The contrived reasons or the inequitable circumstances of a noble goal should not negate the desirability of its pursuit. In fact who’s to say that the incantation of “liberty and justice for all” didn’t bring about a “jump Jim Crow” and free the Japanese from the pen.
Further…no matter that the phrase “under God” was inserted into the Pledge of Allegiance in order to nawh, nawh, nawh, Godless communism. The concept of a God, a prime mover, a first cause, is a semantical construction that is necessary and fundamental to the idea that we humans can have worthy goals. Thank God, be he secular or non-.
Definitions…
*** incantationNOUN: 1. Ritual recitation of verbal charms or spells to produce a magic effect. 2a. A formula used in ritual recitation; a verbal charm or spell. b.* A conventionalized utterance repeated without thought or aptness; a formula: the pious incantations of the administration.*
** * re-** Indicates 7. * Contrary. in the sense of negating. as in * repeal.
THE AMERICAN HERITAGE DICTIONARY OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE
How can a god or the God be secular? It’s religious. So’s the concept of a “prime mover”. If I were an American atheist I would be rather annoyed at having to say that.
Yes, and the two frequently overlap. The U.S., for instance, is a democratic republic - a nation that is governed by the rule of law (republic) and that uses a popular vote to select who determines and enforces those laws (democracy).
These types of differences may confuse those who think that any type of pledge of allegiance is “fascist”. It’s not. It’s nationalistic and this is an important difference. Fascist countries are by their very nature nationalistic. However, Communists are also nationalistic. Republics and monarchies are also frequently nationalistic.
We are a democratic republic with a strong nationalism streak. So, again, the pledge is neither anti- nor un-American.
This is utter nonsense. There are millions of people in the world who have quite lofty goals, ideals, ethics, and dreams who do not believe that there is any such “construction” as a god, much less the capitalized Christian God rammed into the Pledge.
However, given your clear misunderstanding of language, based on the fact that you can even quote the dictionary and still misunderstand the meaning of a word, I doubt that this discussion will be very profitable.
Thank you for reminding me of the importance of the flag. I was alive during WWII and know how much it meant to people. Can’t expect the young folks today to understand, they have not faced the problems of life, or know how precious freedom really is. I hope they don’t have to go through what we did, but if they do, perhaps they will find solace in the belief of God also.
I always thought the pledge had the words “under God” added due to the Red Scare. (I believe that is a reputable source).
And my big problem with the pledge (and the reason I don’t participate in it) is that when one recites it they are pledging themselves to the present administration in power in the United States. There is little or no mention of standing behind the origional ideals that America was based upon.
To the Republic: present government
One nation Under God: we have this thing called "seperation of church and state, but I won’t go there for now
Indivisible: Sure, we don’t want it to split. We’ve got that covered.
Anyway, my point is that there is little in the pledge that talks about the founding ideals and that very little keeps it from simply being a long “Heil (insert ruling group here)”
How can a god or the God be secular? It’s religious. So’s the concept of a “prime mover”. If I were an American atheist I would be rather annoyed at having to say that. - jjimm
I didn’t make the rules jjimm, that’s just the way we think…
Something from nothing - that’s God
That which is created has a purpose - that’s Socrates
God is secular. Religion is just a argument about the purpose.
"This is utter nonsense…
…However, given your clear misunderstanding of language, based on the fact that you can even quote the dictionary and still misunderstand the meaning of a word, I doubt that this discussion will be very profitable." - tomndebb
Fine, tomndebb, if you please you can take your ball and go home. But a debate is not a pick-up game of football. There is no ball, you can only go home.
The word you were looking for was recant. - tomndebb
It might be the way you think, but it’s certainly not the way I do. I don’t believe in God. Ergo, for me, there is no God. Thus, to me, the “under God” comment is religious - and therefore irrelevant.
You didn’t make “the rules”? Which “rules” are these? Who is “we”?
Don’t suppose I can tell the whole story, but back in the 40’s we had this really big war. Several dictators got together and tried to conquer the world, including the United States. At first it was pretty dark, we were outgunned in almost everything but faith in ourselves and our symbols – the pledge, the flag, etc. The enemy had a more advanced technology, better tanks, airplanes, better trained troops and the Navy of one of them was larger by far compared to ours. We prayed a lot, we saluted the flag a lot and changed the way we saluted twice. Millions (15) of Americans want to war and millions more stayed a home to build the weapons of war. It wasn’t easy, it cost 900,000+ American lives to win that war and insure our liberties and freedoms. The same freedoms the people posting here enjoy, those that died gave you the right it laugh and make fun of the pledge, to ridicule others belief in God and generally show disrespect for our country. But, you know I wouldn’t have it any other way. So have your fun.
Nope. As long as you insist on imposing on words meanings that they do not actually convey, I will continue to point out your errors.
You have now insisted on two separate sets of meanings for two different concepts that you have no business asserting (in that your contrived meanings are different than the accepted meanings used by all the other speakers of English). Since you appear to be doing this for the sole purpose of claiming that you are right and others are wrong, while bringing no value to the discussion, I will not “go home” at this particular time.
You and Humpty Dumpty may enjoy each other’s company, but your assertions, here, are without any basis in fact.
I asked for proof, not bovine output, lekatt. Let’s address your so-called proof.
Irrelevant to the issue at hand.
I take it your entire point is that there were people ensuring freedom. Saluting the flag or not saluting it had nothing to do with the actual outcome of that particular war.
You obviously do not understand the concept of proof.
Says who? Cite?
That which is created has a purpose - that’s Socrates.
1.) What proof do you have that the universe was “created?”
2.) Many things are created by humans which have no purpose.
I’m sure you think this is quite clever but it really isn’t, following, as it does, from a set of logical fallacies.
Hey, lekatt! You got any proof that I’ve been showing disrespect to my country? And don’t give me any more of that incoherent posting. This time I want specifics.
To say that WWII, or any major historical event, is irrelevant to the issues at hand is beyond my comprehension to understand. I will just leave it at that.
That just proves you really don’t understand what proof is, lekatt. The issue at hand is “is the pledge of allegiance including the phrase ‘one nation under God,’ unconstitutional.”
Whatever wars have been fought and won in the past have exactly jack to do with that.
I await your apology, your retraction, of your assertion that I have been showing disrespect to my country.
I wouldn’t hold my breath, fanatical atheists attack the foundation upon which this country was founded, and made great, the belief in a Loving God. Go tear up some money, it has “God” printed on it also. Better yet, file some law suits to not allow money in schools. The separation on church and state has been so distorted to accommode the atheists, you might even win. Guess the judicial system forgot there are other people living in this country.