Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional !!!

[kenimpzoom]

Re: Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional !!!

The fact is, our nation is considered by the majority to be "under god".<br /><br />Those that do not believe this, can just skip those words.<br /><br />Ken

 

[rodbolt]

Re: Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional !!!

thats what they did for our swearing in ceremoney for induction into the US Navy. those that did not wish to say under God or so help me God were instructed just dont say the God word. however the rest had to be repeated, 3 times to be exact. the military is a small microcosm of the rest of the world. you never know who or what religion is standing behind you,hopefully covering your arse in case everything goes wrong. myself if congress would just uninsert the inserted phrase the whole thing will dry up and blow away. could ya imagine the hue and cry and wailing and gnashing of teeth if someone tried to change it to one nation under allah,budda or tiki tiki?<br /> Pat Robertson would call for another terrorist strike. why that loony wasnt arrested on domestic terrorism charges still baffles me.<br />I bet if his name had been muamar salad bar and the leader was a US leader not a VE leader it would be a bit different

 

[kenimpzoom]

Re: Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional !!!

*Allah is the arabic word for god.<br />*Budda has no god, but they dont let things like this bother then, not good for the karma.<br />*Tiki tiki is another god. <br />*Hindu has a god<br /><br />The only people "under god" offends is atheists.<br /><br />Well, the god fearing people were here first, love it or leave it.<br /><br />Ken

 

[jtexas]

Re: Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional !!!

I think Hindu has multple gods, it would be more like "one nation indivisible under Ganesh, Ganupta, & etc."<br /><br />how bout we just say "one naked individual..."

 

[wilkin250r]

Re: Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional !!!

I would have to say, JB really hit the nail on the head.<br /><br />If it was so inconsequential, why are you upset about it?<br /><br />The fact is, it's NOT inconsequential. As firmly as you believe in your creator, and as firmly as you believe that the world is headed downhill because of a lack of moral fiber and strong faith and fear of God, there are some people that believe just the opposite.<br /><br />Although I am strong in my own Christian faith, I don't believe our society should be forcing people to recite something contrary to their religions beliefs.<br /><br />Let's take the extreme opposite example, however unlikely. Could you imagine the outcry if they change the Pledge to "one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for All, and God does not exist"?

 

[MudIsFun]

Re: Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional !!!

Just a word on the Supreme Court "deciding" this issue last year against this gentleman... The court ducked the argument altogether as they decided Newdow had no standing to file suit since he filed on behalf of his daughter but he did not have legal custody. The court took the cowards way out.<br /><br />Since Newdow is an attorney he rounded up some "clients" who were offended and file suit on their behalf. I would hazard a guess he did not find his clients they found him and with the 9th circuit being the liberal group they are he was basically assured a win. <br /><br />Next thing we know the Gov't will require we turn all of our cash in for exchange since it does have the under god tag lines. Like this country does not have larger problems to deal with right now.<br /><br />Kevin

 

[Haut Medoc]

Re: Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional !!!

Madalyn Murray O'Hair was murdered,(along with her two children in 1995.....Their bodies were found in Texas after their murderer led police to the graves in exchange for a reduced sentence....JK

 

[JB]

Re: Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional !!!

Really interesting exchange.<br /><br />I hear a lot of folks taking the "conservative" side of an issue accuse those who disagree with them as presenting no arguments, only insults and attacks.<br /><br />This is a legal issue. That is what the courts are for. Reciting a pledge that has a religious component in school, just like organized prayer in school, has the EFFECT of forcing that religious component on the children to avoid ostracization and the cruelty that children are prone to heap on targets of derision. That, according to the Court, violates the Constitutional prohibition against establishment of a state religion.<br /><br />Moral arguments, historical arguments, "we've always done it that way" arguments have no legal standing and are irrelevant here.<br /><br />How about those of you who object, like white southerners who objected to Brown v. BOE, quit name calling and hysterical outburts and offer some LEGAL arguments.<br /><br />I am hearing too many phrases and positions that I heard from segregationists in the 50s, statements that you may regret as much as those passionate white supremacists regret their past positions and activities.

 

[wilkin250r]

Re: Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional !!!

Originally posted by JB:<br /> Moral arguments, historical arguments, "we've always done it that way" arguments have no legal standing and are irrelevant here.

Now why couldn't I say it that well?

 

[kenimpzoom]

Re: Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional !!!

JB, the whole point is that the pledge is optional, the children are not forced to say it.<br /><br />I say if it bothers the parents so much, put their children in private school.<br /><br />Ken

 

[JB]

Re: Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional !!!

I disagree, KIZ. <br /><br />That is not the point at all. The point is that a 10 year old will be ostracized and probably punished by her classmates for being different. There is an implied requirement to participate in organized school activities.<br /><br />That is the EFFECT rule. Whether or not it is "optional" on paper does not matter if the environment has the EFFECT of making it mandatory.<br /><br />Our history is loaded with cases in which the long held opinions and practices of powerful majorities have been found to be illegal under the Constitution. That is the very mechanism through which freedom and liberty have been expanded in our country.

 

[rodbolt]

Re: Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional !!!

I am with ya JB. the simple solution will be re eliminating the phrase. the few that did not say "so help me god" at the military induction were regared with suspision. while "allah" may be an arabic word for god there god is a bit different than ours and a bit different from some of the rest of the worlds Gods. does not mean they are wrong or Pat Robertson is right but just as some will kill in the name of a southern babtist god others will kill equally as hard and think themselves equally as justified. thats why most wars get fought.<br /> I did not care if they belived in fish as long as they had my back when I needed it as I had theirs.<br /> even in boot camp some of the muslims were "ordered" to attend a christian sunday church. had they not things would have gone very badly. stems from the 100% religous ceremoney participation flag that is given to companies with 100% attendance. my self I think that tradition needs to be sunk and forgotten.<br /> best thing to do is say it at church and leave the general public out of what ever religion you ascribe to.

 

[alden135]

Re: Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional !!!

Originally posted by JB:<br /> I disagree, KIZ. <br /><br />That is not the point at all. The point is that a 10 year old will be ostracized and probably punished by her classmates for being different. There is an implied requirement to participate in organized school activities.<br />

How come it's ok to ostercize the christian kid who wants to write a report about god or say grace at lunch? <br />The premise that we can make everyone happy all the time, and assure they are never offended is ludicrous. <br />The pendulum effect is in full swing.

 

[jtexas]

Re: Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional !!!

What if Congress passes a resolution that, within the context of the Pledge of Allegiance, the word "God" is defined to mean "either: <br />1. 'whatever deity or higher power I choose to recognize', or if none,<br />2. 'the sky'."

 

[PW2]

Re: Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional !!!

I say take the reference off the money, too! I don't have enough that it would make much difference to me, anyway.<br /><br />I absolutely agree with JB on this one. I find it curious that most of the arguments revolve around religious incursions in other areas of the government, like the money. Like somehow, that makes it ok.<br /><br />It will be interesting to see how the supreme court rules on this, however. I have no doubt they will rule against Newdow (sp?), but I am dying to know how they will justify that ruling from a legal, constitutional standpoint.

 

[QC]

Re: Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional !!!

That's why I like things as polarized as they are. There will be no change. Good!!! As many of you have said this is pretty inconsequential. So why do any of you care which way it falls?<br /><br />The only reason I care is that I don't like revisionist stuff: history or interpretation of law. There is no guarantee of a separation of church and state. Not even a ban on promoting one religion over another. Only a Constitutional barrier to establishment of a state religion. Neither is there a legal argument for ignoring the FACT that this country was established with Judeo-Christian values at its core. These values are important and were absolutely on the minds of the writers of the Constitution. I am VERY proud of our secular gov't, but that doesn't mean that I am terrified of our history . . .

 

[kenimpzoom]

Re: Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional !!!

Originally posted by Quietcat:<br /> That's why I like things as polarized as they are. There will be no change. Good!!! As many of you have said this is pretty inconsequential. So why do any of you care which way it falls?<br /><br />The only reason I care is that I don't like revisionist stuff: history or interpretation of law. There is no guarantee of a separation of church and state. Not even a ban on promoting one religion over another. Only a Constitutional barrier to establishment of a state religion. Neither is there a legal argument for ignoring the FACT that this country was established with Judeo-Chritian values at its core. These values are important and were absolutely on the minds of the writers of the Constitution. I am VERY proud of our secular gov't, but that doesn't mean that I am terrifed of our history . . .

100% correct.<br /><br />As for the kids saying it, they can mumble something incoherent instead of saying "under god".<br /><br />In fact, they can just stand their silently, pretty soon all the kids will be doing it, just to be a rebel. They will be the cool kid.<br /><br />Ken

 

[JB]

Re: Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional !!!

I still haven't seen a LEGAL argument contradicting the Court opinion.<br /><br />"What if's" and "Yabuts" mean nothing legally.<br /><br />The issue before the court was whether the law placing the phrase, "under God" in the Pledge, AND the organized recitation of the Pledge thus constituted in a government institution, a public school, violated the Constitutional prohibition against making laws with respect to establishment of a state religion.<br /><br />That is the ONLY question the Court considered.<br /><br />Now, please explain why the Court is wrong. It is not relevant whether it ticks you off. More than half of the country was ticked off by Brown v. BOE and even more by Roe v. Wade. They are the law of the land.<br /><br />The Supreme Court may over-rule it, it may not. Either way, live with it.

 

[gspig]

Re: Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional !!!

Here's the number one question: Why is it unconstitutional NOW? It was constitutional when it was passed.

 

[jtexas]

Re: Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional !!!

revisionist? the pledge is already revisionified.<br /><br />The latest revision was in 1954 the words "under God" were added by an act of congress, signed into law by President Eisenhower.<br /><br />The Congressional Record records the reason for the change: "The inclusion of God in our pledge therefore would further acknowledge the dependence of our people and our Government upon the moral directions of the Creator."<br /><br />Ninth Circuit court in its opinion (written by a Nixon appointee, FWIW) on 27 June 2002 called the pledge "...an impermissible government endorsement of religion because it sends a message to unbelievers that they are outsiders...."<br /><br />I haven't heard any legal arguments contradicting that opinion either, JB. <br /><br />"Constitutional when it was passed...." Actually, the Supreme Court is given the task of determining constitutionality. Until they say it is, it might be or it might not be.