One nation under God......Maybe?

[ob]

Re: One nation under God......Maybe?

Most of what you said is correct Pointer,and if it was being listened to with an open mind by the people it is addressed to it would have a polarizing impact.I suspect however what is apparent to some will remain staunchly and seemingly reluctantly unclear to others."A" for effort though.

 

[mikeandronda]

Re: One nation under God......Maybe?

another great post pointer94....keep em coming

 

[Tacklewasher]

Re: One nation under God......Maybe?

Under god in the pledge is intrusive and unconstitutional! But having Al Gore pass a tax without the approval of congress is enlightened. Forcing those who do to pay for those who don't, the american way.<br />

Sorry. I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not here. These two items are as unrelated as apples and cows. I'm as right wing as they come and still believe strongly in the separation of Church and State. I still get confused as to why religion even enters into the left/right debate.<br /><br />Bringing it back to the separation of Church and State, I neither want a mandated state religion nor do I trust those in power to manage it properly. I believe that it should be a non-issue to the political process and have little respect for those politicians who either preach or attack religion. Just like I don't expect a political agenda from a Pastor. I don't get what I would like (in either case) but that doesn't mean I can't argue for it.

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: One nation under God......Maybe?

Clinton does his best politicking in black churches. When he went to CA to help Davis, where did he go? Straight to a black church. Black churches are political forces in this country. They are virtually an arm of the Dem party. Where is the outrage? Na, let's attack "under God" in the pledge...<br /><br />By the way, I have NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER that Black Churches take political stands. In fact, they would not be serving their flocks all that well if they didn't.<br /><br />We better wise up and stop creating problems where there are none. All it is doing is creating deep divides that are getting harder and harder to bridge. It is starting to get close to the situation we faced in the 1850s and we all know how that ended.

 

[mikeandronda]

Re: One nation under God......Maybe?

Tacklewasher Im sorry if I ruffled your feathers earlier....wasnt intended......I really dont want to ruffle "most" of your guys feathers but the point I was trying to make is by having the Government dole out a few bucks to a religious orginization so they may help out some hurting people is a benefit to everybody invovled. It saves tax money and is providing a place for those that are "roof over their head challenged" (politicaly correct here) a place to stay. Do you really believe if the goverment gives money to this cause so a Religious orginization can help fix what should be the gverments problem they should have to become a secular group. All that will do is have them stop helping and then the goverment is on their own.

 

[POINTER94]

Re: One nation under God......Maybe?

tacklewasher<br /><br />I am attempting to point out that the inclusion of "Under God" in the pledge, is not nearly as unconstitutional as taxation without representation. The Gore Tax was overtly unconstitutional as it was not voted on by congress. And every penny taken from me directly affects my "pursuit of happiness." If it was not the government it would be theft.<br /><br />It is my contention that the Under God reference in no way has ever affected anyone's constitutional rights or provided the basis for a state sponsered religion. If you don't believe in "God", what government provision has forced you to so much as recognize let alone pray to any god. (Not you personally) The statement is a recognition of a diety, not the preferential identification of a given "state" religion. I am attempting to point out the gravity of unconstitutional activity we accept vs. the theoritical rhetoric we fear.<br /><br />Probably wasn't real clear in the first post but there was an intended link. Probably was a little on the sarcastic side, not completely intended.<br /><br />Thanks

 

[Tacklewasher]

Re: One nation under God......Maybe?

mikeandronda - I get a bit touchy on the use of public funds. I've recently resigned as Treasury from a society (not religious but not-for-profit) because of what I felt was innapropriate use of funds that came from the govt. It is a serious issue to me and I do think it should be kept separate. Is the gov't going to step in and take over? No. But the public has a right to oversee the use of the money which does mean they have the right to say "no". I may not like how the Wiccan is going about it, but as soon as you accept public funds, you open yourself up to public scrutiny. In this case, the shelter is likely better off scaling back their operation and not accept the public money<br /><br />My opinion only.

 

[ob]

Re: One nation under God......Maybe?

by having the Government dole out a few bucks to a religious orginization so they may help out some hurting people is a benefit to everybody invovled. It saves tax money and is providing a place for those that are "roof over their head challenged" (politicaly correct here) a place to stay. <br /><br />While this idea may serve as a humanitarian gesture to homeless people ,with all due respect ,anytime the goverment spends money for anything its not saving tax dollars but rather costing Joe taxpayer.That's where they got the money in the first place.Perhaps if more churches were humble abodes ,they could offer more to the humble.

 

[Tacklewasher]

Re: One nation under God......Maybe?

Pointer.<br /><br />Don't know enough about the Gore Tax to be able to comment.<br /><br />I'm listening to arguments on both side of the fence on the Under God. Both have interpretations of what the constitution means and the Founding fathers meant and it is getting pretty confusing.<br /><br />Think I'll go read the funnies (where is SBN anyway?)

 

[mikeandronda]

Re: One nation under God......Maybe?

OK guys I see both Taklewashers and OB's points the thing is I personaly see things as black or white....Right or wrong... no gray area ...no middle ground.... I admit this a flaw in my way of thinking, but I cant help but get P.O.ed about some people trying to do good out of the kindness of their hearts and getting burned cuz of needing some help to do so. As for OB's comment on churches helping on their own your 100% right.....I am appalled at some churches displays of wealth, while right outside their doors there are homeless. But what I am seeing here is that because of this homeless shelters Assotiation with Christianity, goverment may not help these people if they continue to opperate as Christian.That sucks the same people who are fighting against this display of faith in a place helping the down and out tend to be the one crying the loudest about people not doing enough for the down and out. For exsample Plywoody has time and time again defended the welfare system which comes out of all of our pockets. But when a privet orginization steps up to help, And by doing so Gov. has to spend less for same work if they did it alone, He and his Lib. buddies scream only help us if you look act and speak like we want you too.If the Gov. helped out groups like this regardless of religion I believe it would help the economy.I do understand Tacklewasher,that some nimrods are gonna take advantage of a situation and spend that money frivolessly, in that case I think we should hand them over to Castaway Ray for some of his brands of justice and punishment only he can think up and write on this fine board

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: One nation under God......Maybe?

Let's wait and see what the Supreme Court says about this. They have agreed to take the case.<br /><br />For 200 years the issue of mentioning God has not been an issue. It hasn't ben an issue until one man, using a duaghter he does not even have custody of, to file a suit in CA to stop the mentioning of God in the pledge. Luckily, he got it into the most out of control, over turned circuit courts in the nation and prevailed initially. The girl's mother, who does have custody, is outraged. The girl herself does not agree with what her father did. <br /><br />Tacklewasher - did you read Washington's farewell address to the nation I posted? How can it be any clearer regarding what the Founder's had in mind. He warned us against this.

 

[ob]

Re: One nation under God......Maybe?

mikeandronda,It is apparent to me that you speak from your heart about the matters in discussion here.In theory ,what you propose is indeed the way things could operate if it weren't for all of the blood sucking leaches that are the foreground of most humanitarian monetary contribution processes.While some of the larger entities of these charitable organizations (United Way for one)post their to date figures,they often omit the portion that they use and many times misuse as their operational expenses.In short ,without them there would not be widespread charity,and with them there will always be members in it for profit.Sort of like Charitable bookies.<br /><br />If I had to guess I figure that its just a matter of time unitl the word God is indeed omitted from the Pledge.Then the libertarians can try to fix something else that ain't broke.Of course always in the spirit of what's best for us simple and narrow minded citizens.Not.

 

[mikeandronda]

Re: One nation under God......Maybe?

Your right OB I do speak from the heart, You see I run a Christian youth group that strugles dayly to be able to provide Kids ( almost 3/4 nonchristian mind you) a safe,fun,entertaining and positive place to hang out and learn to become responsable adults someday. Are we elegable for goverment help....No.....Im not complaining, but in reality it costs alot of money to do this. But in the long run it save people money by " hopefully " helping some of these kids grow up to be perductive adults in soicity. Now just because it is a Christian group does not mean we force feed God on these Kids. Yes we have Bible studies some nights and do promote Christian acctivities but we also allow the teens to be themselves, as long as it doesnt hurt anybody else or put down others beliefs. So in the long run my group (that does a have a succesful record of helping the down and out)struggles to exsist because some people feel that because it is Christian it should not be supported be the Gov. even though we as a orginization are supporting the Gov. by taking the kids off the streets and lowering the crime rate as well as helping teens grow up into responsable adults that get jobs and pay taxs. GRRRRRR. Same with this homeless shelter....Its there to help take care of a problem that the Gov. will have to if they dont. Man, I guess this is why Im a youth worker and not a polatition cuz I would have a nervous break down or snap mentaly within the first year I love this site (Iboats) because of the fact that I am able to learn things about boats and life, but sometimes the things I learn about some of the people in our great country tweeks my mellon a bit and I wonder how we ever got to be this great nation that we are.

 

[ob]

Re: One nation under God......Maybe?

mikeandronda,Good for you and those you help.Its too bad that it has become general practice to have to preface each reference to God as a concession to the few that it may offend.Perhaps some people could use a little force feeding.And as in the recent past ,they can either take it or leave it.If someone doesn't want to use the word God when saying the Pledge,so be it.If someone standing next to you does and it offends you ,get over it.Sometimes my throat feels a little scratchy and I don't recite it at all.I just stand there with my hand over my heart and take it all in.

 

[TexSkeeter150]

Re: One nation under God......Maybe?

First of all I will state that I think that "in God we trust" should stay in our pledge. Ok, now that that is over...My thoughts on this:<br />God is in my heart and nothing can take that away from me. Weather it is in the pledge or not, does not deminish that fact one bit. While I would like it to stay in the pledge I believe some Christians have forgotten what is realy important. The good news of Christ, the work that continues to this day through Christ the list could go on forever. A symbol or words of any kind does not negate any of that. We can be so consumed with words or symbols that we can forget what our true calling through Christ is. God is with us in our hearts, mind and soul, not in the words that humanity comes up with, albeit good words that I agree with. I guess what I am trying to say is that I would love to keep that in our pledge because I believe it is true. But, I will also pick the right hill to die on. I will shine the light of God though my actions, prayers, fellowship, the Bible and love of all of mankind as I would love myself and love God with all my mind, heart and soul(God's greatest commandment Mark 12:30-31). This is just my belief and I am not singling out anyone, just stating my opinons on the original post. <br />God bless.....

 

[POINTER94]

Re: One nation under God......Maybe?

Mike,<br /><br />It is all politics and the perception of state endorcement is just a cover for the centralizaion and power of a morally corrupt group of career politicians. They enter into agreements with religious organizations 100 times a day when it suits their needs. Aid to Isreal? (I don't have a problem with it) Can anyone insure that every dime is accounted for and is not promoting the Jewish Faith? NOPE! But when election time roles around and the Jewish vote is in play, whoops, out comes the checkbook. No problem<br /><br />The military hires chaplins of all faiths to promote the religious needs of our soldiers every day.<br /><br />How about our good friend Rev. Jesse Jackson. Think he isn't recieving funds from the government. And by the way, what is the differnce from lying on his tax return to hold money rightfully belonging to the government and a government grant? The guy hasn't been audited since the mid 80's.<br /><br />It sounds as though you are stuggling with what has become a godless group of opportunists disguised as public servants wrapped in a transparent veil of constitutionality. The government is free to enter into contracts with private organizations regardless of their religious or non-religious views. They just can't use the money to promote one religion over another. Example, school voucher program.<br /><br />As this site is a community of people of similiar interest designed to support each other, why don't you post where those of us who sympathize with your situation can send a contribution. Supporting groups like yours is a way I keep my views alive!<br /><br />Hang in there.

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: One nation under God......Maybe?

You know Tex, the problem is, it won't stop with the removal of "under God" in the pledge. It is just one battle in a larger war. If you don't fight the battles you wake up one day realizing you lost the war and who knows how far they really want to go?

 

[TexSkeeter150]

Re: One nation under God......Maybe?

Ralph, I agree with that statement. My post was just trying to single out this one issue and a response to this thread as a whole. It seems to me that it is easy for Christians to forget what is realy important for us to grow and be like Christ. Look what is happening, there is true hatred coming from Christians toward other humans (God creations, too) because of this one issue. It is our responsiblitiy to live the life of Christ and bring as many to him as possible. I believe God will take care of the rest.

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: One nation under God......Maybe?

I hear you. The reality is, if American Christians were as intollerant there wouldn't be very many non-Christians living here in peace as they do. After a while even Christians get fed up with being smacked in the face. JMHO.<br /><br />Here's just another example: look at how Mel Gibson has been attacked over a movie about Jesus nobody has even seen.

 

[samagee]

Re: One nation under God......Maybe?

I hold a different view on the matter. They are being lead by the lord of chaos to the final battle. They can't even see it coming. They can keep walking on God's people all they want, because at a point they will have to face the creator himself. I feel sorry for them. Perhaps they feel if they remove all reminders of him it won't happen? I don't know, but the insanity of it all has them blinded to what's really coming.