 AM

(found this & wanted to share)

The Pledge of Allegiance is recited by school children of all religious backgrounds, across America on a daily basis. Daily recitation is done in order to honor the nation one is a part of every morning. However, the recitation is not compulsory, which means no punitive action will be taken against children who do not recite the pledge. It is only expected that those who abstain from reciting the pledge should be seated quietly, while the pledge is being said, thereby allowing the others to recite the Pledge. Besides schools, the pledge of allegiance is also recited during the opening of Congressional sessions and also in most local level Government meetings.

Unfortunately, most of those reciting the Pledge today are saying it blinding as a ritual, where children and adults alike, recite the words without actually understanding the meaning. Reciting the Pledge is not a compulsion, but a mark of patriotism to the country. It is an action that symbolizes one's loyalty to the United States of America and the feeling that as an American, one is proud to be a part of this blessed country. Moreover, it is a proclamation stating that all Americans are unified, standing together as one nation and working together for the benefit of the country as a whole. The reason the pledge of allegiance is asked to be recited on a daily basis in schools, is because when a child recites the pledge everyday, he or she may be directed into thinking more deeply about its meaning and significance.

The Pledge of Allegiance is considered to be a platform where kids are given the opportunity to think about their roles as citizens in the country. Reciting the pledge stirs up curiosity regarding their country, thereby inculcating a feeling of patriotism in the long run. Of course, patriotism cannot be forced upon, which is why the recitation is not compulsory. Teachers are to explain the meaning of the pledge to the children in simple language, so that they understand what they are actually reciting every morning. It is important to prevent it from becoming another part of the humdrum of life.

However, there is a lot of debate regarding the recitation of Pledge of Allegiance. Many Americans don't say the Pledge and feel that it's unnecessary even to stand up when the national anthem is being played. They defend themselves by saying that by not reciting the Pledge, they are not being anti-patriotic. According to them, standing or not standing; reciting or not reciting does not make them more or less of an American citizen. On the other hand, some people find the words 'under God' objectionable. Atheists and non- Christian Americans state that they cannot recite 'under God', because it happens to be against their beliefs. Then, there are those people who believe that not saying the Pledge is a sign of disrespect to the country.

So sadly, we see people with different schools of thought debating and battling over the Pledge and forgetting the larger objective of standing together in unity as a nation. The controversies will go on, however, each American has the freedom to choose to recite the pledge or not. So it is up to each individual.
Profile Pic
Wanda127
Champion Author Florida

Posts:4,792
Points:1,456,785
Joined:May 2010
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 7:50:45 PM

I believe that the Pledge of Allegiance should stay the way it is and nothing removed since this country was founded on being able to worship God freely. Also,if you live in this country as a citizen you should say the pledge & place your hand over your heart when it is said.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,081
Points:417,305
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 7:25:50 PM

maria: "I say, don't speak the parts you disagree with. Your heart and mind still belong to you."

--Sort of the "Don't Say; Don't Think" version of 'Don't Ask; Don't Tell.'

How about we just nix the pledge? There's no need for it. It would be better to use school time to educate kids on the importance of becoming a well-informed and engaged populace. Because our self-government depends on it (and is sorely in need of more people caring about the matters of our nation.)
Profile Pic
michaelphoenix2
All-Star Author Tucson

Posts:887
Points:12,080
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Dec 1, 2012 9:11:09 PM

This is one of those topics that i read about and i can't help but feel its just both sides getting upset just to get upset at one another.
Profile Pic
wctsteam
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:1,538
Points:219,045
Joined:Oct 2005
Message Posted: Dec 1, 2012 9:03:38 PM

UNDER GOD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Profile Pic
KatmanDo
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:15,207
Points:3,142,660
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Dec 1, 2012 12:25:57 PM

"But we aren't discussion religion as such, but the belief or lack thereof in God,"

Without recognized deities there is no need for an organized way in which to try to curry favor with them -- the primary function of any religion. So, if one lives where it seldom rains, there's little need to carry an umbrella.
Profile Pic
gas_too_high
Champion Author Columbus

Posts:14,799
Points:2,468,510
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Nov 30, 2012 8:47:47 PM

GTH: "....tolerance on the part of others, not to force everyone to say the Pledge, will go a long way."

KatmanDo "Amen. Especially not to force school children who are too young to stand up for their beliefs to publicly profess their allegiance -- as if their allegiance is in question in the first place."

That's what parents are for, to speak up for their children's beliefs, and why parents should never be shut out of educational decisions concerning the values taught their children.

But I noticed you omitted the first part of my statement, which reads:

"A little bit of toleration on the part of some, to ignore what they don't like..."

Kat: "Of course, which is why religious topics are generally off limits in public."

Of course. But we aren't discussion religion as such, but the belief or lack thereof in God, which is a philosophical position that underlies any religion (or the ideological opposition to religion that makes up so much of atheism today).

GTH


[Edited by: gas_too_high at 11/30/2012 8:51:04 PM EST]
Profile Pic
KatmanDo
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:15,207
Points:3,142,660
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 30, 2012 7:42:36 PM

"Careful with that line of thinking. To me and many believers, that category includes atheism."

Of course, which is why religious topics are generally off limits in public. A public testimonial of one's world view tends to be an invitation to others to testify about theirs. Quite often, such views are that anyone who believes the opposite is simply full of ... balderdash.
Profile Pic
KatmanDo
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:15,207
Points:3,142,660
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 30, 2012 7:38:50 PM

"tolerance on the part of others, not to force everyone to say the Pledge, will go a long way."

Amen. Especially not to force school children who are too young to stand up for their beliefs to publicly profess their allegiance -- as if their allegiance is in question in the first place.
Profile Pic
gas_too_high
Champion Author Columbus

Posts:14,799
Points:2,468,510
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Nov 28, 2012 9:06:16 PM

sgm4law: "Even under that broad a definition, there are people who are very uncomfortable with the notion of saying the nation is "under God" when they find the idea of God objectionable. Why would we force them to agree that the country is "under" something that they don't believe in? And I know that many atheists particularly object to the idea of God because of the history of religious believers doing violence in the name of their particular God."

Those are 2 different things. If you simply don't believe in God, then the phrase "under God" becomes a semantic nullity, like saying "bless you" when someone sneezes.

As to the objection of God due to "violence in the name of their 'particular' God," what that really means is an objection to a particular religion, not a generic concept of God as a Moral Authority outside of ourselves.

katmando: "I find collectively indulging the fantasies of adults to be far too silly to be worthy of serious discussion."

Careful with that line of thinking. To me and many believers, that category includes atheism.

mexicomaria: "I also think it is impossible to please everyone. There are "religious" people who will not serve this country in the armed services, will not say the Pledge, and do not want a flag in their sight. So there are some who object to the Pledge for different reasons."

Exactly right. It would be impossible to fashion a single Pledge to please everyone. A little bit of toleration on the part of some, to ignore what they don't like; and tolerance on the part of others, not to force everyone to say the Pledge, will go a long way.

GTH
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:22,801
Points:2,925,545
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Nov 27, 2012 4:57:18 PM

I would think it would make things more pleasant all around. :)
Profile Pic
mexicomaria
Champion Author Minnesota

Posts:26,829
Points:1,797,215
Joined:May 2007
Message Posted: Nov 27, 2012 3:46:44 PM

My husband became a Christian after eight yrs....does that explain it.
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:22,801
Points:2,925,545
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Nov 27, 2012 1:33:32 PM

"I get what you are saying, sgm, I was given the mandate once, to not mention God or Jesus in the home...I followed that mandate for eight yrs."

What? That's odd. I'm glad you stopped following such a silly mandate. But it's not the same as making everyone say the same thing in the pledge.
Profile Pic
KatmanDo
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:15,207
Points:3,142,660
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 27, 2012 1:01:32 PM

"there are people who are very uncomfortable with the notion of saying the nation is "under God" when they find the idea of God objectionable."

I find collectively indulging the fantasies of adults to be far too silly to be worthy of serious discussion. Whether the phrase is "under God", "under Yeti", "under the influence of Venus in Aquarius", "in the bountiful land of unicorns and leprechauns" or "under the good luck of Number 7" I'm no more inclined to take such matters seriously than I am to collaborate with a teen who still demonstrates faith in the literal existence of Santa Claus. My natural inclination is to react with something like "Oh come on now!!!"
Profile Pic
mexicomaria
Champion Author Minnesota

Posts:26,829
Points:1,797,215
Joined:May 2007
Message Posted: Nov 27, 2012 11:48:44 AM

I get what you are saying, sgm, I was given the mandate once, to not mention God or Jesus in the home...I followed that mandate for eight yrs....do you believe that that mandate changed my mind about my Savior? So, I say, don't speak the parts you disagree with. Your heart and mind still belong to you.

I also think it is impossible to please everyone. There are "religious" people who will not serve this country in the armed services, will not say the Pledge, and do not want a flag in their sight. So there are some who object to the Pledge for different reasons.
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:22,801
Points:2,925,545
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Nov 27, 2012 11:01:17 AM

<<At its broadest, the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance simply means that there is a higher order, an authority from where we as a people draw our moral compass, and therefore our fitness to govern ourselves in this republic known as the United States of America.>>

Even under that broad a definition, there are people who are very uncomfortable with the notion of saying the nation is "under God" when they find the idea of God objectionable. Why would we force them to agree that the country is "under" something that they don't believe in? And I know that many atheists particularly object to the idea of God because of the history of religious believers doing violence in the name of their particular God. Otherwise, I don't see why they would care about saying something, since they don't think God exists. I may be getting their argument wrong, and if so, perhaps an atheist who posts in these threads will correct me.
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:23,845
Points:2,369,975
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2012 9:45:51 PM

Thanks midtownmarty, I think I found you ... nice icon... so is all this stuff real Marty?

History and Meaning of the Pledge of Allegiance from the U.S. District Court Southern DIstrict of West Virginia

Just some highlights... I don't think it necessary to post long posts as some here do...

'“to the flag” (to the symbol of our country)'

'“for which it stands,” (the flag means the country)'

'“under God,” (the people believe in a supreme being)'

whom that being is is always a question...

'The pledge says you are promising to be true to the United States of America!'

'In 1942 Congress also established the current practice of rendering the pledge with the right hand over the heart.'So, for over 60 years the bellamy salute has been replaced, by congress, yet people that have tried to attack the symbol of the United States of America continue to focus on events that took place before they were born (likely) to show honor and support (not worship).

I leave you with this thought...

Pledge of Allegiance - Red Skelton's rendition
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,553
Points:318,395
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2012 8:52:27 PM

Pledging Allegiance

The Pledge, considered by most Americans their most sacred ritual of patriotism, was actually written by a socialist. Francis Bellamy, a fervent Christian socialist and brother of the famed writer Edward Bellamy, penned the original pledge for the Youth’s Companion, a popular youth magazine. For several years the magazine had been championing a movement to place American flags in every school. The effort reflected the editor’s patriotism, but also his keen business sense because the Youth’s Companion offered a free flag to any school that purchased a subscription.

In 1891 the magazine’s editor hit upon the idea of boosting flag and subscription sales by creating a pledge of allegiance to be recited by school children across the nation. To draw attention to the initiative, the Youth’s Companion announced that The Pledge would debut on Columbus Day, 1892, a day that marked the 400th anniversary of Columbus’ arrival in the New World and the opening of the Chicago World’s Fair (the fair actually did not open until 1893).

Tying the debut of The Pledge to all the national hoopla surrounding the Columbus Day celebration proved a brilliant move. Soon after The Pledge appeared in the September 8, 1892 edition of the Youth’s Companion, thousands of schools committed to reciting it the following month on Columbus Day.

Bellamy’s pledge also came with instructions for a salute to be carried out during the recitation.

“At a signal from the Principal the pupils, in ordered ranks, hands to the side, face the Flag. Another signal is given; every pupil gives the flag the military salute—right hand lifted, palm downward, to a line with the forehead and close to it. Standing thus, all repeat together, slowly, ‘I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands; one Nation indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all.’ At the words, ‘to my Flag,’ the right hand is extended gracefully, palm upward, toward the Flag, and remains in this gesture till the end of the affirmation; whereupon all hands immediately drop to the side.”

there's more
Profile Pic
gas_too_high
Champion Author Columbus

Posts:14,799
Points:2,468,510
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2012 8:32:04 PM

This is all quite silly.

At its broadest, the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance simply means that there is a higher order, an authority from where we as a people draw our moral compass, and therefore our fitness to govern ourselves in this republic known as the United States of America.

But an totalitarian State, like the Soviet Union or other Communist state or fascist state, or the "People's Republic of China" today, wants no independent moral compass but itself, or an ideology it controls. Such a state is perfectly happy with atheism.

That was the reason that the words "under God" were added to the Pledge in the 1950s, to affirm that we are a free people united in a country that respects moral authority, and therefore individual freedom, instead of vassals of an all-powerful State that compels us to its own self-interested vision of right and wrong.

Some may object to those words out of a misguided sense that they are being forced to affirm a particular religion. They are not. But others who object, are asserting, whether knowingly or not, that they are at the center of their own moral universe, answerable to nothing higher. That is different, of course, than claiming the freedom of conscience to seek out a moral compass from an authority higher than ourselves.

GTH
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:23,845
Points:2,369,975
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2012 5:10:39 PM

EKEugene, Nice independent site to find "fair and balanced" information...

oh no, AlterNet's tagline is "The Mix is the Message."

Is this where you put your link up for irony or comedy... don't waste the effort for me... and as far as "This is all my own observation, but I sniffed around and found " You really find some "stinkers"...

I do like the animal theme for all the people against the pledge though... like animal farm.. or is that in reverse? Whatever...

Katmando, are you a democrat? Worshipping Satan? Who do you think might sponsor that resolution if it's presented, or might it be an executive order?

SemiSteve, my children are all grown up, And I I'll ask to see if anyone kissed the flag...

SemiSteve, In many schools they are told 'there is no God'
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,081
Points:417,305
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2012 2:56:10 PM

"Should the 86% bend for the 1.6%?"

--By 'bending' you mean not force your beliefs upon others? It's not like we are trying to force ours upon you. But that is exactly what you are doing by having those words in our pledge. Especially when you force other people's children to say it or be thrown out of school.

Look at this from the flip side. What if your kids were forced to say 'There is no God' or be thrown out of school?
Profile Pic
KatmanDo
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:15,207
Points:3,142,660
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2012 2:55:40 PM

""This includes, evidently sadly to you, freedom of religion."
Freedom from religion as well."

If folks are free to peddle their worldviews in large public gatherings then we need to provide equal time for those who believe in astrology, numerology, black magic as well as the conviction that any belief in the mystical or occult is laughable. Just picture this scenario:

"Ladies and Gentlemen, before we begin this high school football game we'd like to pause while Madison Silverstein invokes Lucifer to guide each team here today."

Some reference to Satan might also be fitted into the Pledge.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,081
Points:417,305
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2012 2:50:55 PM

" If you feel you yourself are being asked to affirm belief in God, it is a simple matter to omit those 2 words whenever you say the Pledge."

--Absurd. This is essentially suggesting that there should be two pledges. The majority claims the official one and refuses to talk about considering one which is agreeable to all. So every time the pledge is recited is serves as a reminder that some are being left out as they are forced to listen to the majority chant beliefs not held by those who are forced to listen to the chants.

You God-believers got your way despite the wisdom of our Constitution, during a time of national scare (communism of the USSR) and now that the scare is over you don't want to give it up.

Well, don't feel too smug.

It wasn't atheism that brought down the USSR. It was over-spending on weapons. And that is a lesson we didn't seem to learn from the spectacle. We appear to be headed down the same exact road to the same exact destiny and 'God' has nothing to do with it. Smart fiscal policy would prevent it; but putting 'God' on our money, or in our pledge, will not.
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:23,845
Points:2,369,975
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2012 1:31:19 PM

"Reb, the year is irrelevant; it's the dynamic of jingoism and sedition laws that are the point, Starr's case being one example. Those books I linked to contain many more just like him."

Oh BS, EKEugene, the year is important. And location... Also this law was a state law, not federal.. But hey let's go way off topic. If you want to go to local laws I'm sure we can go off on that tangent. I guess you wouldn't want to talk about slavery in the North Carolina?"it's the dynamic of jingoism and sedition laws that are the point, Starr's case being one example. Those books I linked to contain many more just like him. These are the perils of mass hysteria, which is the underlying cancer in everything I'm saying here. Whether it's mobs forcing people to kiss flags, herding people into camps because they're Japanese, waving a list of "communists" and getting people banned from the movies, the PATRIOT act and false wars, all these and much more are the wages of jingoism. It waxes and wanes. In 1918 it was waxing. These cycles must be recognized and acknowledged, for those who ignore their history are condemned to repeat it."

Funny someone that is from North Carolina that seceeded from the United States over sla

As for the Japanese internment act, that definitely was not one of President Franklin D. Roosevelt's finest orders. That was an EXECUTIVE ORDER that was definitely against all logic. But I guess thats not just a one party trait... Where citizens were taken legally and even the census bureua admittedly was used to round up citizens because of race.

"Burning" is not a fetish by the way; it's an act of protest." EXEugene, that is exactly my point. The Flag of the United States is representative of the Country, which is why the protestors burn it. I don't know anyone that worships the flag as an idol, but you seem to want to try to twist it as that. I think your wrong...

We've had this discussion of idols and christians... so i won't bother to repeat this.
Profile Pic
NickHammer
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,427
Points:3,117,295
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2012 1:19:02 PM

>>I do not believe that patriotism, the sense of duty to one's country, Christianity, religion, or faith as we know it will crumble tomorrow if the words "under God" are removed from the "Pledge of Allegiance" as it was in its 1923 form<<

Nor do I.
Profile Pic
jayrad1957
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:24,379
Points:2,145,540
Joined:Nov 2008
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2012 12:43:42 PM

"This includes, evidently sadly to you, freedom of religion."

Freedom from religion as well.
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:22,801
Points:2,925,545
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2012 10:58:49 AM

>> my only disagreement is the God mentioned in the Pledge does not have Christ tied to it. It is generic God. <<

I hope you aren't suggesting that we put Christianity in the pledge for America, a country whose greatest strength is its freedom. This includes, evidently sadly to you, freedom of religion.

Please don't be like the Taliban or the Muslim Brotherhood, who want their governments to be Islamic states, and petition for a specifically Christian state. What do you have against other people of faith who are citizens of our country? How terrible!
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:23,845
Points:2,369,975
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2012 8:59:45 AM

EKEugene, you keep bringing up "kissing the flag" from the Montana. You conveniently fail to bring up the fact that this took place in 1918. We are a Far cry from then since it is just fine to go out and burn the flag in public display with little repercussion.

I think the people that burn the flag have a bigger fetish then those that kiss it, in my opinion...

Profile Pic
gas_too_high
Champion Author Columbus

Posts:14,799
Points:2,468,510
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2012 8:54:23 AM

EKE: "At this point it seems you want to parse what the meaning of "is" is. The act of kissing the flag was the vigilante justice the mob tried to visit upon Mr Starr; when that failed they convicted him using the sedition law. Thus your sentence "Had he refused to kiss the flag, but not disparaged it, he would have remained free" directly contradicts the one before it, since disparaging the flag was *exactly* what Starr was convicted for."

The sedition/desecration law may have been a pretext, but it was the legal reason for his conviction and jail sentence. had he not done that, some other pretext would have to have been found, if one existed. We don't know what might have happened, but we know what *did* happen, and it was *not* what hyou said happened.

" In effect the reverse of your claim is true, i.e. had he acquiesced and kissed the flag, then he would not have been convicted (of anything). Ergo his refusal to do so got him ten to twenty."

Only indirectly, and via a separate legal pretext. Your original claim would have needed that qualification to remain true, a qualification it lacked. And since you brought Bill Clinton's famous quote into the argument, what he did was to deny "having sex" with Monica Lewinsky, relying on the qualification that the sex act was one of oral sex performed on him, not by him. In other words, he flatly denied, without qualification, where at most he could only have given a qualified denial. You have done the same.

And rather than bandy words further with a Clintonian parser of them, I'm done with this discussion, except to repeat the statement that E. V. Starr was *not* convicted of refusing to kiss the flag.

GTH

[Edited by: gas_too_high at 11/26/2012 8:55:12 AM EST]
Profile Pic
gas_too_high
Champion Author Columbus

Posts:14,799
Points:2,468,510
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Nov 25, 2012 10:10:37 PM

EKEugene: "No -- right."

I never referred to the authors of the Declaration. You reframed my question and answered one I didn't ask.

I asked: Where does the Declaration itself say those rights came from?

Answer from the text: "Our Creator".

GTH: "Got that? A mob -- not a law -- tried to compel Starr to kiss the flag."

EKE: "Nice try at parsing words but the record is the record. In technical legal terms he was convicted of a sedition law, as were the other cases mentioned there. Without the laws, there is no conviction. That vigilante justice instigated the conviction is irrelevant."

Except that the conviction is *not* what you claimed. Your claim was:

"So was that guy who got ten years in the clink for refusing to kiss the flag."

He was given a 10 year sentence for *disparaging* the flag, a form of desecration. This was of course a manifestly unjust law as well as an unjust conviction given the extenuating circumstance of the mob scene, but *not* a conviction for "refusing to kiss the flag."

Had he refused to kiss the flag, but not disparaged it, he would have remained free.

I know reading words to get at the truth is sometimes "inconvenient" to your point of view, but truth is truth.

GTH
Profile Pic
KatmanDo
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:15,207
Points:3,142,660
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 25, 2012 4:33:51 PM

"there were many times God became very important, even to the unbeliever, and it was right before they died,"

As they say, "Desperate times call for desperate measures".
Profile Pic
mexicomaria
Champion Author Minnesota

Posts:26,829
Points:1,797,215
Joined:May 2007
Message Posted: Nov 25, 2012 1:24:36 PM

ropegun....I think you post was very good....my only disagreement is the God mentioned in the Pledge does not have Christ tied to it. It is generic God... 81% of USA has a God. 1.6% is of the religion that believes their is not God, he never existed. The rest pretty much list no faith.

My brother told me that in Viet Nam....there were many times God became very important, even to the unbeliever, and it was right before they died, or were in a position where they were going to die shortly. I asked them...was country, or the flag mentioned, or was a superior being mentioned...most, right before dying. He said, family and God.
Profile Pic
gas_too_high
Champion Author Columbus

Posts:14,799
Points:2,468,510
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Nov 24, 2012 11:06:39 PM

GTH: 'Remember where those "unalienable rights" mentioned in the Declaration of Independence, came from?'

EKEugene: "Sure. Franklin, Jefferson, Adams, Robert Livingston and Roger Sherman...you refer to the rights they invoked of a people's government to derive from the consent of the governed."

Wrong.

The Declaration in pertinent part (emphasis mine):

"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."

GTH: Until you substantiate that urban legend, I place no more stock in it than rumors of Barack Obama's birth in Kenya...."

EKE: "I already substantiated it the first time I mentioned it....But if you still insist, Google is our friend."

Gee, now that wasn't so hard, was it? And those cites provide enough context to debunk the claim that E. V. Starr was imprisoned for "refusing to kiss the flag". What Starr was actually imprisoned for, was disparaging the flag after a mob tried to force him to kiss it.

Got that? A mob -- not a law -- tried to compel Starr to kiss the flag. So much for your "fetishism". Apparently Guenther (or whoever quoted him) got it wrong.

"But I still cannot make grammatical sense out of "make a religion over atheism". What does that mean? I do agree with you that atheism is not a religion, but I don't see where anyone claimed it to be."

EKE from Nov 22, 2012 7:17:46 AM EST:

'When we proclaim "one nation indivisible", while in the same sentence dividing ourselves, we've got an issue. It isn't just "mentioning" religion-- it's demanding an actual pledge to it. So you're being forced to espouse an idea you specifically do not believe in. I'd say that's beyond harmless.'

In that post, you seem to be positing atheism -- belief in the nonexistence of God -- as a belief system in opposition to religion, or more properly, belief in God.

Whether you meant that or not, you have never explained why an optional phrase in an optional Pledge divides anyone. Deep down, you must not believe that the Pledge, or the words "under God" are truly optional.

GTH
Profile Pic
ropegun11
All-Star Author Illinois

Posts:775
Points:563,485
Joined:Sep 2011
Message Posted: Nov 24, 2012 9:23:40 PM

...I grew up in a school in which we recited the "Pledge of Allegiance" (in it's current form), hands over our hearts, facing the flag every morning and I am very grateful that they do the same at my child's school, because I believe it reinforces the idea that we really must unite as a nation or we will be vulnerable to attack from those who would like to achieve mastery over our country and our people. However, having served my country for 16 years in the USAF side-by-side with brothers and sisters from many different faiths and cultures (whom I trusted and would have taken a bullet for, as they would have done for me), I do not believe that patriotism, the sense of duty to one's country, Christianity, religion, or faith as we know it will crumble tomorrow if the words "under God" are removed from the "Pledge of Allegiance" as it was in its 1923 form (Historic Documents: "The Pledge of Allegiance").
Profile Pic
mexicomaria
Champion Author Minnesota

Posts:26,829
Points:1,797,215
Joined:May 2007
Message Posted: Nov 24, 2012 9:11:44 PM

>>>"By the way E.V. Starr in Montana was cited by me, November 16 at 15:47:57 ET. No, I don't think a PhD in American Studies uses wishful thinking as a tool to write a history book, though it's easy to see why events like this might be buried. My job: dig 'em up. I'm like a historical archeologist. You should see me in my pith helmet..."

I meant......usually when a story is true you can find evidence of what the Prof is asserting. I could find none.....there is just your reference from him. There is no record of the man, or the time he did.

I always question Prof. when they make statements that I can not find any evidence that the incident ever took place.
Profile Pic
gas_too_high
Champion Author Columbus

Posts:14,799
Points:2,468,510
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Nov 24, 2012 8:59:40 PM

Apologies, I forgot to link jingoism properly in my last post.

GTH
Post a reply Back to Topics