House Blocks Court on Pledge of Allegiance Ruling

[michaeledward]

So let me get this straight a "God" gave us they inalienable rights that are self-evident in this country but we are not "one nation under God"? Most of the founders believe in "God", you are the one saying that they were fundamentalist Christians, not me. I pointed out their belief in a God and how it helped shape some of their thinking.

Actually, those inalienable rights were granted by 'their creator'; not 'god'. But, feel free to change the words to suit your argument.

And while I am no expert, I believe even Mr. Jefferson opposed this phrase. I thought that most of the founders were diests, which in today's parlance would be described as an 'agnostic'.

 

[punisher73]

Yes, it was a direct quote they are listing the grievances they had against the king. Here is the exact quote.

"He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions."


"the Law's of Nature and Nature's God" and "their Creator" a couple sentences later. It's not changing the words, use of the capital letter is used to denote a specific name not a concept.
----

Perhaps you have heard that this American Citizen was held for two years without the right to council. He is to be (or has been) released without charge.​

President Bush and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and Attorney General Ashcroft should be ashamed of themselves. That they could so casually cast aside the rights of an American Citizen is reason enough for them to be removed from office​

I agree with you on this, but this isn't something that the majority of people consented to through a vote or otherwise. That was something very wrong that was just done.

We can also both agree that we disagree. Guess this is why there are also so many political analysts that would support both our sides. Have enough balloons to share for some balloon animals for all of us?

 

[michaeledward]

Perhaps you have heard that this American Citizen was held for two years without the right to council. He is to be (or has been) released without charge.

President Bush and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and Attorney General Ashcroft should be ashamed of themselves. That they could so casually cast aside the rights of an American Citizen is reason enough for them to be removed from office​

​

I agree with you on this, but this isn't something that the majority of people consented to through a vote or otherwise. That was something very wrong that was just done.

I understood that the USA PATRIOT Act was passed by the United States House or Representatives prior to being signed into law by the President. As this body is directly elected from the citizenry, it serves as my voice in Washington. If the House of Representatives votes for a bill, by extention, each of the citizens has voted for the bill.

We do not run our Federal system of governance via 'Ballot Initiative'. Each of those in Congress who voted to steal away the rights of citizens should be removed from power.

Fortunately, the United States Supreme Court (with the exception of Justice Thomas) recognized that citizens have rights (even those born of Saudi Arabian parents with a first name of Yaser), and they have ordered Secretary Rumsfeld to correct the error of his ways.

 

[Marginal]

Many schools do not allow religious groups to use school facilities to gather. Back when I was in high school (later 80's, early 90's) several "church groups" requested to be able to use a classroom either before school or after school to have a bible study and/or prayer group and were repeatedly turned down.

What you either are unaware of, or don't want to mention is that the courts have frequently ruled against such decidsions of the public schools in question.

Jesus didn't say you couldn't pray in public, he said not to pray LIKE the pharisees. The pharisees would yell and scream and tear their garments to draw attention to themselves while interupting other people at the temple to worship.

Even by your interpretation, that's not any different than what the fundies are currently doing. The whole idea of Christians being persecuted because they can't pass laws forcing Christian indoctrination on the general population is absurd. The utter shrillness of those like Pat Robertson is no less obnoxious and falsely pious than the acts decried by Jesus in those passages.

The only "right" to worship those types are losing is the right to force their opinions on everyone else.

I don't care what religion you are, or what your beliefs are. I think that there are universal truths in all religions. I just happen to feel when around 80% of the country professes to believe in God (and I'm not identifiying what that belief means to each individual, or how they perceive what/who God is) that the majority of the people should be heard and listened to.

80% of the nation doesn't think that manditory school prayer to your particular interpretation of the Judeo Christian God is a ducky idea.

 

[rmcrobertson]

What fundamental rights have Americans ever tried to vote away? What's this thread about, again?

In my view, I have an absolute right not to be forced to sit through prayers to a God I don't believe in. I have the right not to have my kids forced through such rites, too. I even think I have the right not to be pressured towards reciting foolish loyalty oaths to pieces of red, white and blue cloth.

Perhaps as importantly, I think Americans have the right to habeas corpus, counsel, trial, bail. I think that when we're dealing with others, we have the responsibility not to grab people, hold them incommunicado, refuse to bring charges, refuse them counsel, and--oh yes--torture them. Oooh, there's a wacky concept.

So vote against Bush, or you're voting FOR these things....and no, not kidding. This crap's being pulled on his watch, as he's fond of saying. What's more, he and his cronies are arguing for the right to torture, among these other rights.

As for the Constitution, somebody shoulda took better notes. Or found a prof with a brain. It says that, a) "we hold," certain truths to be, "self-evident;" that is, some things prove themselves; b) that this particularly applies to the fact that we are, "endowed by our Creator," with, "certain inalienable rights," (as I wrote but you did not read, Mr. P, "inalienable," means that they cannot be taken away by men, because they were not given by men); c) that "Governments," are instituted among "men," to protect these rights.

The history of the Bill of Rights is that new rights are granted and old ones extended--the only rights taken away are the "right," to own slaves, the "right," to deny women the vote, etc.

As for your reading of Matthew...weird. I see why you say what you're saying: the Biblical text is completely incompatible with your argument.

Here's what I really don't get: why would anybody be in favor of the radical, revolutionary madness espoused by the likes of Pat Robertson? Why would anybody sensible be arguing such an un-American position?

 

[AaronLucia]

We are poor Americans...

So much freedom, so much bickering.

Robertson, i noticed u said that you have the right to not sit through/hear basically anything u don't want to, and you are exactly right. Exercise that right by plugging your ears, or leaving.



While i am unsure of my ideals on the 'Under God' issue, i think it is a problem. Basically, whatever we don't believe, we shouldn't have to do because we have rights. If I don't believe i should have to do the speed limit, then i won't do it, and since from what i heard the Constitution is about making sure the minorities dont' get screwed, i think i'll complain when i get a ticket.

p.s. - i am really horrible with analogies, so don't yell at me too much.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Gents,
Friendly reminder, lets keep the sniping down, myself included.

Danke.

 

[michaeledward]

We are poor Americans...

So much freedom, so much bickering.

Robertson, i noticed u said that you have the right to not sit through/hear basically anything u don't want to, and you are exactly right. Exercise that right by plugging your ears, or leaving.



While i am unsure of my ideals on the 'Under God' issue, i think it is a problem. Basically, whatever we don't believe, we shouldn't have to do because we have rights. If I don't believe i should have to do the speed limit, then i won't do it, and since from what i heard the Constitution is about making sure the minorities dont' get screwed, i think i'll complain when i get a ticket.

p.s. - i am really horrible with analogies, so don't yell at me too much.

There is a bit of a difference between the actions you take under your own judgement, such as driving your automobile at high rates of speed, and actions taken as guided by a state-sponsored activity, such as school.

In the school, all the children must begin their day with a 'PLEDGE' of 'ALLEGIANCE'. This pledge is often led by the school principal over a public address system, as well as the teacher in front of the class. To expect a child of 8 or 9 or 10 years old to understand what they are saying, and squaring that with a belief system is, I think a bit ridiculous. It is even more fantastic to think that if the child has a belief system that conflicts with the phrase 'under God' that they could just remain silent or step out of the room.

Oddly, even the Catholic Church realizes this. I was baptised as an infant, with my parents and god-parents speaking for me before the Church. I attended many years of Catholic schooling to understand the belief structures of the Church and only after all that was completed, does the Church allow the sacrament of 'Confirmation', where speaking for myself, I become a member of the Church.

It is foolish to expect children to take this pledge. Regardless of the phrase 'Under God'.

 

[MisterMike]

The pledge makes sense, especially since it is in a PUBLIC school. In the same way boy scouts have oaths and Kenpo Karate schools have creeds, children should be introduced to things such as loyalty at a young age.

 

[punisher73]

As for your reading of Matthew...weird. I see why you say what you're saying: the Biblical text is completely incompatible with your argument.
-------

Must be nice to ignore other biblical scholars works that don't agree with your interpretation. Don't bother expecting other responses from me on this as I have said we can agree to disagree.

 

[michaeledward]

The pledge makes sense, especially since it is in a PUBLIC school. In the same way boy scouts have oaths and Kenpo Karate schools have creeds, children should be introduced to things such as loyalty at a young age.

To equate 'PUBLIC' schools with the Boy Scouts or Kenpo Karate Schools is a bit of a false analogy.
In my state, all children are required to attend school until the age of 16.
No one is required to attend Boy Scouts or Kenpo Karate Schools.

I looked up the definition of allegiance. It looks to me kind of outdated.

1 a : the obligation of a feudal vassal to his liege lord b (1) : the fidelity owed by a subject or citizen to a sovereign or government (2) : the obligation of an alien to the government under which the alien resides

2 : devotion or loyalty to a person, group, or cause


​

In my opinion, we should be teaching our children how to process information and come to a reasoned position, rather than indoctrinating them in the 'obligation to his leige lord'.


Wouldn't loyalty be better performed if it was a dynamic choice of the citizen, rather than something 'owed'?

Mike

 

[AaronLucia]

Ok...i was thinking about this one..

'And to the Republic for which it stands..'

I thought we were a democracy...

So therefore we shouldn't have to say that either..

And lastly, as much as i like having 'Under God' in the Pledge, in fairness it shouldn't be there.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Nope, we're a Republic.

Definitions:
Republic: a political system in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who can elect people to represent them
Democracy: is government by the people in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system

Heres a bit more info on the systems http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/whatsdem/whatdm2.htm

 

[GAB]

Hi All,

We are a Constitutional Government, a Democratic Republic. We have an Indirect Democracy.

Because we elect others to speak for us, Representitives.

I believe we have the longest lived Constituitional Government ever.

Regards, Gary

 

[GAB]

Hi all,

The Under God was added in the Eisenhower Admin.

It is not some old and loyal item that has been around since the beginning of the pledge.

It was placed in the pledge by the right wing and it is still being held there by the fundamentalist's of this country.

I guess they figured like most of the far right, that if you envoke God it will help your cause.

God Bless America is another one that is being over done at this point in time.

Like the Sikh's, Muslim's and others who believe God is on their side and if you pray, you will not be the prey. If you do it four or more times a day it will even be better for you, while kneeling and kissing the ground. Gets even better if you have some beads to play with.

We should all get down on the ground in America and Kiss the ground for the freedom it gives you and the Constitutional Government we have. Makes about as much sense to me.

The best thing our forefathers did for us was write that document. The best thing we can do is to live up to their standards and keep it going.

Regards, Gary

 

[MisterMike]

In my opinion, we should be teaching our children how to process information and come to a reasoned position

How can we if we cant:

expect a child of 8 or 9 or 10 years old to understand what they are saying

If the pledge teaches one thing, it is rote memorization. If we're lucky, students will come away with a little sense of pride in their Flag, and the Republic for which it stands. I know that's not too popular with the left these days.

 

[GAB]

Hi,

Since the great majority of your Dr.'s of whatever field it might be in, are from the middle or the left.

What is their feeling on this idea of rote learning based on a going to the extreme right government?

Saddam was a secular Government, one of the reasons why we were there for him at one time, He and Osama were not amigos, so what happened there in that situation is, we are against massive killing in the name of a god or a man.

So what is the other alternative to a war that has been going on in gods name now for so many centuries you can not count them on your hands and toes and those of your favorite partner combined?

When will it stop? When you as one individual are pushing up daisys or your ashes are in some location of your choice.

History is brutal, but it is at least there to study, and try to learn from. We are not learning we are just repeating, so much for rote learning, it is obviously a good way. If it is in the direction of a civilized society, and in whos opinion is that? He who is in the ruling party at the time, I guess?

What has Khadafi been doing of late, I think he was one we changed his mind, for a while at least. Is he stll backing the IRA (Ireland)

I think we are trying to show the world we will not tolerate it any longer. Is that good or bad? We will see what our people think in the November election.

Regards, Gary

 

[rmcrobertson]

Gee, and they taught me that we were actiually a "representative democracy:" we exercise our rights to vote "through," elected representatives.

I still don't understand the contradictions and the radicalism of some of these arguments. Some of you insist that we absolutely must follow what the "Founding Fathers," (true only of Washington--after all, we erected about the world's biggest phallic symbol in his honor, which is why when Maya Lin sited the Vietnam War Memorial, she...but I digress) intended--but the instant anybody brings up the original intenet of this Pledge thing, you shy away.

Some of you despise countries like North Korea and Cuba, where they have pictures of their Maximum Leader right next to the flag in every classroom, and kids start out the day with a rote recitation of their duty to the flag, the Max Leader and the country--and you want American schoolkids to start out the day with pretty much the same rote recitation.

Underneath of lot of these arguments, I think what's really at stake is real love of country--which should be based on what the country stands for ("liberty and justice for all," remember?) in reality. What I particularly dislike isn't the Pledge so much: it's the hypocrisy. We've got hungry kids, beaten kids, abused kids, futureless kids, all over this frickin' country, because we're too cheap to help them, we're too ideological to see them, and the likes of the current Prez run around yakking about opportunity and "no child left behind," rather than actually doing a damn thing for them. But oh boy, we sure git them kids to recite the Pledge of Allegiance.

Then there's that whole little thing with having kids recite, "with liberty and justice for all," while our current government goes endlessly to court to defend the current Prez's bizarre little theory that if we are afraid enough or just in a real big hurry, you don't HAVE any rights. Reciting the Pledge while our in-power politicans run around from talk show to talk show advancing the idea that we have the right to torture prisoners....it's a grotesque, radical redefinition of American traditions.

So, let's compromise. I'll pop for the Pledge, if a) everybody agrees to actually observe the provisions of the Bill of Rights, so the recitation means something; b) if we stop treating poor people and workring people like crap, so the Pledge actually means something; c) if we go back to the original Pledge as it was originally written, and fully support its writer's faith in internationalism and world government.

Otherwise, how 'bout we stop forcing kids to recite lies every morning?

 

[michaeledward]

How can we if we cant:

If the pledge teaches one thing, it is rote memorization. If we're lucky, students will come away with a little sense of pride in their Flag, and the Republic for which it stands. I know that's not too popular with the left these days.

Please back up this statement.

How do you measure the 'popularity' of 'pride' by the 'left'?

What actions do you see being taken that justify such an obscene statement?

 

[Marginal]

Please back up this statement.

How do you measure the 'popularity' of 'pride' by the 'left'?

What actions do you see being taken that justify such an obscene statement?

Probably from the RNC.

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040924_1679.html