Pledge of allegiance ruled unconstitutional

Hmmmm ... not going to get sucked in again, not going to get sucked in again ... don't agree at all but not going to be sucked back in.

Argh! Can't help it. There are as many examples of a country going bad because of religion as there are good examples.

I think a lot of people confuse morals with religion. I have strong morals and ethical values. I do not practice any religion. These two statements are not incompatible.

I think a country needs to practice good ethics. Not religion. There is a difference.

OK, feel free to pounce. I've been sucked into the vortex. Aaaaaaaaahhhh!!!

 

All I have to post is:

And
:(

 

I'm not being sucked into this debate, but make no mistake--I am not happy about this.

-John

 

Part of this discussion was about why governments and civilizations fail. I for one don't think it's because "under God" might be removed from a pledge. I believe they fail because citizens become apathetic. It's imperative that we know who is at fault and why. When we cease to hold our elected officials accountable and allow them to misdirect funds, mismanage, embezzle, and pass the blame we end up with outdated infrastructures and people dying for lack of water in front of our eyes. So yes, I do want to know if it was incompetence, a breakdown in the chain of command, failure at the local, state, or federal level. Does FEMA have access and the power to deploy needed resources? Were the resources available? Were there any real plans? I hope the media and our citizens make all of them squirm until these questions are answered. The next disaster might be where you live.

Our country has always been at its best when the citizenry stands up and demands change...that the law of the land has become complacent with the status quo. A generation chose to become politically active, go to jail, and protest in creative ways to end our involvement in Vietnam. When women stood up in masse, we were finally given the right to vote and some legal rights. Another generation of women demanded equal opportunities so that their options included more than being a secretary, nurse, or teacher. The civil rights movement altered the futures for all people of color. We fail as a nation when we become greedy and self absorbed. It is not lack of prayer or "In God We Trust" on our money. Our government's job is to be stewards of our economy, our laws, our environment, our safety. It is not their place to determine faith. It should be blind to our sex, race, and religion..or lack of. It is our job to make sure they are.

The Founding Fathers lived in a world of white Christian men. They created a government using the world as they knew it to frame it. I'm sure they never imagined a government charged with providing religious freedom to such a diverse religious population. They were concerned that government not be able to dictate how they chose to worship. All it would take to settle this, is to put Catholic, Muslim, Hindu, Taoist, or Judaic symbols on our courthouses and money. Even the religious right would be demanding absolute separation.

 

I hope you didn't mean that how it sounded. Everyone should be allowed to worship (or not) as they please.

And Zy, good points.

JohnEZ and Slim, if you don't like an honest debate of ideas, that's fine. Don't read it.

 

Please understand that I say what I am about to say with the utmost respect for everyone and their religion (or lack thereof). Faith is a highly personal choice, and I understand that.

I didn't say I didn't like an honest debate of ideas (I love 'em!), I only said I wasn't happy about the ruling. I did not nor am I saying why, mostly because I'm as hard-headed as the next Italian & Irish Catholic (hint!!).

I'm offended because of the fact that it seems like God is not just being excluded, but absolutely prohibited from everything. Gosh darn it, if I wanna pray silently in the middle of my Bio class (to myself) why can't I? Who's gonna stop me? If I'm not preaching it, and I'm not asking everyone else to believe it, last I checked, nobody will, because of the first ammendment.

What truly upsets me is the fact that it was good enough since the 50s. Why does it have to go now? One small, select group complains and it goes? Does this make my arguments less valid than theirs?

This is what I cannot stand. If we are all viewed as equals in the US, with the same rights, then my argument should be just as valid as the guy who doesn't want it in the pledge. And since it *obviously* isn't, I feel the guy who wanted it out got preferential treatment. Since when has this country catered to one specific religious denomination? Last I checked, never. Why are we starting now? We were not imposing a religion on anyone with the "Under God."This has nothing to do with their religious choices.

Just my opinion. I tried, I really tried not to get sucked in. Sorry, guys.

-John

PS. I went to a breakfast with the Veterans of Foreign Wars for all the POWs and MIAs today. And I am very, very pleased to report that they are still reciting the Pledge as we know it--under God!

 

Thanks for clarifying, John. I think there are so many sides to this argument that there isn't a right or wrong way to look at it. Which may seem wishy washy but I don't think it is. You make some good points, and even if I don't entirely agree I can see your point of view.

It would be nice if the people in charge could be trusted to act with integrity and impartiality, but such people are few and far between, in "real" life as well as politics.

Our government is run by human beings, oftentimes extremely flawed ones. So, sometimes judgments go one way and sometimes they go the other. For good reasons and for bad. One can only hope it all comes out even in the wash.

I'm glad we have a site of people who actually care what's going on in the world.

 

Thank you, SBW. You're absolutely right Nobody's opinion is wrong, just different.

I completely agree with what you say above. It really would be nice... shame it just can't happen. :(

Thanks for understanding, SBW

Thanks again,
John

 

I'm not jumping into this fray, I promise, just saying that even though I was against Creationism being taught in Science Class, I am not against my daughter saying "One Nation Under God" proudly to me this week after learning it in Kindergarten. I thought it was very poinient, that they day the Federal Court was calling it unconstitiutional was the same day that my daughter recited it to me in the car on the way home from school.

And, one other thing: I don't think, Josh, that it's such a bad thing, or even a new thing, to have so many different relgions in the world. I don't think that spirituality ever hurt anyone, no matter who they were worshiping, if done for the "right" reasons. See, that's the problem. Spirituality, including Christianity, gets twisted and used by people for evil purposes. Look at Jim Jones. Look at David Koresh. Look at the "Holy Roman Empire" and how they caused the "Dark Ages" and the Inquisision. Look at the prejudice and abuse of the Native Americans because they were not Christians and worshiped an Earth-based Religion.

 

My understanding was that we were guarenteed the freedom to practice religion, and not have the government endorse one form over another. But it seems that a minority want to take away my right to practice what I believe and carry it to rediculous extremes. A little commonsense would go a long ways to peaceful co-existance. [sorry about any spelling errors.]

 

Of course it's impossible to include everyone. The point was that IF the government just chose one thing from a religion other than Christianity to post on every courthouse or piece of money...Christians would be offended and demand separation of church and state.

I am a Christian. I have a very profound faith. I am not offended by prayer, religious symbols, "under God", or nativity scenes in the town square. I personally find it familiar and comfortable. I know that 87% of Americans are Christian. If the U.S. wanted to decide it IS a Christian country run by a Christian government...I could accept that. It would require no sacrifice on my part because I am part of the majority. I love tradition and history. I could leave all of this as is. BUT until they choose to make adherance to a belief in God a requirement for citizenship, our government should not include these words in a pledge that affirms one's patriotism.

I recognize this "feels" wrong in some way to remove God from our pledge. But in 50 years, I've lived through a lot of change. Some of the loss I still mourn and some things ended up making things better. At times, I'm glad change is a process that occurs slowly and I'm getting old.

 

"facetious
not serious about a serious subject, in an attempt to be amusing or to appear clever" -Cambridge Dictionary
"tongue-in-cheek advice" -The American Heritage Dictionary

 

Actually, if it were "a god" it would be small-g. Putting the big-G makes it a proper name; the title of specific person, place, thing, or event. "God" with the big-G is "The God", grammatically speaking "The One Named God". "One nation under god..." would be far more correct.

Also, having God in the Pledge ignores that this is also a nation of Agnostics, Athiests, Deists, Realists, and other even stranger non-deity-based belief systems. How do they craft a Pledge that is fair to them as well?

 

Indeed, but Realists, Deists, and Athiests might, and some do. The Pledge by including God, excludes the Athiest. And Athiests have laid down their life to support this country, so they should be able to pledge alligience to it.