Pledge to the AMERCIAN FLAG

  • Thread starter Thread starter Joey D
  • 52 comments
  • 1,885 views

Pledge Unconstutional?

  • YES

    Votes: 5 16.1%
  • NO

    Votes: 12 38.7%
  • I'm not American

    Votes: 14 45.2%

  • Total voters
    31
The decision is against the under God portion. The counter argument and what the Supreme Court has supposedly held is that the words do not amount to a support of religion by anyone listening to it. I am not sure about reciting it.
 
I think its fine. If you don't like it go to Russia :D No really though just don't say that part if it offends you. I'm not offend by to much.
 
Perhaps you should read the decision - the issue is with the mention of God, whilst under your constitution I believe you're guaranteed freedom of religion. Therefore, forcing people to pledge allegiance to a God that they don't have to pledge allegiance to under the constitution is therefore unconstitutional.

Take the reference to God out - and the problem magically goes away....
 
Originally posted by Deathhawk
However "God" is not offensive to 70+% of the populace because it covers so many religions.

It's not about it being offensive, or popularity - your constitution guarantees freedom of religion. Forcing people to take the oath of allegiance to 'God', or the 'Almighty' is unconstitutional.
 
Yet another slap in the face to the Christian men who founded our country, and to the God who has blessed us so many times. :mad:

I really don't get the point of debate, though. In the pledge of allegiance you really aren't pledging anything to God, because it is simply used as describing the condition of America: "One nation, under God". :confused:
 
"One nation under God."
It is all regarding the conflict between church and state.
The problem is that they are saying that the mention of God in a state song is in conflict with the church and state being seperate.

But I say, who the hell cares. It's just a bunch of people trying to make it into the press.
Why hasn't this ever been brought up before?
I am not a big fan of religion, but I have no problem with saying the word "god" in a song that envokes patriotism within me.

The motion was crushed 99 to 0 today anyway.
 
Couldn't you just drop in the name of the deity of your choice?

Is it really worth the aggro? I'm sure god / vishnu wouldn't mind....

Oh and i'm not American.
 
Okay, here's the thing. When our forefathers left GB for the Americas it was because they wanted religious freedom. That wish was so important that it was worked into the constitiution because King Geo, was trying to shove a religion down the throats of the people. Church and state were seperated for that reason. Not so we could forget God.
Our money even says "in God we trust". We are so busy trying to remove God from the common knowledge.
The pledge is not about forcing religion down the throat of a nation. It is about acknowledging the God, whether you be Catholic, Lutheran, Episcopalian, or whatever, that protected the Forefathers on their perilous journey, and in the success of founding a new nation.
With all this debate Madeline Murry O'haire is laughing in her grave.
 
Why is it that there are more people in here posting the fact that they are not American.
I didn't think this thread was about if you are an American or not?
 
This is pathetic. They'll pass some stupid thing like this, but then let every lds kid in utah have a class period excused from their school day to go to a mormon class.

If sayin "Under God" is unconstitutional then why the hell are they letting religions take time out of the school day to go have a little church service?!?? Isn't there suppose to be a division between state and religion. Well school is state, smaking a religion class in the middle of school would then be mixing state and religion.

Our government is messed up. A reform is due.
 
Yup I agree here. We have one very ****ed up goverment. I;m sorry
 
It's not the government, it's your High Court.

Guys - take a deep breath and have a think about the issue. The issue isn't the pledge itself as a concept - the issue is (and I'll admit ignorance as to the wording, but I am on the other side of the planet and in a different country) making people pledge allegiance to a God they don't believe in.

Gil makes a very good point - consider the foundations of your country, and the multi-cultural society that the United States is now.

If you want to present yourselves as a tolerant, open and free nation, then you should drop the religious references from the pledge - actions of fringe religions in Utah not withstanding (apologies to Mormons).

And, infallible, what reforms do you propose? I would argue that there is a separation of church and state in the circumstances you describe, in that not all children are made to attend religious classes, and that the classes are run by the church and not by the school.

No-one here has actually provided a counter-argument to the High Court's ruling that the pledge is in contradiction to Amendment 1.

And - here's the thing...

If you make someone tell a lie whilst giving a pledge of allegiance, does not that make the pledge itself a lie (unintended though it may be)?
 
When I was a tyke, many years ago. (I'm not 40 yet) We stood up every morning, put our right hands over our hearts, and recited the pledge:

"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."

Just 31 little words. But a very big commitment to the nation. The forefathers of our country did not mean for us to be divided for stupid, paltry crap such as this.
When the colonists left GB, a lot of the reason was that the Government was trying to make the nation one religion. As an aside, the King of the day, because of that religion, beheaded his wife, in order to avoid a non-sanctioned divorce. (The priest did say "until death do you part")
That is the whole reason for the separation of church and state. To keep the government from controlling religion.
It was not, as is being taught today, to remove God from public mention at every turn.
The early Romans were a one religion nation. No morality was taught. Everyone was out to have a good time. The worship of Christ offended them and they did their best to slay all Christians. Rome fell, crushed from within and without.
Today, the "religious right" is ridiculed. They want prayer in the schools, they want to teach children the difference between good and evil, between right and wrong. They want, ratings on games and music so parents know what the kids are playing and listening to.
The prevailing winds are saying that we don't need to teach morality. Christians, of every denomination, are being dismissed as kooks, with no bearing on reality that want to take away our "freedom" by forcing us to pray and mention God in public.
What a load of crap!!
Can you see the parallels? Is America the next nation to be destroyed from within because it has no values? It is, after all, "unconstitutional" to mention God in the Pledge of Allegiance.
When I was a kid, you didn't drop to the floor if a car backfired. Today, in some places, if you don't hit the floor, you risk taking a bullet from a drive-by shooting.
IMHO it is due to the fact that we took prayer out of the schools, made it unlawful to teach "bible based" morality, and it's illegal to use corporal punishment.
That same bible says "Train up a child in the way he should go, When he is old he will not depart from it"
Teaching a child is telling him/her. Training, involves having unpleasant consequences for going astray of the teaching. We are no longer training our children, and the country is being torn apart from within, and disrespected from without.

Those who do not remember and acknowledge the mistakes made in the past, are doomed to repeat them.

Here endeth the rant.
 
Isn't this a touch arrogant - implicit in your comments is the assumption that:
- everyone taking the oath is Christian
- Christianity is the only way to be taught the difference between right and wrong

It may not have been what you intended but it certainly read that way.

The issues you touch on, pertinent though they are, still don't address the central issue here, that forcing people to state an oath involving a god that they don't believe in is an infringement of their freedom of religion.
 
Wow Gil your a pretty smart guy there. Also vat_man you have some intellagence as well. I see were this is going.


BTW who said yes?
 
Vat_man,
I'm not implying that everyone taking the oath is Christian. I am implying that the founding fathers wrote the constitution based on Christian principles. Not of a specific religious belief.
Sorry to get a bit out of hand in my earlier post. (and this one)
At the time the constitution, (and the pledge for that matter) was written, it was a, more or less, valid assumption.
Christianity is not the only way to get the principles of right and wrong.
However, if you turn to Exodus 20:1-21...Yes that is the ten commandments.
It is wrong to kill. Thou shalt not murder Ex. 20:13
It is wrong to steal. Thou shalt not steal v. 15
It wrong to do the horizontal bop with your best friend's lady. Thou shalt not commit adultery. v. 14.
It is also universally accepted that lying is wrong. Thou shalt not give false testimony against your neighbor, v. 16.
You see what I'm getting at, I hope. Christianity is not the only way to teach/learn right from wrong. But it is generally accepted that the Bible is the oldest book in existence, and is generally taken to be a work of fact not fiction.
So the principles which we speak of are straight out of what my mama calls "The Good Book". Now more than ever it's true "Know Jesus, Know peace. No Jesus, No Peace."

I know I sound like I'm preaching. For that I apologize. I guess it gets under my skin that kids are killing each other on the street, People in America and throughout the world don't have enough food to eat. or medicine to prevent sickness. And we're arguing about the wording of the Pledge.
As always looking at the forest, and have missed the trees completely.

Here endeth the rant. (Gil steps gingerly off the soapbox).
 
as far as i understand it the fathers were theists and/or christians. the us constitution is based on state constitution, native american constitutions and philosophical principles from john locke and such.
 
Back