I Pledge Allegiance to Bugs Bunny and the United States of America!

My question is Simple. What does it matter which God you worship? You may worship no God at all? Weather you worship Bugs Bunny, Buddha, Jesus Christ, or no God and you just try to live an honest lifestyle. What does it matter whether or not you say the pledge of Allegiance with GOD in it or not?

And WTF is the Supreme court going to do? Say no more Pledge to be said in public schools?

Is there more news on the pledge thing, then?

It doesn’t matter, unless you’re a teacher leading a class in the saying of the pledge. If you are, however, you’re a representative of the state and you’re advancing a religion. See first amendment.

Say no more pledge with the words ‘under god’ in public schools . Pledge can be changed, not used, etc.

Simple, huh?

Well, I belive the pledge is not a mandatory ceremony anymore, so no one can make you recite it.

As for the ‘under God’ clause, why don’t we replace that with ‘under Allah’ or perhaps ‘under the mother goddess’, or how about ‘under buddha’, and we’ll see how the christian right reacts :wink:

Basically it boils down to the separation of church and state. Some people contend that this this particular clause is state sanctioned theism.

Can’t see what’s so difficult, Phil: being forced to acknowledge a deity is so antithetical to the “America way” that I can hardly think of anything more so.

And of course it’s coercive: how many six year olds do you know who could routinely REFUSE to do what their teacher asks them to do, making a principaled stand that sets them apart from their peers, because they know they have the constitution behind them?

Please. “Let the children claim the First!” What kind of bullshit is that? Makes me think of the tobacco executive upon whose insistance that anyone who doesn’t like secondhand smoke can move away from the smoker, was asked (paraphrasing), “What about infants?” and responded (still paraphrasing), “Well, at a certain point, even infants can crawl.”


Lissener - it’s not that difficult for me to understand. The Op is quasi-sarcasm.
I certainly do not want to jerk anyones knees here. And yes there is new news here .

*“American way” . . .

must perview

Note that the phrase “under God” is a recent addition- the Pledge existed for decades without it, and the USA did quite fine, thankyouverymuch.

How does one “perview”, lissener? :wink:

That can lead to a bunch of other questions. The big one, to me, is “why should kids be compelled to say anything at all?” It’s a tradition, but a silly one if you ask me. Little kids don’t understand what they’re saying or why they’re saying it, and the older ones just do it because they’re supposed to. More specific to the question above, I would ask “if the ‘under god’ part doesn’t matter, why is it in there in the first place?” It wasn’t there until 1948, when it was inserted for political purposes.

If they uphold the 9th circuit ruling, what would probably happen is that those words would be removed from the pledge, and it would be said as it was until 1948. Or schools could stop saying it entirely and spare their students from a waste of 60 seconds. Whichever.

What, you mean with all that whooshing going on? :eek:

Sorry, Kinthalis

I don’t know about other states, but here in Utah they passed legislation requiring elementary students to recite the pledge daily, and ‘encouraging’ (whatever that means legally…) secondary and high school students to do the same.

So yes, many people are being ‘forced’ to recite it. Around here anyway.

Speaking as someone who worships Bugs Bunny, I’d like to say that no wars, pogroms, self-immolations or holocausts have ever occured in his name.

To the best of my knowledge, usually you must pay “perview.”

There’s been an awful lot of anvil-dropping, though.


A Supreme Court holding in 1949 ruled that children cannot be forced to recite it. What that law probably does is require the teacher to lead the students in the pledge.

Of course, I’m not cool with that either. It basically makes it a requirement for a state employee (the teacher) to affirm the existence of a monotheistic deity every morning as a condition of their job.

As for you Bugs Bunny supporters, maybe no wars have been fought in his name, but you’d probably have the PC crowd crying foul on that one, since Bugs has been in so many “racist” cartoons. Bugs Bunny mocked Japanese for having slant-eyes! You’re not a racist are you??!! :eek:

Actually, I think he’s right. But this happens every couple years. Some idiots pass a law requiring kids to say the Pledge while being baptized and taking a written oath to be heterosexual. Millions of taxpayer dollars later, the Supreme Court points them to the relevant rulings. Then stupid parents encourage aforementioned idiots to pass another even more unconstitutional law. Repeat until we all go broke.

Hmmmm. I’d think that anyone with standing could walk into a federal court and immediately get an injunction against that law, with no effort at all. It doesn’t get much more clear than the SCOTUS explicitly saying “hey, don’t do this.” I don’t really see how one could possibly have to litigate this with millions of dollars, it’s open and shut.

You mean like (just as an example) how it’s so clearly a violation of church and state for a judge to slap up a giant stone monument to the ten commandments that it couldn’t possibly result in protracted, mindless litigation and appeals?

Sure anyone could get an injunction. But an injunction isn’t the end of a legal snafu, it’s just the opening salvo. Stupid people can drag things out in court for decades if they’re dedicated enough. And if it’s on someone else’s tab it’s even easier.

Well, there was no SCOTUS holding that said explicitly “it’s unconstitutional to erect a giant stone monument of the decalogue outside your courthouse.” But there is a very specific SCOTUS holding that children cannot be compelled to recite the pledge.

And while the injunction isn’t the end, it will prevent the law from being enforced while any litigation might happen. No matter what arguments are made, what briefs are filed, and what motions are made, there is simply no possible way that any federal court could uphold a law mandating pledge recital, since there is a SCOTUS holding directly on point that says such a law is unconstitutional. A 1L from a fifth tier law school who failed procedure class could win that case with pocket money he picked up from the curbside. You barely even need an advocate at all once you’ve gotten the injunction, because there is absolutely nothing that the state could possibly do that would convince a judge to lift it.

The Supreme Court can’t enforce it’s decisions, that’s why people still try to get away with stuff like this. And I suppose there are parts of the country where they know nobody will complain for one reason or another.