crap… just typed this up but ran into posting trouble
No new insight to add, and can’t really spend much time here… I’m really excited about this ruling even though I have very little faith in the supreme court to uphold it.
That said… was just watching cnbc… Falwell (Yeah i know… of course he’s a jackass) said something to the tune of “under this ruling, the declaration of independence and the constitution itself would be considered unconstitutional”… the DoI thing has been dealt with sufficiently in this thread, but the constitution… Am I wrong in remembering that it contains precisely 0 references to God and/or Creator? Again… falwell is a jackass but blatant untruths like that should have at least been countered on the show.
Anyway… i’ll go back to my rejoicing in this – albeit shortlived – period of enlightenment.
WV_Woman, I can understand civil disobedience in a case where something is clearly unjust, but how is omitting “under God” or stopping the Pledge of Allegiance from being school-led harm anyone? Kids can still recite it voluntarily if they care that much, just like prayer.
I think the easiest way to end this whole thing is to switch to a republic with a permanent prime minister named God who can rule by decree. But the legislature is still there for most things. That way, we can say under God with no problems.
I’m disappointed in both of you. WV_Woman, you (should) know this is not the case. I understand that there is a bitterness sometimes because things change, and it’s not possible to view America as the kind of Christian society it was 50 years ago. However, it was NOT set up to be one, and I will not be argued into it. I say this as an every-Sunday Christian. The point of America is not to be Christian, but to get the government out of people’s hair.
It is NOT a valid argument to say that this is part of a progression that will automatically result in overt religious oppression. You don’t actually know this. This IS the correct decision, and I’ve been expecting it for many years.
MEBuckner, you DO know that what you said is not true. It simply is not a fact, and you know it. I know that what WV said was ridiculous, but especially as a moderator, I would expect you to not just fire back with pure emotion.
—The atheists will not be happy until even the simple mention of God is illegal … even in the privacy of your own home.—
This is ridiculous. In fact, I cannot help but think that it is willfully dishonest, because I hear it so much, and yet it has so little basis in reality.
No one is outlawing a mention of god by anyone. No one’s rights to stick their fingers in their ears and shout “god god god god” until they turn blue is being taken away. ALL that is being suggested is that the GOVERNMENT not lead people in a obligatory prayer everyday, or that citizens are made to feel like their government considers them to be second class because the official pledge is reserved for only those special citizens who believe in gods.
America was, is, and shall be, a religious nation. Since the athiests are under no obligation to say ‘God’, I see this whole affair as yet another petty attempt by a minority to dictate to the majority. What the hell is point of being a ‘democracy’ if the majority does not call the shots? So the ‘rights’ of a handfull of athiests trump the rights of religious people? BS.
BTW, the argument I see the athiests make is total bunk. The US Government was FAR more religious in the past, but no theocracy has emerged.
Athiests may as well enjoy this little left-coast victory; Even the Democrats are outraged by this latest incident of judicial activism, and you can be sure that ruling will not last long.
Then we’d better give the Louisianna Purchase back to the French real quick-like! We can’t have our Federal government running around buying territory from foreign nations in flagrant disregard for the 10th Amendment.
Wrong, bucko- this country isn’t, and never will be as long as I have a vote, a theocracy. If you want to live in a theocracy move your ass to Aphganistan.
One trait I’ve unfortunately noticed on the part of all-too-many devout Christians is a tendency to “project” the modus operandi of their church onto other groups.
A Christian church encourages its members to go forth and convert others and bring those new converts into the fold, and so this same church will accuse gay rights groups of going out and trying to “convert” poor innocent heterosexuals to the Gay Lifestyle [TM].
A Christian church feels that non-Christian viewpoints are dangerous to their faith, as they might woo Christians away from the flock, and so this same church accuses atheists of attempting to silence all non-atheist beliefs.
A Christian church baptizes its babies in boiling tar, and so this same … no, wait … Christian churches don’t do that. I was thinking of Klingons. Never mind.
—I see this whole affair as yet another petty attempt by a minority to dictate to the majority.—
I cannot understand how people can wrap this issue around their minds to come out with such a dishonest take on the situation.
Tell me: what rights have “the majority” lost in this case? What could an individual do then that they cannot do now?
Can they no longer say the pledge? No… they can say it as much as they want to
Can they no longer say it formally every day? No… nothing is stopping them.
Can they say it in classrooms? Yes…
The only thing that this decision would change is that the government is not leading the religious-themed pledge. When the government stops forcing its citizens to participate in something, how can any sane person complain that they personally have had their rights taken away, or that they are being dictated to? That is the exact OPPOSITE of what is happening: a particular dictate has been removed, not added!
I wonder if you even know how absurd that sounds. Or how little basis it has in reality. Real ammusing how you label the group pushing for less interference with people’s religious beliefs to supposedly be pushing for more interference. Can you see how little sense that makes?
Cardinal: I reserve the right to respond to absurdity with absurdity.
The entire Bill of Rights is an attempt to dictate to the majority on behalf of the minority.
Here is the Pledge of Allegiance to the Christian Flag:
As that page notes, there seem to be several versions of this pledge in existence. Christians are welcome to recite whichever version of this pledge they so desire, in their homes, their churches, their private schools, their places of business, or in the public schools (as individuals or unofficial groups) during whatever times students are free to engage in general conversation (at lunch, during breaks between classes, and usually during homeroom when there are no general announcements being made). Under the “equal time” laws, public school students may meet after school in Bible clubs, and they could recite pledges of allegiance to the Christian flag then as well.
– Thomas Jefferson, third US President and principal author of the Declaration of Independence
– James Madison, the Father of the US Constitution and principal author of the First Amendment (and the rest of the Bill of Rights)
– Thomas Paine
– George H. W. Bush, 41st President, and father of the current president
– Newdow v U.S. Congress (Today’s court case)
Hmmm, …
Perhaps bin Laden, the remnants of the Taleban and al Qaeda (CNN spelling) needn’t continue with their fundamentalist religious war against the “Great Satan.” The religious fundamentalists, naive politicians and a lazy, ignorant American public will tear apart the USA on their own.
If an atheist, agnostic, or polytheist takes the pledge without saying “under God”, they have not taken the official pledge of allegiance. If they do say “under God”, they are knowingly making a statement that they believe to be false. I don’t see how the rights of the monotheists extend to the point of forcing everyone else into an ethical dilemma. Hell, even christianity takes a dim view of swearing false oaths. Surely it’s unethical of these religious folk to force everyone else to either swear falsely, or forgo pledging allegiance entirely ?
The words “under God” are not essential to the pledge, except by law, but they do ensure that only christians and other monotheists can take the oath honestly. IMHO, that’s a heck of a special privilege.
Duckster: What you give as a direct quote from Thomas Jefferson is actually a summary written by someone else of his beliefs on religious liberty and the separation of church and state from this web page at the University of Virginia; the page gives a number of actual direct quotations from Jefferson.
“As the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion; . . .” - Article XI, Treaty of peace and friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli of Barbary (Treaty of Tripoli), unanimously approved by Congress and signed by President John Adams, 1797
Simple: forcing someone to take the pledge is ripe for abuse by the state. By 1943, states like West Virginia were suspending Jehovah’s Witnesses children for not saying the pledge. It most likely will happen again Also, being isolated and being reegarded suspiciously by other kids for not saying the pledge is known to have harmful social effects.
Even the conservative Supreme Court are shying away from favoring laws that has the great potential for outrageous abuse. They even held Miranda constitutional, not because they like it, but because they declared that it is the best method to prevent unlawful arrest.
<anecdote>
I was riding my bike the other day. Had to replace a broken spoke, true the rim and by the time I went out for a test-ride, it was like 1:00 AM.
<glurge>
I was skimming by the detritus of the road and out of the corner of my eye I thought I’d shot by an American Flag. Looped around, and under the stars and God there was an American flag, the plastic indented many times from being run over.
</glurge>
I picked it up, and by Krishna it was a big (6" x 8") magnet! It’s on my fridge now, and by Zeus no Executive Order will take it from me.
<rant>
How many post-911 car flags are littered on the road? Or ride, tattered on the SUV’s and antennae.
I thought the pledge of Allegiance sucked when I was in elementary school - and I was 7 when watching the Watergate hearings. Do any of you pledge allegiance every day in some hand-over-heart ceremony? Maybe some of you did the Nuclear bomb drills, where you were protected from annhilation by crouching down and putting your heads between your legs?
US Senators have admitted they did not fully read or realize the powers granted in the Patroit Act. The powers requested most recently have far reaching effects than California Justices.
There’s a mid-term election coming up in November. Clearly, the liberals have declared war on your rights to proclaim your liberties are granted ‘under god’.
Next they will outlaw your right to have flags on your car. There are some who would suggest you are not a patriot if your flag flies, freely…into the wind.
</rant>
Squink, you continue to amaze me with some really well stated objections. If I wish to cite you, how would I do so: as “Squink”? Reffer people to this thread?
