# God save America **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 22, 2003, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-save-america/220452 "2003-12-22T14:27:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![JS\_Princeton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/57b2e6/32.png) [@JS\_Princeton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JS_Princeton)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2003, 2:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-save-america/220452/61 "2003-12-25T02:46:10Z")
Dear bizzwire, > [@](#): > > They taught Christian Identity in your school? Man, that is f\*\*\*ed up. Hmm, don’t think I even remotely wrote that, but then, it’s getting pretty clear that certain people aren’t interested so much in what I’m writing as what they _think_ I’m writing. > [@](#): > > Oh, I see, you are drawing parallels where none exist: Kids in your school who were Christians were white. In my school? Huh? Actually, most of the kids who were called themselves Christians in the last school I attended were Asian, but that doesn’t say one thing about the subject at hand. I must admit that I fail to follow your constructions, and if you think that the syllogism you are setting up is indicative of my argument then you certainly are right to be outraged. However, it is a straw man argument par excellance because that is NOT a good illustration of what I’m writing and is instead something you have created to destroy. You enjoy the undistributed middle as much as jklann it seems, but I didn’t do that, _you_ did in your incorrect redaction. Thanks. > [@](#): > > Mr Goose, meet Mr. Gander. Mr. Pot, I’d like to introduce you to Ms. Kettle. Please quote a fallacy I explicitly indicated as I have done for your post, and then I’ll believe you have something meaningful to add to the conversation. As it is, it seems you are full of a mixture of breathable gases whose molecules have a high average kinetic energy. ---
**Author:** ![JS\_Princeton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/57b2e6/32.png) [@JS\_Princeton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JS_Princeton)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2003, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-save-america/220452/62 "2003-12-25T03:00:39Z")
It occurs to me on rereading the last few posts that bizzman incorrectly thought I was writing about a concrete “school” as opposed to a philosophical “school”. I am not writing about any school I attended. I am instead referring to a general line of thinking that is espoused by not a majority but a fair fraction of conservative Christians in the United States. These people whom I referring to might be said to belong to a “school” of thought which would embrace the tee-shirts, the Chick Tracts, the firebrand mythology that charcterizes many fundamentalist, evangelical idealizations of Christianity. It is these very groups which lend themselves to comparison to such whacko ideas as Christian Identity religions. They, interestingly enough, have been members of both political parties in the US up until a few years ago, but now are gravitating mostly toward the Republicans. It is simply my contention that the “God Bless America” that continues to feature in presidential speeches is still in deference to these folks. As it is, there are quite a few Catholics, for example, who are also jumping on board this bandwagon that used to be the exclusive domain of Protestant evangelicals. Let me submit that in upcoming years we will begin to see a consolidation of political groups who are conservative religious, and it seems to me that it is expressly such groups that will insist ceremonial Deism in the form of “In God We Trust” or “One Nation Under God” should be maintained so that they can keep their perceived ideological hold on the country (and keep it safe from the Godless or those in league with the Devil). The secular state is a threat to most who listen for the “God Bless America” at the end of a President’s speech. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2003, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-save-america/220452/63 "2003-12-25T03:09:24Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by JS Princeton \* > \*\*… Let me submit that in upcoming years we will begin to see a consolidation of political groups who are conservative religious, and it seems to me that it is expressly such groups that will insist ceremonial Deism in the form of “In God We Trust” or “One Nation Under God” should be maintained so that they can keep their perceived ideological hold on the country (and keep it safe from the Godless or those in league with the Devil). The secular state is a threat to most who listen for the “God Bless America” at the end of a President’s speech. \*\* And, although I think Roosevelt was a fine president and what was needed at the time I’ll never forgive him for tacking “So help me God.” on the end of the Presidential Oath. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2003, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-save-america/220452/64 "2003-12-25T04:42:34Z")
Y’know, can’t God make up his own mind? I mean, like, y’know, whether you ask God to bless something or not, isn’t He going to decide on his own? Is God some kind of obedient lapdog or something? So what’s the beef if anyone asks? If God doesn’t exist, or if God is going to make up his own mind, what’s the damage to you? Y’know. ---
**Author:** ![bizzwire](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/958977/32.png) [@bizzwire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bizzwire)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2003, 5:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-save-america/220452/65 "2003-12-25T05:45:14Z")
**JSP** You are indeed correct; I thought you were talking of a specific school; the jump from there to Christian identity did baffle me. My stoopid. ---
**Author:** ![JS\_Princeton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/57b2e6/32.png) [@JS\_Princeton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JS_Princeton)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2003, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-save-america/220452/66 "2003-12-25T14:24:47Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by David Simmons \* > \*\*And, although I think Roosevelt was a fine president and what was needed at the time I’ll never forgive him for tacking “So help me God.” on the end of the Presidential Oath. \*\* Wasn’t that Washington who did that? ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2003, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-save-america/220452/67 "2003-12-25T15:19:56Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by JS Princeton \* > \*\*Wasn’t that Washington who did that? \*\* Possibly. However, from my readings of various biographies of Washington, he wasn’t as pious as the Focus on The Family website makes him out to be. And if it was Washington it is also a point against him in my book. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2003, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-save-america/220452/68 "2003-12-25T15:37:26Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by David Simmons \* > \*\*Possibly. However, from my readings of various biographies of Washington, he wasn’t as pious as the Focus on The Family website makes him out to be. > > And if it was Washington it is also a point against him in my book. \*\* You owe the freedoms you enjoy to George, is that a point for him? Why would you hate God so much, what has He done to you? Love ---
**Author:** ![Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freddy_the_Pig)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2003, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-save-america/220452/69 "2003-12-25T17:37:07Z")
All right, **JS** , to make sure I don’t read things into your writing that you didn’t mean to imply, please expand upon the following points: > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by JS Princeton \* > \*\*Why doesn’t GWB end his updates on military progress in Iraq with “Allah bless Iraq”? > > I’ll tell you why. It’ll offend a huge constituency that believes that the US is the only place the president should be asking for a blessing.\*\* Do you believe that George W. Bush would end his reports on Iraq with “Allah bless Iraq” if it were not for fear of offending this huge constituency? Is this huge constituency wrong–that is, do you personally believe that it would be appropriate for the president to single out other nations for divine blessing, and to reference God by the name used in a religion which he does not practice when doing so? \*\* > [@](#): > > It’s all politics to appease narrow-gate theologians that believe that only Conservative Christians who speak English in America are on God’s side.\*\* Anyone who believes that “only Conservative Christians who speak English in America are on God’s side” is both a moron and a bigot. What percentage of conservative Christians would you estimate fall into this category? Do you believe that these are the only people that respond favorably to the inclusion of God Bless America at the end of a speech? When Democratic presidents like Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton say God Bless America, should this also be construed as an attempt to appease this group?\*\* > [@](#): > > Why do you think the US Churches send out so many missionaries? There is a large number of Americans that believe the USA is the best and God, being the best, must have a special place in his White Old Man’s heart for the good ol’ USA.\*\* Are these two sentences connected? The Catholic Church also sends out a lot of missionaries. Is this wrong? What did you mean by saying that a “large number of Americans” believe that God has a White Old Man’s heart? Do you have any evidence concerning the percentage of Americans who assign racial attributes to a deity? ---
**Author:** ![Major\_Feelgud](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/3be4f8/32.png) [@Major\_Feelgud](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Major_Feelgud)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2003, 7:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-save-america/220452/70 "2003-12-27T07:55:56Z")
The US wasn’t set up as a “secular” state in particular and all this: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” means was that the state wasn’t going to force you to practice a particular type of religion. As a Brit, you should know why. Every time a popish monarch was on the throne the Protestants were massacred, and vice versa. That’s why people had come here so they wouldn’t be killed for their religous views. Hope that answers your question. ---
**Author:** ![Aldebaran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Aldebaran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aldebaran)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2003, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-save-america/220452/71 "2003-12-28T23:17:49Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by bizzwire \* > I know I’m really gonna regret asking this, but > What’s so radically different between > “God Bless America,” and > “In the name of Allah, the Compasionate, the Merciful?” I’m sorry, but first of all I don’t see why you should regret asking this… But next I don’t see the supposed relation between both sentences. Salaam. A ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2003, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-save-america/220452/72 "2003-12-28T23:32:01Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by lekatt \* > **You owe the freedoms you enjoy to George, is that a point for him?** Well, according to Tom Brokaw we owe our freedoms to a mythical entity that he called the greatest generation. That was also highly exaggerated, if not pure bullshit. > [@](#): > > \*\*Why would you hate God so much, what has He done to you? > > Love \*\* I don’t. But the people who insist that I must have a defective moral sense because I don’t believe in the God of the Bible do irritate me if I let myself think about their lousy hides. ---
**Author:** ![Tir\_Tinuviel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@Tir\_Tinuviel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tir_Tinuviel)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2003, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-save-america/220452/73 "2003-12-29T03:30:44Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by TitoBenito \* > \*\*No offense but that is really silly, much sillier than god bless america. \*\* See, this is what I don’t get. How is it sillier? Asking God to Save an entire country, (an amount of which don’t believe in Him, arent sure, or believe in another version of Him/Her/It/Them) or asking God to save His Representative on Earth who you would imagine He’d have a bit more of a vested interest in. The second one makes a lot more sense to me. Mind you, I am interperating “Save” as redeem/deliver, not protect/guard. [sub](Otherwise **Futile Gesture** would have a very good point! :D)[/sub] ---
**Author:** ![Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d07c76/32.png) [@Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Age_Quod_Agis)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2003, 5:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-save-america/220452/74 "2003-12-29T05:18:42Z")
> [@](#): > > _pothead:_ > You may be familiar with the Pledge of Allegiance no longer being required in public schools because it has the word ‘God.’ Wrong. The US Supreme Court ruled that students cannot be punished for refusing to recite the Pledge of Allegiance in [West Virginia St. Bd. of Ed. v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943)](http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=319&invol=624). The Court’s ruling was based on free speech, and not freedom of religion. Said the Court: > [@](#): > > If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein. If there are any circumstances which permit an exception, they do not now occur to us. [citation omitted] > > We think the action of the local authorities in compelling the flag salute and pledge transcends constitutional limitations on their power and invades the sphere of intellect and spirit which it is the purpose of the First Amendment to our Constitution to reserve from all official control. The words “under God” were [added to the Pledge in 1954](http://washingtontimes.com/national/20031014-114239-7289r.htm), eleven years after _West Virginia St. Bd. of Ed. v. Barnette_. Only last year, a 9th Cicruit Court of Appeals panel found that the words “under God” rendered any officially led recitation of the Pledge in public schools unconstitutional. The Supreme Court quickly granted certiorari and stayed the effect of the 9th Circuit’s ruling. Thus, there are no US Court opinions with the effect of law that currently hold the Pledge is impermissible because of the word “God.” > [@](#): > > _JS Princeton:_ > God bless the USA and nobody else! So your two cites are a t-shirt and a review of a Chris Rock movie? Forgive me if I’m not blown over by the sheer weight of your authorities. ---
**Author:** ![Will\_Repair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/a698b9/32.png) [@Will\_Repair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Will_Repair)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2003, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-save-america/220452/75 "2003-12-30T01:21:37Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Bryan Ekers \* > \*\* …you ask God to bless something…He going to decide on his own?_\* _ **As if** _ God forgot and needed reminding? And why would God be concerned about nations instead of souls? _ **As if** _ God wears a Cubs baseball cap? ---
**Author:** ![pothead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ecb155/32.png) [@pothead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pothead)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2003, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-save-america/220452/76 "2003-12-30T03:54:06Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Age Quod Agis \* > \*\*Only last year, a 9th Cicruit Court of Appeals panel found that the words “under God” rendered any officially led recitation of the Pledge in public schools unconstitutional. The Supreme Court quickly granted certiorari and stayed the effect of the 9th Circuit’s ruling. > > Thus, there are no US Court opinions with the effect of law that currently hold the Pledge is impermissible because of the word “God.”\*\* The 9th Circuit ruling was what I was referring to. I’m not old enough to remember nor have sufficient knowledge of legal history to know of the earlier case you cited. Even if it the Pledge isn’t mandated as per the 1943 ruling, I agree with the 9th Circuit’s decision that a official recitation is unconstituional. Since its still under review, and no judgement has been declared, I’ll leave it alone for the time being. Do you have any opinions or responses to my other points? ---
**Author:** ![Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d07c76/32.png) [@Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Age_Quod_Agis)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2003, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-save-america/220452/77 "2003-12-30T21:45:45Z")
> [@](#): > > _pothead:_ > The 9th Circuit ruling was what I was referring to. If that’s true, then you did a poor job of referring to it. The 9th Circuit ruling never affected areas outside of the 9th Circuit, and it did not have any affect at the time you wrote your post, so your reference was wrong in almost every respect. > [@](#): > > _pothead:_ > Do you have any opinions or responses to my other points? Well, since you asked. > [@](#): > > _pothead:_ > It may be true that the President’s are making use of their First Amendment right to the freedom of religion and speech, and although its acceptable as an argument, its a bit shaky, since during an official press conference or speech, the President is an extension of the executive branch of the U.S. government, not an individual. No, the President doesn’t become the embodiment of the Executive branch merely by being in public. Further, if you look at the words of the 1st Amendment, it talks about _Congress_ making “_laws_ respecting an establishment of religion.” The President simply saying “God bless America” is not equivalent to Congress making a law respecting an establishment of religion. > [@](#): > > _pothead:_ > U.S. Treasury notes and coins are laden with the word ‘God.’ When I asked my history teacher, she responded that one doesn’t have to use Treasury notes. While I could surely use one of my many credit cards or checks without ever touching a dollar bill, the fact remains that the U.S. Department of the Treasury issues notes with a flagrant use of the word ‘God.’ “Flagrant use of the word ‘God’”? That implies that there’s something wrong with it. Your history teacher’s explanation is pretty simplistic, too. Phrases like “In God We Trust” have been found constitutional based on a doctrine called “cermonial deism.” In many decisions, the Supreme Court has used this phrase to refer to practices that appear at first glance to be religious, but are “so conventional and uncontroversial as to be constitutional.” For example, every President since George Washington has asked Congress to declare Thanksgiving to be a day of national celebration and prayer; every Congress since the first in our nation’s history has opened with an invocation or prayer delivered by a chaplain employed by the Legislature; and the Supreme Court opens each term with the bailiff saying “God save the United States and this Honorable Court.” Similarly, in _Lynch v. Donnelly_, 465 U.S. 668 (1984), Supreme Court Justice O’Connor used the printing of “In God We Trust” on our national currency as an example of ceremonial deism that could not be reasonably perceived as government endorsement of religion. Said Justice O’Connor: > [@](#): > > Those government acknowledgments of religion serve, in the only ways reasonably possible in our culture, the legitimate secular purposes of solemnizing public occasions, expressing confidence in the future, and encouraging the recognition of what is worthy of appreciation in society. For that reason, and because of their history and ubiquity, those practices are not understood as conveying government approval of particular religious beliefs. Id. at 693 (O’Connor, J., concurring). _See also County of Allegheny v. ACLU_, 492 U.S. 573, 603-04 (1989) (Justice O’Connor again expressed belief that national motto posed no Establishment Clause problems). Even Justice Brennan, one of the Supreme Court’s stongest adherents of strict separation of church and state, thought that the national motto (“In God We Trust”) was ok. Said Justice Brennan: > [@](#): > > [S]uch practices as the designation of “In God We Trust” as our national motto, or the references to God contained in the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag can best be understood … as a form of “ceremonial deism” protected from Establishment Clause scrutiny chiefly because they have lost through rote repetition any significant religious content. Moreover, those references are uniquely suited to serve such wholly secular purposes as solemnizing public occasions, or inspiring commitment to meet some national challenge in a manner that simply could not be fully served in our culture if government were limited to purely nonreligious phrases. The practices by which the government has long acknowledged religion are therefore probably necessary to serve certain secular functions, and that necessity, coupled with their long history, gives those practices an essentially secular meaning. Id. at 716-17 (Brennan, J., dissenting) (citations omitted). See also Abington v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203, 303 (1963) (Justice Brennan opined that the national motto was “so deeply interwoven into the fabric of our civil polity that its present use may well not present that type of involvement which the First Amendment prohibits”). That was probably a bit long, but I hope it helps. Anyway, welcome, and I’d encourage you to keep challenging your teachers. ---
**Author:** ![Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d07c76/32.png) [@Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Age_Quod_Agis)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2003, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-save-america/220452/78 "2003-12-30T21:48:30Z")
By “welcome,” I meant “welcome to the SDMB.” ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2003, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-save-america/220452/79 "2003-12-30T22:03:30Z")
Back to the OP, they say “God bless America” because it’s politically efficacious to pander to the majority who believe in sky-magicians. ---
**Author:** ![pothead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ecb155/32.png) [@pothead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pothead)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2003, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-save-america/220452/80 "2003-12-30T22:51:57Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Age Quod Agis \* > **If that’s true, then you did a poor job of referring to it.** Touché. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Age Quod Agis \* > **No, the President doesn’t become the embodiment of the Executive branch merely by being in public. Further, if you look at the words of the 1st Amendment, it talks about _Congress_ making “_laws_ respecting an establishment of religion.” The President simply saying “God bless America” is not equivalent to Congress making a law respecting an establishment of religion.** I wasn’t referring to the President being merely in public and having a word with a woman on the street, but when he is acting in the official capacity of the Executive branch, he is no longer simply exerting his own opinions. The President is meant to be the singular symbolic embodiment of the nation. When he signs a treaty, speaks to diplomats, goes to war, he does not do so because his fortune teller told him to. He does it because its his duty and he does it because thats what his electorate demands of him. And as the ultimate representative of the people (disputable but thats another thread) shouldn’t he attempt to be as unbiased while acting in an official capacity? Shouldn’t other government officials and institutions act in the same manner as well? > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Age Quod Agis \* > **"Flagrant use of the word ‘God’"? That implies that there’s something wrong with it.** There isn’t? The use of the word “God” proposes a state sponsored religion. Since its not specified which religion, I’ll assume its an arbitrary creation of the U.S. Federal government. The provisions of the First Amendment are fulfilled but the Constitution does not explicitly give such powers to the government. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Age Quod Agis \* > **Your history teacher’s explanation is pretty simplistic, too. Phrases like “In God We Trust” have been found constitutional based on a doctrine called “cermonial deism.” In many decisions, the Supreme Court has used this phrase to refer to practices that appear at first glance to be religious, but are “so conventional and uncontroversial as to be constitutional.”** While it may have become convention and uncontroversial (to those you have cited and their peers), it nonetheless carried implications which others may find controversial and even unconstitutional. By having government documents carry the word “God” how is religion _not_ being sponsored? Considering the overwhelming presence of white Christians in the U.S., those of other ethnicities and religions can feel alienated when faced with a word strongly associated with the majority white Christian population. While God is the same as Allah or YHVH, its used more often to mean God in the Christian sense than any other. Considering the presence of the word “under God” in the Pledge has prompted the Supreme Court to look at whether an official recitation is unconstitutional, why isn’t the same scrutiny being put on the other examples? If ceremonial deism does hold a candle, shouldn’t the 9th Circuit have used it as a precedent and be done with it? > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Age Quod Agis \* > \*\*That was probably a bit long, but I hope it helps. Anyway, welcome, and I’d encourage you to keep challenging your teachers. \*\* Thanks. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-save-america/220452.md?page=3)