Pledge of Allegiance Declared Unconstitutional [Archive]

furie

06-26-2002, 11:04 AM

Wed Jun 26, 2:36 PM ET
By DAVID KRAVETS, Associated Press Writer

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - A federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that the Pledge of Allegiance is an unconstitutional endorsement of religion and cannot be recited in schools.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ( news - web sites) overturned a 1954 act of Congress inserting the phrase "under God" after the words "one nation" in the pledge. The court said the phrase violates the so-called Establishment Clause in the Constitution that requires a separation of church and state.

"A profession that we are a nation `under God' is identical, for Establishment Clause purposes, to a profession that we are a nation `under Jesus,' a nation `under Vishnu,' a nation `under Zeus,' or a nation `under no god,' because none of these professions can be neutral with respect to religion," Judge Alfred T. Goodwin wrote for the three-judge panel.

The court, in the nation's first ruling of its kind, said that when President Eisenhower signed the 1954 legislation, he wrote that "millions of our schoolchildren will daily proclaim in every city and town, every village and rural schoolhouse, the dedication of our nation and our people to the Almighty."

The court noted that the U.S. Supreme Court ( news - web sites) has said students cannot hold religious invocations at graduations and cannot be compelled to recite the pledge. But when the pledge is recited in a classroom, a student who objects is confronted with an "unacceptable choice between participating and protesting," the appeals court said.

"Although students cannot be forced to participate in recitation of the pledge, the school district is nonetheless conveying a message of state endorsement of a religious belief when it requires public school teachers to recite, and lead the recitation of, the current form of the pledge," the court said.

This is fucking bullshit

<img src="http://www.tseery.homestead.com/files/droids.jpg" width=300 height=100>
<a href="aim:goim?screenname=furie1335&message=You_are_Number_6">IM:Furie1335
</a>

JerryTaker

06-26-2002, 11:17 AM

So we're not going to remind our impressionable youth every day that they can blame all their problems on some big invisible man in the sky?

cool!

<IMG SRC="http://afs30.njit.edu/~gsm2321/gumbysig5.gif">

I've given my life to become what I am, To preach the new beginning, To make you understand. To reach some point of order, Utopia in mind, you've got to learn To sacrifice, to leave what's now behind...

nickeye

06-26-2002, 11:25 AM

some big invisible man in the skyGhost Dad?

<center><img src="http://njpconsulting.homestead.com/files/eyeballhead.jpg"></center>

Captain Rooster

06-26-2002, 11:48 AM

Stop the ride. I wanna get off.

<CENTER><img src=http://www.ltrooster.homestead.com/files/ronfez.netMatrix.gif>
</CENTER> 
<CENTER></CENTER>

Carter

06-26-2002, 11:49 AM

OMG Bill Cosby Ghost Dad
reference.... priceless

<img src="http://www.easytab.com/images/sig.gif">
 -Carter
--Big Man on Campus--

FMJeff

06-26-2002, 12:03 PM

I agree with them. I think its a fantastic step in the right direction. Seperation of religion and government all the way...

<img src="http://members.aol.com/sabanj666/ass.gif">
 Jeff Shain
WebMaster
http://www.foundrymusic.com

Tall_James

06-26-2002, 12:08 PM

to paraphrase Spock... "The needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many."

<img src=http://users.rcn.com/jamespatton/tall%20james%20sig%20copy.jpg>
It's not raining - I'm spitting on you!

Arienette

06-26-2002, 12:11 PM

i think this could be a good thing, as well... first off, there's the religious issue. i think it's a good idea to separate anything religious from public schooling. it's not right to push any sort of religious agenda on kids who are sent to a secular learning environment. if a parent wants their child to be taught religion, they have the option of sending them to a religious school of some kind where i'm sure there's all kinds of fun religion crap being fed to them daily.

second (and practically), i dont see the point of having the pledge recited anyway, regardless of the religious implications. i think we all know from expereince that being forced to recite that every morning did not make us feel any more patriotic than we already were or weren't. everyone would sigh and roll their eyes, people made up their little parodies and snickered, etc. every morning. there were no values being instilled in anyone. if anything, it served to make this whole thing a sort of joke, and to undermine the intent of the entire exercise. but, of course, i'd expect a rewording before an abolition

http://members.aol.com/deviantari/myhomepage/arienette.gif?mtbrand=AOL_US
worshiping the dancing rooster... thanks for the sig

i want a lover i don't have to love
i want a boy who's so drunk he doesn't talk

Gvac

06-26-2002, 01:00 PM

Anyone who thinks declaring the Pledge of Allegiance "Unconstitutional" is a good thing better not complain when this country is overrun with terrorists and there is nobody to rise up to fight them.

We already have a generation of people who have no fucking clue what principles and beliefs this country was founded on, and this is a step to ensure it continues.

It's become somewhat "chic" to think freedom of speech means you should be able to declare yourself an enemy of America and suffer no consequences. It's preposterous.

PS - Any of you pseudo-intellectuals have a clue as to where the following comes from?

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

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.

This is the problem with many of the people in this country today...They believe their freedoms and rights come from the government.

Not so, my friends, and NOT ONE of the founders of this Nation thought so, either.

<img src=http://gvac.50megs.com/images/capsig.jpg>

JerryTaker

06-26-2002, 01:14 PM

We don't force children to recite the Declaration of independance every day.

ok, fine, not force, but give them a choice of conforming or being an outcast...

and what god? which god do we stand under? the one who tortured his underlings for giving humans fire?
Maybe the one who told his worshipers to keep slaves to build giant tombs for thier leaders?
How about the one who countered that by sending an angel to kill the first born of the followers of that god?
Maybe it's the one who tells animals that they'll be favored if they blow up buildings in America?

Maybe the whole notion of god is antequated, and a leftover from the dark ages, and regardless of who beleived in them in the past, continuing to make it a part of an organized civilized government slows any further advancement... maybe people are dying in droves in the middle east because they contine to beleive in that crap, so let's cut the crap, cut "god" out of the routines of our children, take it off our money, and let's beleive in ourselves and our governments, not some fictional all-powerful problem-solver....

sorry, I'm really taken aback by how people are bashing this decision....

EDIT: By the way, I am not in anyway bashing the Pledge as it was originally written, the "under god" part was added in the late '50's and never should have been. I have no problem with aligning myself with my own country, or teaching that to children; I just don't think they need a notion of "god" pushed on them every day....

<IMG SRC="http://afs30.njit.edu/~gsm2321/gumbysig5.gif">

I've given my life to become what I am, To preach the new beginning, To make you understand. To reach some point of order, Utopia in mind, you've got to learn To sacrifice, to leave what's now behind...

This message was edited by JerryTaker on 6-26-02 @ 5:42 PM

FMJeff

06-26-2002, 01:23 PM

Anyone who thinks declaring the Pledge of Allegiance "Unconstitutional" is a good thing better not complain when this country is overrun with terrorists and there is nobody to rise up to fight them.
<hr>
This really doesn't make any sense, Gvac. We're fighting against religious zealots. How will the separation of church and state result in our inability to defend the freedom of our country? To suggest atheists have no survival instince/love for life and freedom is just not valid.
<hr>
We already have a generation of people who have no fucking clue what principles and beliefs this country was founded on, and this is a step to ensure it continues.
<hr>
I disagree. I think the teaching of patriotic idealism should be over. We live in an age of reality and economics, and so did our founding fathers. A lot of teachers fail to teach the REALITY of living in those times. If England was more diplomatic in thier relations with thier colonies and the result of that relationship was mutually beneficial both socially and economically we would probably still be a part of the British Empire. The British government was incapable of adapting to the situation. They put a stranglehold on the colonial economy, then further aggravated the situation by imposing many invasive policies that further enraged their citizens. It was only logical and a matter of time before people fought back. It had nothing to do with the allmighty. It was basically people fighting for a better quality of life.

I think you'd be very surprised to see how quick Americans would fight to protect its freedoms.

<hr>
It's become somewhat "chic" to think freedom of speech means you should be able to declare yourself an enemy of America and suffer no consequences. It's preposterous.
<hr>
I find it more preposterous to dismiss thier opinions as "chic". I'm an atheist and I don't view my perceptions of religions as "chic" or edgy. It's just a pragmatic way of dealing with life. And I don't read anywhere in this article about anyone declaring themselves an enemy of this country. Does not reciting a pledge make you a traitor?

<hr>

PS - Any of you pseudo-intellectuals have a clue as to where the following comes from?
<hr>
Declaration of Indepence.
<hr>

This is the problem with many of the people in this country today...They believe their freedoms and rights come from the government.
Not so, my friends, and NOT ONE of the founders of this Nation thought so, either.
<hr>
I believe our freedoms and rights come from the men and women who have fought and continue to fight to protect them. They are, in my mind, more divine and powerful than any fabricated deity.
<hr>
It's all or nothing. How can this country call itself a melting pot of cultures and ideas if we force the notion of G-d on our Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim brothers, not to mention other polytheistic religions? Should we not have a dollar bill that says in Buddha we trust? Or G-d Bless Allah, land that i love? Why is our G-d more valid than theirs? It's a double standard, and double standards make bad policies. Religion and state should be TWO SEPARATE ENTITIES, else suffer the fate of the Afghani people by the hand of the Taliban...an extreme example, but valid. This is a step in the right direction AWAY from the that kind of religious fanaticism.

<img src="http://members.aol.com/sabanj666/ass.gif">
 Jeff Shain
WebMaster
http://www.foundrymusic.com

This message was edited by FoundryMusicJeff on 6-26-02 @ 5:53 PM

gone

06-26-2002, 01:39 PM

i couldnt agree more on this decision.. but i would like to say something about gvac's opinion.. how i see it is.. this ruling is not saying that our children shouldnt have pride in our country, its saying that you can do that but not have the religion shoved down their throats...

this country was founded on christian belief systems.. but TAKE A LOOK AROUND. we are a diverse country.. not everyone is christian anymore, and thats a fact we have to adapt to. im shocked to shit the pledge lasted as long as it did. imagine you were born in a buddhist society, your family moves to american to get a better life.. your family still believes in buddah.. but you are FORCED to stand and say the pledge every morning.. wouldnt you feel like you were an outcast? over a few little words....

arg im sorry this is lengthy and sparatic but this is something i felt strongly about even in high school, i dont know how many detention i got for refusing to say the pledge

C*U*N*T "That's just it. The logic is fucked up here. There is something inherently wrong in this." JTHM
DARK PRINCESS of the coven. slave to the wind. MERRY PART AND BLESSED BE.
<img src=http://members.aol.com/inkgrrrl99/images/queenofnnysig.gif width="300" height="100>

furie

06-26-2002, 01:53 PM

first off, there's the religious issue. i think it's a good idea to separate anything religious from public schooling

Ok, we'll stop giving the public schools money; since money has the word God on it.

Maybe the whole notion of god is antequated, and a leftover from the dark ages

I thought the 1700's was the Age of Enlightenment...
:) just busting balls. sorry.

<img src="http://www.tseery.homestead.com/files/droids.jpg" width=300 height=100>
<a href="aim:goim?screenname=furie1335&message=You_are_Number_6">IM:Furie1335
</a>

This message was edited by furie on 6-26-02 @ 6:01 PM

Gvac

06-26-2002, 01:57 PM

Ha ha! Good one, Furie!!

You're forgetting something, though...as fervent as the government is in breaking up monopolies, the rule never applies to them. They believe it is THEIR inalienable right to have a monopoly on education and retirement plans.

<img src=http://gvac.50megs.com/images/capsig.jpg>

Boba Fett

06-26-2002, 02:00 PM

I thought we lived in a country where everyone was accepted for their own opinions.

<IMG SRC="http://www.carisi.com/boba.gif">

FMJeff

06-26-2002, 02:02 PM

Ok, we'll stop giving the public schools money: since money has the word God on it.

I doubt they pay the schools in big wads of bills...but your point is made, and I agree. Remove the word God from our currency, our national anthem, and anything else that represents us as a mixed religion/culture population.

<img src="http://members.aol.com/sabanj666/ass.gif">
 Jeff Shain
WebMaster
http://www.foundrymusic.com

furie

06-26-2002, 02:02 PM

Boba, it is. And no one's opinions are being suppressed.

<img src="http://www.tseery.homestead.com/files/droids.jpg" width=300 height=100>
<a href="aim:goim?screenname=furie1335&message=You_are_Number_6">IM:Furie1335
</a>

Drudge Jr.

06-26-2002, 02:16 PM

i don't think it's unconstitutional as long as it's volountary, however i would like to see it gone. it furthers nothing but cynismand wastes time.

http://drudgejr.com
aim sn: drudgejr

A.J.

06-26-2002, 02:43 PM

Pledge of Allegiance Declared Unconstitutional

In the words of Casey Kasem: "It's ponderous -- fucking ponderous!"

<IMG SRC="http://norraccm.freeservers.com/images/rnf_ajindc_01.jpg"> ® Made By Christy ¯

DarkHippie

06-26-2002, 02:55 PM

i've always had a problem with the "under god" part of the pledge. I think people should make there own decisions about religion instead of having it institutionalized by it being slipped into the pledge of allegence . . . Hey, quick solution, take out "under god" (when i was in school, i would say "one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all")

<IMG SRC=http://czmachine.50megs.com/images/dhsig1.gif>

this sig is the masterpiece of the cheesy one
support your local 420: union of brotherhood

living on the road, my friend, was supposed to keep us free and clean.
now you wear you skin like iron, your breath's as hard as kerosene-- townes van zant "the ballad of poncho and lefty"

<a href=http://www.freeopendiary.com/entrylist.asp?authorcode=A537085>Transcendental Blues: a journal</a>

sunndoggy8

06-26-2002, 03:08 PM

Anyone who thinks declaring the Pledge of Allegiance "Unconstitutional" is a good thing better not complain when this country is overrun with terrorists and there is nobody to rise up to fight them.

Gvac, dont you think thats just a tad off base? Youre now blaming future national security issues on not saying the pledge of allegiance? I think thats absolutely crazy. Most kids could care less about saying the pledge in the morning, if their school even makes them do so. Saying the pledge and protecting the country from terrorists are TWO DIFFERENT ISSUES.

We already have a generation of people who have no fucking clue what principles and beliefs this country was founded on, and this is a step to ensure it continues.

So wait, by forcing people to listen and say a 30 second pledge were instilling the principles and beliefs of the country? I dont think so. Basic fundamental values and principles of this country come from education.not years old traditions that dont get any respect anymore anyway. You say that this will make things worse.well I dont see how things were all that great now, so the pledge obviously wasnt doing a wonderful job of instilling values into society.

Its become somewhat "chic" to think freedom of speech means you should be able to declare yourself an enemy of America and suffer no consequences. Its preposterous.

I think its absolutely insane for you to say that having the right of freedom of speech means that youre anti-American. This country was built over the years on having this basic right. Yes there have been times when its been used to justify insane things, but this is not one of them. But anyway, youre confusing the issue. This isnt about being anti-american, but separating religion and state.

And dont tell me that our forefathers didnt originally want thing to be this way, because these are the same forefathers who owned slaves and who themselves were prejudiced towards different religious groups and races, and did numerous other things that would today be considered wrong. It was a different time under different circumstances, and the laws change to reflect this evolution of society.

Its all or nothing. How can this country call itself a melting pot of cultures and ideas if we force the notion of G-d on our Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim brothers, not to mention other polytheistic religions? Should we not have a dollar bill that says in Buddha we trust? Or G-d Bless Allah, land that i love? Why is our G-d more valid than theirs? Its a double standard, and double standards make bad policies. Religion and state should be TWO SEPARATE ENTITIES, else suffer the fate of the Afghani people by the hand of the Taliban...an extreme example, but valid. This is a step in the right direction AWAY from the that kind of religious fanaticism.

I couldnt have said it any better than Jeff did, so Im quoting him.

<IMG SRC="http://home.att.net/~sunndoggy8/RFnetSunndoggy8.jpg" width=300 height=100>

"You should've seen her face. It was the exact same look my father gave me when I told him I wanted to be a ventriloquist."

Doogie

06-26-2002, 03:12 PM

This decision came at a great time huh? California is always ten years ahead...on BS ridiculous things like this. I came to a new conclusion today, that California is the cause of a lot of the demoralization of this country. But hang in there people...I am sure that the appeals court of Cali will overturn that, or the Supreme Court of the United States will overturn this.

People if you are atheist, or whatever, just edit out the part where it says "Under God". Is it that hard to give respect to your country every morning??!! It is 30 seconds!!!! Jesus, these ideals are more damaging to the country than what they are seemingly trying to protect everyone from.

Who didnt want to beat the guy to a pulp once you saw his face on TV today?? What is great though is this guy is carrying around money that says "In God we trust" with no problem. Is he going to be treated differently cause of these bills...Sure, if he spends it right...Fuck California for fucking up the nation once again, for fucking up peoples faith in the system again, and for thinking that they are sooooo ahead of the nation...Fuck you to that cocksucker mother fucker...I hope his family car veers off into an embankment and explodes into flames and the guy gets to see his family burn before he dies himself...

GOD Bless America...

Fuck you, you communist cocksucker in California

<IMG SRC=http://publish.hometown.aol.com/doogcool/myhomepage/rfnetdoogie76.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_US>

"I know you want it, I read Mike Tyson's book!!!"-thanks to Aggie for the quote

Doogie

06-26-2002, 03:25 PM

PS - Any of you pseudo-intellectuals have a clue as to where the following comes from?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Declaration of Indepence.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Actually Jefferson, rarely gives credit to where the real Ideas of the Declaration come from. The Glorious Revolution and the English Civil War...the teachings of John Locke and other enlightenment thinkiers...

<IMG SRC=http://publish.hometown.aol.com/doogcool/myhomepage/rfnetdoogie76.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_US>

"I know you want it, I read Mike Tyson's book!!!"-thanks to Aggie for the quote

Knowledged_one

06-26-2002, 03:49 PM

SO i said rectum damn near killed him

Shaolin shadowboxing, and the Wu-Tang sword style
If what you say is true, the Shaolin and the Wu-Tang
could be dangerous
Do you think your Wu-Tang sword can defeat me?

En garde, I'll let you try my Wu-Tang style

Gvac

06-26-2002, 03:49 PM

The founders knew all too well the importance of seperation of Church and State - many of them experienced the Anglican Church tyranny in Britain. Note their careful wording in the Declaration of Independence so as not to mention any one specific "god". It was their contention, however, that all of our basic rights and freedoms come from something far greater than any legislative or judicial branch of government.

As far as kids learning about the principles of our country through education, that's what scares me. There is currently a movement in the state of New Jersey to not teach about the Founding Fathers because many of them were slave owners, and thus not worthy enough to learn about. And with test scores and education levels at an all time low in this country, it truly terrifies me what the next generation will know about our history.

<img src=http://gvac.50megs.com/images/capsig.jpg>

FMJeff

06-26-2002, 05:47 PM

As far as kids learning about the principles of our country through education, that's what scares me. There is currently a movement in the state of New Jersey to not teach about the Founding Fathers because many of them were slave owners, and thus not worthy enough to learn about. And with test scores and education levels at an all time low in this country, it truly terrifies me what the next generation will know about our history.

Lol, can you stretch the facts any more to fit your point? These people WERE slaveowners. They were also incredible, REAL human beings with weaknesses. We worship them like g-ds, but they were just brilliant men in a room with the responsibility of guiding the people of this country through some very turbulent waters. I think that makes them significantly more interesting and relevant subjects of study. However, this is rarely taught in the schools...it was barely covered in my high school and I went to a rather progressive school.

No, the test scores have nothing to do with a loss of patriotism in this country. The pursuit of knowledge is a personal choice, and most kids would rather be out dancing, drinking, listening to homogenized music and fucking, notwithstanding budget cuts, bad or insufficient teachers and poorly equipped facilities.You think test scores in the 17-1800's were better because they had a more profound love of God and Country? Hell no...a better education meant a better job with more money for their family. I'd really like to meet the person who says "I'm learning as much as I can so I can be a better American."

<img src="http://members.aol.com/sabanj666/ass.gif">
 Jeff Shain
WebMaster
http://www.foundrymusic.com

A.J.

06-26-2002, 05:55 PM

While we're at it, let's ban the playing of "God Bless America" for the same reasons.

<IMG SRC="http://norraccm.freeservers.com/images/rnf_ajindc_01.jpg"> ® Made By Christy ¯

Doogie

06-26-2002, 07:04 PM

No, the test scores have nothing to do with a loss of patriotism in this country. The pursuit of knowledge is a personal choice

No but the loss of patriotism can lead to a lack of interest in learning the history...

I teach history myself, and I consider myself a patriot. I allow my feelings as a patriort carry over to the classroom. And my enthusiasm for my country makes it interesting for my kids to learn. I do a lesson, then give a background story to what was left out, what has been changed in the last 20 years of revisionism, and what to read to further interest.

Now I am not fired up about this issue cause of the God issue in the pledge. I am more mad at the disrespect that the court has shown for the pledge itself...and courts have been wrong before. Let us not forget that the Supreme Court also once said that segeregation was legal at one time for christ's sakes. It is important to examine all these aspects of our nation before making judgements. California sets the record for passing laws that get declared unconstitutional all the time (referendums). My argument is if you dont like the "Under God" part dont say it like I do...

But dont take away from everybody elses right to wanna say the pledge of alliegance. I can honestly say that I am always the one saying the pledge loud every morning. And the only time I ever heard other kids participating in the pledge was on Sept. 12...

Lack of enthusiasm starts with the basics. It starts with first learning to respect, with that respect comes enthusiasm, and with that enthusiasm comes independent learning...In this case in point, respect for patriotism starts with the pledge. If you dont like the "under God" part, edit it out to your hearts conent, but dont show disrespect to this country...

<IMG SRC=http://publish.hometown.aol.com/doogcool/myhomepage/rfnetdoogie76.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_US>

"I know you want it, I read Mike Tyson's book!!!"-thanks to Aggie for the quote

Gvac

06-26-2002, 07:48 PM

Once again, I must point to the ultimate authority - and he agrees with me once again!
<img src= http://gvac.50megs.com/images/gvacreagansig.jpg>

NewYorkDragons80

06-26-2002, 07:53 PM

Arienette

06-26-2002, 07:56 PM

Anyone who thinks declaring the Pledge of Allegiance "Unconstitutional" is a good thing better not complain when this country is overrun with terrorists and there is nobody to rise up to fight them.gvac - i have no problem whatever with people being patriotic and rising up against terrorism. i love this country. and i think it would be great if there was a way that we could get kids to really become patriotic and realize how great this country is. i just dont feel that reciting the pledge is the way for that to be accomplished. just because i have a problem with religion being involved in secular life does not make me anti-american or anything else. i dont want to get too into my personal beliefs here since i'm sure no one cares, but i dont see where the two things are relatedRemove the word God from our currency, our national anthem, and anything else that represents us as a mixed religion/culture population thanks, jeff.. that was the exact point i was going to make.

http://members.aol.com/deviantari/myhomepage/arienette.gif?mtbrand=AOL_US
worshiping the dancing rooster... thanks for the sig

i want a lover i don't have to love
i want a boy who's so drunk he doesn't talk

FMJeff

06-26-2002, 08:06 PM

Do you know who was the first to use "One nation, under God"? Abraham Lincoln in his Gettysburg Address. Lincoln is considered by most historians as a non-theist (probably a deist.) His use of the word was most likely a ceremonial usage that America was, and still is, God's country.

I don't think there's a plausible arguement in existence that would convince me that the word "God" in any context doesn't express a judeo-christian connotation.

Let's look at the Webster dictionary definition for a moment:

1 capitalized : the supreme or ultimate reality: as a : the Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshiped as creator and ruler of the universe b Christian Science : the incorporeal divine Principle ruling over all as eternal Spirit : infinite Mind
2 : a being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship; specifically : one controlling a particular aspect or part of reality
3 : a person or thing of supreme value
4 : a powerful ruler


Look this is all semantics, I realize that. All this ruling is meant to do is get people talking, questioning, debating...its not going to destroy religion in this country. As long as people feel the need to look to a higher power for salvation, there will always be a need for religion. That will never change, no matter what a judge decides. Treat this as an opportunity to question complacency and reevaluate principles...that's right, an OPPORTUNITY...not a mandate.

No but the loss of patriotism can lead to a lack of interest in learning the history...

Granted, but that's not the arguement here. Gvac argues the dwindling faith in divine providence has affected our patriotism.

I personally think the Catholic Church is afraid of losing its illusion of power over this country and its policy making, but that's my personal opinion.

But dont take away from everybody elses right to wanna say the pledge of alliegance. I can honestly say that I am always the one saying the pledge loud every morning. And the only time I ever heard other kids participating in the pledge was on Sept. 12...

If you dont like the "under God" part, edit it out to your hearts conent, but dont show disrespect to this country...

I don't understand what you mean by "disrespecting the country". Did you even read the article? Nobody wants to do away with the pledge of allegiance. They just want to remove the religious references from it.

I believe in this country, and I think a pledge of allegiance is a good thing...but I pledge allegiance to the tangible...my government, my president, my congress...not the "supreme ruler of the universe".

You know, He-Man was master of the Universe....was He-Man god?

hehe...

<img src="http://members.aol.com/sabanj666/ass.gif">
 Jeff Shain
WebMaster
http://www.foundrymusic.com

ADF

06-26-2002, 08:46 PM

Anyone who's read my sonnet on GVAC's testicles knows that I love him, but I have to agree with Jeff on this one. The less we rely on some heeby-jeebie invisible man in the sky, the better. I had forgotten that the "under god" thing wasn't added in until the fifties, but it reminds me of how paranoid we were during that whole anti-communist phase. True, this isn't the time to be anti-patriotic (is there ever such a time?), but not believing in god doesn't equate to not being patriotic. I'm an atheist and I've served in the Air Force (and currently serve in the Air National Guard of NJ), so I don't think my patriotism is in question. If you want to require the whole "Pledge of Allegiance" thing in school, that's fine with yours truly, but just don't ostracize those who don't want to recite the "under god" part.

<img src= http://thereisnogod.faithweb.com/images/third.jpg width = 300 height = 100>

Se7en

06-26-2002, 09:14 PM

Some of you people need to express a little more clearly your thoughts.

Don't go, "I agree with decision!" and then be surprised when someone calls you disrespectful of the country. The decision effectively BANS the pledge....and if that's not something that's disrespecful of the country, however indirectly, I don't know what is.

Cause as it stands, you have NO pledge. Personally, I agree, it's more of the minority wanting to do our thinking for us, but really, if those two words were the issue all along, than perhaps the effort here should have been to get those two words removed instead of utterly banning the entire pledge altogether.

All I can say is, this verdict made me sick to be in this country. I believe I should have been born back in the 50s, before the fucking hippies & baby boomers came along and RUINED everything outside of civil rights.

I'd cry about how I fucking hate liberals too, but what a tiresome argument that would become.

<img border="0" src="http://Se7enRFNet.homestead.com/files/RFnetSe7en3.jpg" width="300" height="100">

WWFallon - a sig-pic-making jar of Human Clay

"Being a bastard WORKS."
--Spider Jerusalem

sunndoggy8

06-26-2002, 09:23 PM

Seven, maybe you should reread the decision.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ( news - web sites) overturned a 1954 act of Congress inserting the phrase "under God" after the words "one nation" in the pledge.

Those two words, not the whole pledge. And it doesn't matter, because the decision will be overturned anyway.

<IMG SRC="http://home.att.net/~sunndoggy8/RFnetSunndoggy8.jpg" width=300 height=100>

"You should've seen her face. It was the exact same look my father gave me when I told him I wanted to be a ventriloquist."

Ixia Naar

06-26-2002, 10:02 PM

I happen to agree with the ruling...though unconstitunial seems a harsh way to describe it....no biggie take the lil' god line out....oh and slap the guy who started this whole thing cuase he's a Fu*king moron 8 )....and afta the god line is out throw anyone who won't say the pledge outta the country cuase i don't want em' here ifin they don't like this country

sexy bastard

06-26-2002, 10:49 PM

Ixia Naar

06-26-2002, 11:02 PM

you don't swear on a bible any more Sexy...they jus make you swear an oath that your telling the truth

sexy bastard

06-27-2002, 12:39 AM

yes but dont you still have to swear to god...shit i wil lfind out in 2 weeks anyway
lol

<img src=http://members.aol.com/leonj25/myhomepage/sb.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_US>
www.leohernandez.net
the epitome of masculinity (yeah right)

hyperspace

06-27-2002, 04:22 AM

well i wouldn't worry about this too much. i once saw a documentary about similar situations like this only i couldn't understand it because it was in arabic.

PSSTT!! HIS REAL NAME'S MOSLEY!!!

Arienette

06-27-2002, 05:27 AM

does this mean that when your in court and they make you swear on a bible then...since it is a judicial system and they say "do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god" does this mean it will be replaced with "liar liar pants on fire"
cause if they are separating church from state which is what it is suppose to be then in a court of law how can you be held in court if you lie cause they say you took an oath to tel lthe truth then in a court all you have to say is that it is unconstitutional also. Am i right or am i getting way to deep into this...but then again I bet it will happen eventuallysb - there's no reason to be condescending... potentially losing the "so help me god" part does not sound like a bad idea to me at all. the whole idea of taking an oath is to promise to tell the truth. for someone who is an athiest, for example, what the hell does saying "so help me god" do to strengthen his oath? if anything, it makes it less valuable. maybe it's silly, and maybe it's not worth arguing over, but i dont see where religious references are at all necessary or appropriate in these non-religious settings.

http://members.aol.com/deviantari/myhomepage/arienette.gif?mtbrand=AOL_US
worshiping the dancing rooster... thanks for the sig

i want a lover i don't have to love
i want a boy who's so drunk he doesn't talk

Michael Fury

06-27-2002, 05:58 AM

Excellent decision. Never liked it anyway. What is wrong with "One nation, indivisble, with liberty and Justice for all"? Nothing. People who don't believe in gods and tooth faries and Santa Claus and the like shouldn't have to recite a pledge that pays tribute to someone else's imaginary friend. Keep your superstitions to yourself, please.

Pray for Mojo.

sexy bastard

06-27-2002, 06:11 AM

damn arienette you just turned me on there
lol

<img src=http://members.aol.com/leonj25/myhomepage/sb.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_US>
www.leohernandez.net
the epitome of masculinity (yeah right)

JerryTaker

06-27-2002, 06:58 AM

I thought the 1700's was the Age of Enlightenment...

Well, I know it's been brought up already, but Jefferson was a slave owner, was that part of enlightenment? people said "god" a lot and owned slaves back then, it didn't mean that either was right, the "god" thing was just more acceptible for longer...

As for this whole money thing.....
Who here actually likes having their lives and the lives of everyone else revolve around money? I hate money, I despise it, it's like our slave owners, but we need it to live, so we have to have some little peices of paper that say, "this is my value in the world, I can trade this in for drinks" I don't care what it says on it, I don't care that you can fold it to make it look like 9/11, I don't care, I just have to have it, because society tells me so.... so don't preach to me "Well give up your money" because I would love to live in a world where we didn't have to carry out individual worths in our pockets....

<IMG SRC="http://afs30.njit.edu/~gsm2321/gumbysig5.gif">

I've given my life to become what I am, To preach the new beginning, To make you understand. To reach some point of order, Utopia in mind, you've got to learn To sacrifice, to leave what's now behind...

wilee

06-27-2002, 07:07 AM

IN A SURPRISE MOVE, NINTH CIRCUIT COURT DECLARES CONSTITUTION UNCONSTITUTIONAL!

(AP - 6/27/02) Expanding the majority opinion of it's recent 2 to 1 decision to declare the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional since it contains the phrase "under God", the Ninth Circuit Court of the U.S. has set it's sights on the Preamble of the Constitution itself.

The Justices would not comment, but their clerks provided press releases explaining their intended actions.

"Separation of church and state is necessary in this day and age," the release begins, "and the Constitution itself is violating this necessity.

"Use of the words 'blessing' and 'ordain', which have obviously religious connotations, is insulting to atheists, and others who do not believe in the existance of God. Webster's dictionary defines 'blessing' as 'to hallow or consecrate by religious rite or word', and 'ordain' as 'to invest officially (as by the laying on of hands) with ministerial or priestly authority'. These words cannot be allowed to offend non-believers."

The AP has spoken to several political scholars. One commented that this is a circular argument. "How can you use a document to declare itself illegal?" he said. "We believe that this decision is also likely to be overturned as will the 'Pledge Decision'," commented another.

<IMG SRC="http://cwjr.home.infi.net/rocket.jpg">

Doogie

06-27-2002, 08:55 AM

Did you even read the article? Nobody wants to do away with the pledge of allegiance. They just want to remove the religious references from it.

Then why did the senate vote 99-0 to condemn the decision. With the influential speech coming from Barbara Boxer, the Democratic Senator of California...the only reason it wasnt 100-0 is that Strom Thurmond is absent. Look, I am as opposed to religion in daily life as the next person. And like I said if you want to delete the under God part then go for it. I personally have always held to the theory that "the seperation of church and state" means seperation of the Catholic Church and state...it was the church that led to the English Civil War which led to the ideals so cherished by Jefferson, which led to the Constitution. Everything has symbiance, and everything has an effect on tommorow...

<IMG SRC=http://publish.hometown.aol.com/doogcool/myhomepage/rfnetdoogie76.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_US>

"I know you want it, I read Mike Tyson's book!!!"-thanks to Aggie for the quote

Yerdaddy

06-27-2002, 09:09 AM

Ni!

<img src="http://yerdaddy.homestead.com/files/pics/sigtussle.jpg" >
If I don't make you laugh, you don't know what felch means.

McNabbShouldDie

06-27-2002, 10:39 AM

ya know what im doing next year? every morning i will just stand there and salute my flag anyways. 
fuck the minorities, one by one there taking away everything that this country has to stand for. i'm sick of it. 

<IMG SRC="http://members.aol.com/mcnabbshoulddie/myhomepage/rfnetmcnabbshoulddie.gif?mtbrand=AOL_US">
Thanks to WWFallon for the awesome SIG PIC!!

Hey Donovan...say hello to my little friend.

FMJeff

06-27-2002, 10:41 AM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Did you even read the article? Nobody wants to do away with the pledge of allegiance. They just want to remove the religious references from it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then why did the senate vote 99-0 to condemn the decision.

I don't understand how your response relates to mine.

The ruling of the liberal court was to recind the addition of "Under G-d" to the pledge made in the 50's because they support the unpopular position that the word "G-d" in any context is inexorably religious in connotation. The ruling had nothing to do with banning the pledge.

Congress condemned that ruling. They support with the popular opinion that the article "God" is a symbolic representation of the supreme diety of all the monotheistic religions in this country. The vote was a symbolic gesture to show the religious majority in this country that they support religion and its role in our country. To do anything else would be career suicide.

I found a really odd quote today on the net.

"There are more religious fanatics in this country (United States) than anywhere in the world. They're not killing people in the name of God because they have freedom and a good quality of life. If we were a starving, poor country we would probably be suicide bombing our rich neighbors begging for our worthless land back too."

What do you guys think about that? I agree. I think if the Palestinians were as rich and prosperous as we are they wouldn't be so angry and jealous of Israel.

<img src="http://members.aol.com/sabanj666/ass.gif">
 Jeff Shain
WebMaster
http://www.foundrymusic.com

legroommusic

06-27-2002, 11:33 AM

What's silly about this is that there is a thread about two words. I know that I've post my beliefs, but I think that PC thugs just go out of their way for words rather than content. You can't say God. You also can't say nigger, spic, gook, kyke. There is two words, and when God is one of them, OH NO! RELIGION! I believe everyone has used God in every day language. Are you going to get other people fired if they all of a sudden say " oh my God!" or "Gadzooks"(I know noone says that. But look at the content and not one word). You guys are silly.

I propose this idea. How about the thought police.

wait that's minority report.

okay, so

They're not all gems

FMJeff

06-27-2002, 11:56 AM

What's silly about this is that there is a thread about two words.

It's not about the words, its about the significance of a pledge supported by our government that represents the people of this country.

I propose this idea. How about the thought police.
wait that's minority report.

Did you see the movie? They were pre-crime police. They didn't arrest you for thought or intent, they arrested you for actions you would inevitably commit.

<img src="http://members.aol.com/sabanj666/ass.gif">
 Jeff Shain
WebMaster
http://www.foundrymusic.com

Arienette

06-27-2002, 12:16 PM

I believe everyone has used God in every day language. Are you going to get other people fired if they all of a sudden say " oh my God!" or "Gadzooks"regardless of your take on this whole issue, i think everyone would agree that there's a big difference between a person willingly using a word in their speech and all children being forced to use it daily. the whole idea is that you can't hold someone's beliefs against them, and they are allowed to voice them, so the whole firing scenario is just silly. no one is saying that school children who believe in god shouldnt have every right to go around reciting the pledge or anythign else. it's the fact that this is legally madated and forced on all children, regardless of what they believe, that bothers me

http://members.aol.com/deviantari/myhomepage/arienette.gif?mtbrand=AOL_US
worshiping the dancing rooster... thanks for the sig

i want a lover i don't have to love
i want a boy who's so drunk he doesn't talk

Doogie

06-27-2002, 12:23 PM

Jeff the problem I have is not with you or me, it is with the average drone that doesnt undrestand what this decision is all about. They will believe that the pledge is out the window. Thet they dont have to say it cause it is "a religious belief", and that is damaging to the moral of this country. I have repeatededly stated that I am for the seperation of churvch and state, the problem is that this decision is everywhere and many will believe that the pledge is unconstitutional, is wrong, and uneccesary. These are the people that I fear most, and I fear religious zealots...I dont see why they just couldnt take the under God out part quietly, instead of making it into this big thing...Lets face the facts it is being reported that the pledge is overturned, and misinformation is more damaging than the truth. This is what I fear, that the misinformation will lead to a downward spiral of morale. This of course is a worst case scenario, but a possibility nonetheless. I also wanted to show the senates reaction to all this...
as I have said before, patriotism starts at the basic levels." You dont uproot a whole bush to get one flower", and this is kind of uprooting a tradition. Ok take out the under God part and if people wanna say let them say it. If not that is there choice too...
<IMG SRC=http://publish.hometown.aol.com/doogcool/myhomepage/rfnetdoogie76.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_US>

"I know you want it, I read Mike Tyson's book!!!"-thanks to Aggie for the quote

This message was edited by Doogie76 on 6-27-02 @ 4:35 PM

FMJeff

06-27-2002, 01:32 PM

Jeff the problem I have is not with you or me, it is with the average drone that doesnt undrestand what this decision is all about.

I see your point now. Yeah that's a danger, but I have a feeling in a week or so nobody will care and this will be old news.

<img src="http://members.aol.com/sabanj666/ass.gif">
 Jeff Shain
WebMaster
http://www.foundrymusic.com

furie

06-27-2002, 06:06 PM

My biggest problem with this
topic isn't the "under God" part.
My concern is the lack of
patriotism in kids today. Not
saying the pledge ay all. Kids
don't have to say the pledge
because it mentions God, which
brings into the seperation church
and state issue.

The whole point of kids reciting
the pledge is to endocterate
them to America, which is not a
bad thing.

So how about a this; All school
children must recite the pledge,
without "under God"

anyone?

<img src="http://www.tseery.homestead.com/files/droids.jpg" width=300 height=100>
<a href="aim:goim?screenname=furie1335&message=You_are_Number_6">IM:Furie1335
</a>

cozmokramer

06-28-2002, 12:14 AM

This is such bullshit , im a student and to speak for my fallowing students the pledge of allegiance has no effect on us what so ever. half of us dont even say it and the other half dont even know what the hell it means. AND I THOUGH OUR GOVERNMENT IS MAJORITY RULES NOT MINORITY - JUST BECAUSE ONE PERSON HAS TO SPEAK OUT AND TRY AND MAKE EVERYTHING POLITICLLY CORRECT . FUCK THAT IF THE ANY KID IS IN SUCH DISCOMFORT THEN STEP OUT OF THE ROOM IF IT BOTHERS YOU SO MUCH!

<IMG SRC="kramer.jpg" BORDER="0" ALIGN="Top">

Im going to kill myself OR DIE TRYING!

Yerdaddy

06-28-2002, 01:50 AM

It's majority rule with respect for the rights of minority groups - that's the whole point of the Bill of Rights. The point of the ruling is that the minority of students that do not believe in god, or don't believe in a god that is defined or suggested by the word "god," cannot be compelled to make pledges to a god. And the fact that those minority students would have to take some alternative action like leave the room or remain silent while the rest of the class is lead in the pledge, fits the legal definition of compulsion. Therefore, according to the first ammendment, those two words have to be removed and the pledge goes on without it. I say we replace "under god" to "this is not a bit." Who's with me?

<img src="http://yerdaddy.homestead.com/files/pics/sigtussle.jpg" >
If I don't make you laugh, you don't know what felch means.

FMJeff

07-02-2002, 08:55 AM

please keep pledge of allegiance stuff to one thread.

<img src="http://members.aol.com/sabanj666/ass.gif">
 Jeff Shain
WebMaster
http://www.foundrymusic.com

furie

07-02-2002, 09:11 AM

AND I THOUGH OUR GOVERNMENT IS MAJORITY RULES NOT MINORITY

no, that would mean we're living in a democracy. We're not. This is a republic. If this were a democracy, then this issue would have been shot down day one. But since this is a republic, then all one needs to do, it to pressure the right people and get a responce.

<img src="http://www.tseery.homestead.com/files/droids.jpg" width=300 height=100>
<a href="aim:goim?screenname=furie1335&message=You_are_Number_6">IM:Furie1335
</a>

FMJeff

07-02-2002, 09:53 AM

We're not. This is a republic.

And i think we should build a grand army of the republic to combat the separtist threat...

i recommend giving chancellor palpatine full executive control

<img src="http://members.aol.com/sabanj666/ass.gif">
 Jeff Shain
WebMaster
http://www.foundrymusic.com

42nd-delay

07-02-2002, 10:26 AM

please keep pledge of allegiance stuff to one thread.

Sorry, my bad, missed this thread.

This pledge thing doesn't seem like a huge deal. I guaruntee this is not the end of the pledge. As has been stated, the problem was with the words "under God", not with the whole pledge.

There's more pressing issues facing this country, it seems to me. Even if you're just talking about the issue of church and state seperation, how about the fact that public money is now going to religious charities and, thanks to a recent Supreme Court, can go to religious schools without legal challenge?

------------------------------
42nd-delay

"42nd-delay is the only person who's making sense." - Ron, 3-12-02

<img src = "http://www.krikordaglian.com/images/superbowl_sig.jpg">
Now playing in the Entertainment forum - Murder at the Super Bowl: the Trailer! 
<a href = "http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=80&Topic=8046">Click here to see it!</a> 
<a href=http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=46&Topic=14923&RequestTimeout=50>Parody songs that didn't make it on the show.</a>

Gvac

07-02-2002, 12:50 PM

Ever notice how the first thing the Nazis did in Germany was abolish the belief in any "god"? The same is true of communism.

We as Americans believe our freedom, our rights, and our liberties come from a much higher power than the government. We ascribe the name "God" to that power because the vast majority of people in the country choose to do so. We didn't outlaw any other names, just as we haven't decreed that deli sandwiches from this moment on are only to be called "Hoagies"..."subs" and "Heroes" are now illegal. It's pure semantics.

If you are truly an atheist, the mention of the word "God" should offend you no more than the mention of Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny.

<img src=http://gvac.50megs.com/images/capsig.jpg>

furie

07-02-2002, 01:24 PM

I knew the moment i mentioned "republic", SW:AotC refrences would start flying

<img src="http://www.tseery.homestead.com/files/mice.jpg" width=300 height=100>
<a href="aim:goim?screenname=furie1335&message=You_are_Number_6">IM:Furie1335
</a>

Gvac

07-02-2002, 01:26 PM

Glad you brought up the Representative Republic thing, too, Furie. A true democracy is little more than mob rule. We count on our elected officials to be our voice and to be guided by some sort of morals.

Too bad it rarely happens.

<img src=http://gvac.50megs.com/images/capsig.jpg>

Pootertoot

07-02-2002, 02:01 PM

Ever notice how the first thing the Nazis did in Germany was abolish the belief in any "god"? The same is true of communism.

And Hitler killed himself to dodge his gas bills. What's your point? Don't try and throw historical examples of terror from godlessness in the argument because terror in the name of god FAR outweighs it.

Everyone's making a fine argument for themselves, so I'm just going to pound down this point:

It was inserted into the pledge in 1954.

This has nothing to do with founding fathers. This has nothing to do with the tainting of the origin of our country. This is just the removal of something that wasn't there in the first place, something that never should have been placed there.

If people are so concerned about how our founding fathers intended to run our nation, blah, blah, fuckin' blah, how come now one cares about preserving our pledge the way it was written?

I'm gonna go "insert" some more elephant dung on another picture of Mary. I hope you guys will back me up when they try and get me to take it off. ;P

<center><embed src="http://www.geocities.com/slfcallednowhere/mario2.swf" width=300 height=100> 
Take a Chance, Take a Chance
</center>