Pledge of Allegiance declared unconstitutional

[I Are Baboon]

Court Declares Pledge Of Allegiance Unconstitutional
2:35 PM EDT,June 26, 2002
By DAVID KRAVETS, The Associated Press

SAN FRANCISCO -- A federal appeals court ruled today that the Pledge of Allegiance is an unconstitutional endorsement of religion and cannot be recited in schools.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a 1954 act of Congress inserting the phrase “under God” after the words “one nation” in the pledge. The court said the phrase violates the so-called Establishment Clause in the Constitution that requires a separation of church and state.

“A profession that we are a nation `under God' is identical, for Establishment Clause purposes, to a profession that we are a nation `under Jesus,' a nation `under Vishnu,' a nation `under Zeus,' or a nation `under no god,' because none of these professions can be neutral with respect to religion,” Judge Alfred T. Goodwin wrote for the three-judge panel.

The court, in the nation's first ruling of its kind, said that when President Eisenhower signed the 1954 legislation, he wrote that “millions of our schoolchildren will daily proclaim in every city and town, every village and rural schoolhouse, the dedication of our nation and our people to the Almighty.”

The court noted that the U.S. Supreme Court has said students cannot hold religious invocations at graduations and cannot be compelled to recite the pledge. But when the pledge is recited in a classroom, a student who objects is confronted with an “unacceptable choice between participating and protesting,” the appeals court said.

“Although students cannot be forced to participate in recitation of the pledge, the school district is nonetheless conveying a message of state endorsement of a religious belief when it requires public school teachers to recite, and lead the recitation of, the current form of the pledge,” the court said.

[Random]

I am really suprised that wasn't done sooner as sensitive everybody is now.

[eric strt6]

works for me

[I Are Baboon]

Originally posted by Random
I am really suprised that wasn't done sooner as sensitive everybody is now.

No kidding. Not sure I agree with the ruling though.

[RideMonkey]

They should change it to "One nation, under science".

[El Jefe]

So change the pledge to "One nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all." Problem solved on the separation of church and state, and kids can still say the pledge. I'll bet most kids these days don't even know it. That's too bad. (too bad kids don't know the pledge. I agree with separation of church and state)

[Damn True]

What a bunch of poop.

Liberals will turn this country into a mass of passionless lumps who stand for and believe in nothing.

[I Are Baboon]

Originally posted by RideMonkey
They should change it to "One nation, under science".

I prefer "One nation, under IRB..."

[kafin8ed]

how bout "one nation on two wheels..." i like the sounda that...

[eric strt6]

Originally posted by Damn True
What a bunch of poop.

Liberals will turn this country into a mass of passionless lumps who stand for and believe in nothing.

Hey thats BS

I believe in the right to either believe or not believe in the diety of my choice. We call the document that guarantees that right the US Constitution and the bill of rights

part of the role of the government is to protect minorities from the oppression of the majority. It is unconscionable to force people to recite a tome that denigrates their beliefs regardless if the majority disagrees.

[I Are Baboon]

Originally posted by eric strt6


Hey thats BS

I believe in the right to either believe or not believe in the diety of my choice. We call the document that guarantees that right the US Constitution and the bill of rights

part of the role of the government is to protect minorities from the oppression of the majority. It is unconscionable to force people to recite a tome that denigrates their beliefs regardless if the majority disagrees.

I agree with that. Hopefully they will ratify the Pledge and not abolish it altogether. It should be used to pledge your allegiance to the USA, not to a god. It'd be a shame to see them eliminate the Pledge entirely.

[Sniper]

why don't we all just live in a bubble, so nobody's feelings ever get hurt again.....

[dirtgirl]

Originally posted by El Jefe
So change the pledge to "One nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all." Problem solved on the separation of church and state, and kids can still say the pledge.

BUT Efl Jefe, that would be TOO simple and make TOO much sense.

Instead, lets just all sit around fighting and arguing with each other so that NO one is happy...

Let me start.


I disagree with anything that anyone of you is thinking. :stupid:


:D

[ibismojo]

Originally posted by Damn True
What a bunch of poop.

Liberals will turn this country into a mass of passionless lumps who stand for and believe in nothing.

hmm...so no religion means no passion eh?

[Damn True]

The right to never be offended is not in the bill of rights.

Maybe I can get the courts to outlaw music, tv shows, and movies that glorify infidelity, promiscuity, drugs, and gang life. That stuff bugs me. Do I also have a right to not be bugged?

Not having the right to let your kid wear a cross around his/her neck is as equal an infringement.

[I Are Baboon]

Originally posted by Damn True


Not having the right to let your kid wear a cross around his/her neck is as equal an infringement.

Who mentioned anything about eliminating the Freedom of Religion?

[Damn True]

Originally posted by ibismojo


hmm...so no religion means no passion eh?

I'm not talking specificly about religion. Moreso the clamping down on your right to say what you believe to be true lest it offend somone.

[Joe Pozer]

Originally posted by dirtgirl


I disagree with anything that anyone of you is thinking. :stupid:


:D

I'm offended by the fact that you disagree with what I'm thinking. I'm suing! :rolleyes:

[eric strt6]

Originally posted by Damn True
The right to never be offended is not in the bill of rights.

Maybe I can get the courts to outlaw music, tv shows, and movies that glorify infidelity, promiscuity, drugs, and gang life. That stuff bugs me. Do I also have a right to not be bugged?

Not having the right to let your kid wear a cross around his/her neck is as equal an infringement.

no you can pray to your god, but it is not ok to force someone else to do the same. I don't care how many crosses or bibles you carry thats your business and it's constitutionally protected and so is someones right to do without any of it.

[Damn True]

Originally posted by I Are Baboon


Who mentioned anything about eliminating the Freedom of Religion?

There was a case about a month ago in So-Cal in which the courts decided that it was a breach of the "separation of church and state" to allow a 12 year old girl to wear a cross around her neck because it offended non-christian children in the class.

Same damn thing.

[M.W.]

Originally posted by Damn True
What a bunch of poop.

Liberals will turn this country into a mass of passionless lumps who stand for and believe in nothing.

Yes, as long as it follows MY opinion, then it's good.

If you change something to accomodate people who aren't ME, then you're an idiot...

Yeah. sure.

[Damn True]

Originally posted by eric strt6


no you can pray to your god, but it is not ok to force someone else to do the same. I don't care how many crosses or bibles you carry thats your business and it's constitutionally protected and so is someones right to do without any of it.

But you have to do so quietly so as not to offend anyone. Which by doing so infringes on the tennants of my faith that state I am supposed to preach the good news and carry the light of Jesus into the darkness of the world.

By disallowing that you are preventing freedom of "religion".

[dirtgirl]

Originally posted by Joe Pozer


I'm offended by the fact that you disagree with what I'm thinking. I'm suing! :rolleyes:

I would file a countersuit against you for raising your eyes toward heaven and thereby violating my religious freedom, but I'm feeling like quite the passionless lump right now.

:monkey:

[M.W.]

Originally posted by Damn True


There was a case about a month ago in So-Cal in which the courts decided that it was a breach of the "separation of church and state" to allow a 12 year old girl to wear a cross around her neck because it offended non-christian children in the class.

Same damn thing.

Well, I know people who aren't allowed to wear their Bad Religion shirts to school. And other people who've been in trouble for drawing pentagrams on binders and such...

[ibismojo]

Originally posted by Damn True
The right to never be offended is not in the bill of rights.

Maybe I can get the courts to outlaw music, tv shows, and movies that glorify infidelity, promiscuity, drugs, and gang life. That stuff bugs me. Do I also have a right to not be bugged?

Not having the right to let your kid wear a cross around his/her neck is as equal an infringement.

no one's infringing on anyone's right to their belief. by having the god word in the pledge, there are those who feel coerced to say something which they don't believe in. that is unconstitutional. and since you want to appeal to as many, you take the god word out. does that mean god is completely obliterated from the country's patrioism and foundations in which it were founded? of course not. it's still printed on money. it still has a role in the armed forces.

[Damn True]

Originally posted by M.W.


Yes, as long as it follows MY opinion, then it's good.

If you change something to accomodate people who aren't ME, then you're an idiot...

Yeah. sure.

That isn't at all what I am saying. It goes far deeper.

[eric strt6]

Originally posted by Damn True


There was a case about a month ago in So-Cal in which the courts decided that it was a breach of the "separation of church and state" to allow a 12 year old girl to wear a cross around her neck because it offended non-christian children in the class.

Same damn thing.

now thats wrong. Government should not show favoritism but let people wear or not wear , pray or not pray with out interference

[Shortbus]

aaaaaaah :rolleyes:

People with TOO much time on their hands and a very limited imagination...

:p

[ibismojo]

Originally posted by Damn True


I'm not talking specificly about religion. Moreso the clamping down on your right to say what you believe to be true lest it offend somone.

ahh...the paradox of our country...a country founded on christianity...yet states freedom of religion...yet asks the citizens of our country to pledge an allegiance to a diety which some may not believe in.

[I Are Baboon]

Originally posted by Damn True


There was a case about a month ago in So-Cal in which the courts decided that it was a breach of the "separation of church and state" to allow a 12 year old girl to wear a cross around her neck because it offended non-christian children in the class.

Same damn thing.

That is rediculous (the story, that is).

It'll be intersting to see what comes of this. Will kids no longer be allowed to say "Under God" if they so choose? I think they should be allowed to express their belief in their faith, but I don't agree with making everyone pledge allegiance to a god.

[Damn True]

Originally posted by ibismojo


no one's infringing on anyone's right to their belief. by having the god word in the pledge, there are those who feel coerced to say something which they don't believe in. that is unconstitutional. and since you want to appeal to as many, you take the god word out. does that mean god is completely obliterated from the country's patrioism and foundations in which it were founded? of course not. it's still printed on money. it still has a role in the armed forces.

Then if you don't dig God, don't say it. But don't try to stop me from proclaiming what I believe.

[eric strt6]

Originally posted by Damn True


But you have to do so quietly so as not to offend anyone. Which by doing so infringes on the tennants of my faith that state I am supposed to preach the good news and carry the light of Jesus into the darkness of the world.

By disallowing that you are preventing freedom of "religion".

go right ahead but I may tell you where to put it if after asking to be left alone you insist on continuing

[I Are Baboon]

Originally posted by M.W.


Yes, as long as it follows MY opinion, then it's good.

If you change something to accomodate people who aren't ME, then you're an idiot...

Yeah. sure.

DT et al should be allowed to express their faith. Don't put words in his mouth like that.

[ibismojo]

Originally posted by Damn True


But you have to do so quietly so as not to offend anyone. Which by doing so infringes on the tennants of my faith that state I am supposed to preach the good news and carry the light of Jesus into the darkness of the world.

By disallowing that you are preventing freedom of "religion".

right...that is your good duty to carry on the light of Jesus...but not the governments. that is what is meant by separation of church and state.

[ibismojo]

Originally posted by Damn True


Then if you don't dig God, don't say it. But don't try to stop me from proclaiming what I believe.

OR

we can take out the word God...and let everyone else who believe in God say God in the allegiance.

[M.W.]

Originally posted by I Are Baboon


DT et al should be allowed to express their faith. Don't put words in his mouth like that.

Others should be allowed to not express a faith that they don't believe in.

[Damn True]

Originally posted by ibismojo


OR

we can take out the word God...and let everyone else who believe in God say God in the allegiance.

If we do that aren't we doing the same thing to the Christians that the court is so pitifully trying to protect the non-Christians from?

("But when the pledge is recited in a classroom, a student who objects is confronted with an “unacceptable choice between participating and protesting,” )

Or is it ok to poop on the Christians?

[I Are Baboon]

Originally posted by M.W.


Others should be allowed to not express a faith that they don't believe in.

No one is arguing that.

[Shortbus]

I don't think we should change the freaking PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE every time a Joe Shmoe gets offended by something in it!!!!!

[Damn True]

Originally posted by M.W.


Others should be allowed to not express a faith that they don't believe in.

Nobody is making the kids say anything.

If you don't want to go to to church sleep late on Sunday.

If you don't want to listen to Howard Stern don't tune your radio to that station.

If you don't want to say God, then don't.

[MtnBikerChk]

I saw a funny bumper sticker this weekend:

"Jesus loves you. Everyone else thinks your an a$$hole."

[dirtgirl]

Originally posted by Damn True


If we do that aren't we doing the same thing to the Christians that the court is so pitifully trying to protect the non-Christians from?

("But when the pledge is recited in a classroom, a student who objects is confronted with an “unacceptable choice between participating and protesting,” )

Or is it ok to poop on the Christians?

Perhaps we should have a multiple choice allegiance to accomodate all religions.

One nation . . .

Under God
Under Jehovah
Under Allah
Under Vishnu
Under Gaia
etc...

[Shortbus]

"Jesus loves you. Everyone else thinks your an a$$hole."

What does it matter what everyone else thinks??? :p

[I Are Baboon]

Originally posted by MtnBikerChk
I saw a funny bumper sticker this weekend:

"Jesus loves you. Everyone else thinks your an a$$hole."

Perhaps they will add that to the pledge. :monkey:

[Damn True]

Originally posted by Shortbus
I don't think we should change the freaking PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE every time a Joe Shmoe gets offended by something in it!!!!!

Here here.

There was a move about 5 years ago to eliminate it altogether because groups of immigrants were offended at their children being asked to pledge allegience to our flag.

What the? You moved here jacka$$. If you still hold an alegience to goonygoogooland you should have stayed there.

[M.W.]

Originally posted by I Are Baboon


No one is arguing that.

By saying that it's wrong to take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance you are.

Say I'm an atheist. Every day I go to school and recite the Pledge of Allegience, and I have to acknowledge the existance of a god that I don't believe exists.

Now say I'm Christian. I go to school and recite the Pledge of Allegience after God has been removed from it. I'm not DENYING the existance of God, I'm just not mentioning God in the Pledge.

[Shortbus]

Perhaps we should have a multiple choice allegiance to accomodate all religions.

WHAT about the NON-religious ones?!!!!

[I Are Baboon]

Originally posted by M.W.


By saying that it's wrong to take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance you are.


Ehhh...I support taking God out of the Pledge. I also support Freedom of Religion.

[ibismojo]

Originally posted by Damn True


If we do that aren't we doing the same thing to the Christians that the court is so pitifully trying to protect the non-Christians from?

("But when the pledge is recited in a classroom, a student who objects is confronted with an “unacceptable choice between participating and protesting,” )

Or is it ok to poop on the Christians?

we're not pooping on the Christians!!!! the problem is that THE GOVERNMENT has an allegiance which recognizes GOD in which some people don't believe in. Ok? So...since there is a SEPARATION between CHURCH and STATE, the allegiance is bogus to begin with because it is "preaching" to those who don't believe in God.

You're arguing, why don't those who don't believe in God just not say God and everything will be all dandy. Well, it would be so easy had there been NO separation between the church and the state. But since the government clearly DEFINES that there IS a separation between the church and the state, it must remain neutral in the whole scheme of religion. So in order for the allegiance to work with this idea....it must take out God. Now you have an allegiance which no longer preaches by the GOVERNMENT, keyword, GOVERNMENT, not Damn True, Not Jesusfreak, not ibismojo. GOVERNMENT. Now those who do believe in God can say God in the allegiance and that would be their right to religion as they so see it.

[Shortbus]

Ehhh...I support taking God out of the Pledge. I also support Freedom of Religion.

So you wanna take religion OUT of the pledge, but still wanna support freedom of religion? So freedom of religion = NO religion????

[Damn True]

Originally posted by M.W.


By saying that it's wrong to take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance you are.

Say I'm an atheist. Every day I go to school and recite the Pledge of Allegience, and I have to acknowledge the existance of a god that I don't believe exists.

Now say I'm Christian. I go to school and recite the Pledge of Allegience after God has been removed from it. I'm not DENYING the existance of God, I'm just not mentioning God in the Pledge.

Your last statement is fundamentally correct. But the overiding theme here is not the pledge of allegience it is the movement to eliminate all expression of faith.

[M.W.]

Originally posted by I Are Baboon


Ehhh...I support taking God out of the Pledge. I also support Freedom of Religion.

Same here. But I don't see how it tramples on anyone's right to freedom of religion by removing God from the Pledge. It just means that Christians are now being treated the same as other religions/atheists/agnostics/whatever. Why do they get THEIR god mentioned in it?

What if I want to say Zeus instead? I think Zeus should be in the Pledge instead of God. By not having Zeus, you're trampling on my freedom of religion!

No, I want to say Pop-Tarts! By not having pop tarts in it, you're taking away my right to say Pop-Tarts!

[MtnBikerChk]

My cat's name is mittens.

[I Are Baboon]

Originally posted by Shortbus
Ehhh...I support taking God out of the Pledge. I also support Freedom of Religion.

So you wanna take religion OUT of the pledge, but still wanna support freedom of religion? So freedom of religion = NO religion????

These are two separate issues. You think the court that made this ruling wants to abolish freedom of religion? Freedom of religion does include no religion, if that is what you so choose.

[Spud]

Interesting - the history of the Pledge indicates that the statement "under God" was only added in the 1950's.....

The history of the Pledge of Allegiance begins in 1892, when a form of the pledge first appeared in a publication. Here are key events in the life of the pledge:

1892: The pledge debuts September 8 in the juvenile periodical The Youth's Companion. It reads: "I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands; one nation indivisible, with liberty and Justic for all.

1924: The words "the flag of the United States of America" are substituted for "my Flag."

1942: The government officially recognizes the Pledge of Allegiance.

1954: At the urging of President Dwight D. Eisenhower, Congress passes legislation that adds the words "under God" to the pledge. The revised pledge reads: "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

Source: Encyclopedia Britannica Inc.

[El Jefe]

There is a big difference between a personal expression of religious belief and the government (schools being part of said government) leading a ceremony that includes an overt reference to a religious figure.

Congress inserted the phrase "under God" into the Pledge in 1954. Take the phrase back out, and then express your personal beliefs how you wish. Wear your crosses, wear your pentagrams, wear an "Atheist and Proud" hat.....whatever floats your religious (or non-religious) boat.

[Shortbus]

No, I want to say Pop-Tarts! By not having pop tarts in it, you're taking away my right to say Pop-Tarts!

The pledge was WRITTEN in a time when religion still had "SOME" important role in most people's lives... It would be an insult to history alone to want to change the pledge to accomodate 21st century "beliefs" (or NON beliefs)

EDIT: b4 i get flamed i stand corrected :p

[Spud]

Originally posted by MtnBikerChk
My cat's name is mittens.

Isn't mittens plural, like a pair of cats. :rolleyes: Besides, dogs rule.

;)

[Spud]

Originally posted by Shortbus
No, I want to say Pop-Tarts! By not having pop tarts in it, you're taking away my right to say Pop-Tarts!

The pledge was WRITTEN in a time when religion still had "SOME" important role in most people's lives... It would be an insult to history alone to want to change the pledge to accomodate 21st century "beliefs" (or NON beliefs)

Wrongo, we added "under god" to the existing pledge during the 1950's.

[Shortbus]

This is all going TOO fast for me :rolleyes: :p

[The Toninator]

Originally posted by RideMonkey
They should change it to "One nation, under science".
"One nation, under $ ".
"One nation, under cha ching ".

[I Are Baboon]

Originally posted by M.W.


Same here. But I don't see how it tramples on anyone's right to freedom of religion by removing God from the Pledge.

I don't think it does elimnate their freedome of religion right. Removing God from the Pledge would eliminate the forcing of a God on people. People are still free to practice religion as they so choose.

Personally, I don't care that much either way. They could leave it as is, and I'd be fine with it. I said the Pledge a million times growing up, and was never offended by saying "Under God."

[Squeak]

Spoon!

[M.W.]

Originally posted by Damn True


Your last statement is fundamentally correct. But the overiding theme here is not the pledge of allegience it is the movement to eliminate all expression of faith.

By removing the reference to God, you're not dissallowing expression of faith. You're just stopping people who may not have faith in God from having to express their faith.

Nobody's saying you can't still express your faith. But INDIVIDUAL people should be allowed to CHOOSE if they want to or not. They shouldn't be forced to acknowledge something that they don't neccessarily believe in.

[M.W.]

Originally posted by I Are Baboon


I don't think it does elimnate their freedome of religion right. Removing God from the Pledge would eliminate the forcing of a God on people. People are still free to practice religion as they so choose.

Personally, I don't care that much either way. They could leave it as is, and I'd be fine with it. I said the Pledge a million times growing up, and was never offended by saying "Under God."

Honestly I don't care either, given the fact that I'm not even from the US. I just don't see what's wrong with removing it. It doesn't HURT anyone, and it will probably make a fair number of people happier/more comfortable.

[Zonic Man]

Don't worry, the 9th circut is notorious for being overturned by the Court. They WILL get overturned on that decision. Under the fact that separation doctrine goes to separating the gov. from endorsing SPECIFIC religions...I.E. no christmas tree on the County Seat's front law and a sign saying "Merry Xmas" with a nativity scene...but a xmas tree, with a star of david, and whatever they use for quamsa and a sign saying "Seasons Greetings" is okay.

basically, it is likely to be overturned on the theory that "God" is universal and does not support one particular religion, thus the state or government is not "sponsoring" one religion over another.

Damn 9th circut. When will they ever learn.

BTW: Court is 5-4 conservative/interpretationalist presently, with 2 more conservatives upcoming from Bush (Stevens is like a million years old and Ginsburg gets sick every other month).

[Damn True]

Originally posted by M.W.


By removing the reference to God, you're not dissallowing expression of faith. You're just stopping people who may not have faith in God from having to express their faith.

Nobody's saying you can't still express your faith. But INDIVIDUAL people should be allowed to CHOOSE if they want to or not. They shouldn't be forced to acknowledge something that they don't neccessarily believe in.

I can't recall anyone being expelled from school for a failure to express faith or a lack thereof. Nobody is forcing the kids to say it. However there are innumerable cases like the one I mentioned before where kids have gotten in trouble for wearing crosses, holding prayer meetings on school grounds, even things as benign as wearing a t-shirt from a bible camp. But we are trying to force the kids that want to say it to stop so they don't offend someone.

[Spud]

Originally posted by Damn True


I can't recall anyone being expelled from school for a failure to express faith or a lack thereof. Nobody is forcing the kids to say it. However there are innumerable cases like the one I mentioned before where kids have gotten in trouble for wearing crosses, holding prayer meetings on school grounds, even things as benign as wearing a t-shirt from a bible camp. But we are trying to force the kids that want to say it to stop so they don't offend someone.

Must not have gone to school in rural Idaho. Lots of examples here.....

[I Are Baboon]

Originally posted by Zonic Man
Don't worry, the 9th circut is notorious for being overturned by the Court. They WILL get overturned on that decision. Under the fact that separation doctrine goes to separating the gov. from endorsing SPECIFIC religions...I.E. no christmas tree on the County Seat's front law and a sign saying "Merry Xmas" with a nativity scene...but a xmas tree, with a star of david, and whatever they use for quamsa and a sign saying "Seasons Greetings" is okay.

basically, it is likely to be overturned on the theory that "God" is universal and does not support one particular religion, thus the state or government is not "sponsoring" one religion over another.

Damn 9th circut. When will they ever learn.

BTW: Court is 5-4 conservative/interpretationalist presently, with 2 more conservatives upcoming from Bush (Stevens is like a million years old and Ginsburg gets sick every other month).

Hmmm...interesting points, ZM. Good post.

[dirtgirl]

Please vote in my poll. :) It is here (http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=23377)

[eric strt6]

Originally posted by Damn True


I can't recall anyone being expelled from school for a failure to express faith or a lack thereof. Nobody is forcing the kids to say it. However there are innumerable cases like the one I mentioned before where kids have gotten in trouble for wearing crosses, holding prayer meetings on school grounds, even things as benign as wearing a t-shirt from a bible camp. But we are trying to force the kids that want to say it to stop so they don't offend someone.

meet me. I was suspended for not reciting the pledge on exactly these grounds [ I refused to say under god and I still do] in Jr High 1971, Santa Monica Unified School District.

[M.W.]

Originally posted by Damn True


I can't recall anyone being expelled from school for a failure to express faith or a lack thereof. Nobody is forcing the kids to say it. However there are innumerable cases like the one I mentioned before where kids have gotten in trouble for wearing crosses, holding prayer meetings on school grounds, even things as benign as wearing a t-shirt from a bible camp. But we are trying to force the kids that want to say it to stop so they don't offend someone.

Honestly, I think that kicking kids out of school for wearing crosses and such, is complete sh*t. But if I'm gonna get in trouble for wearing my Bad Religion shirt, or kids are gonna get in trouble for wearing their Little Devil shirts, then it should be universal.

And what about the kids at my school who would yell at me and proclaim that I was going to hell and blah blah blah? I always got in trouble for arguing back at them, but they never got in trouble for claiming that I was going to be eternally damned, which I think is more offensive...

[Random]

Originally posted by eric strt6


meet me. I was suspended for not reciting the pledge on exactly these grounds [ I refused to say under god and I still do] in Jr High 1971, Santa Monica Unified School District.

Thats nuts I did a quick check on Supreme court and Pledge and came up with this case

West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943) - Court overturns Gobitis but is broader in its scope. No one can be forced to salute the flag or say the pledge of allegiance if it violates the individual conscience.

I never said it in school and I never had problems with any teachers or students. I even had some teachers that didn't say it.

[Freak]

Next thing you know, the song "God Bless America" will be banned!! :rolleyes: :p

[M.W.]

Originally posted by eric strt6


meet me. I was suspended for not reciting the pledge on exactly these grounds [ I refused to say under god and I still do] in Jr High 1971, Santa Monica Unified School District.

On a similar note, I once had to stay in after class because I didn't sing the french anthem passionately enough. (I went through french immersion, and this one teacher always made us sing the french anthem. And I guess I wasn't inspired enough by the anthem of another country that I have no ties to for her...)

[SK6]

Originally posted by I Are Baboon
Court Declares Pledge Of Allegiance Unconstitutional
2:35 PM EDT,June 26, 2002
By DAVID KRAVETS, The Associated Press

SAN FRANCISCO -- A federal appeals court ruled today that the Pledge of Allegiance is an unconstitutional endorsement of religion and cannot be recited in schools.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a 1954 act of Congress inserting the phrase “under God” after the words “one nation” in the pledge. The court said the phrase violates the so-called Establishment Clause in the Constitution that requires a separation of church and state.

“A profession that we are a nation `under God' is identical, for Establishment Clause purposes, to a profession that we are a nation `under Jesus,' a nation `under Vishnu,' a nation `under Zeus,' or a nation `under no god,' because none of these professions can be neutral with respect to religion,” Judge Alfred T. Goodwin wrote for the three-judge panel.

The court, in the nation's first ruling of its kind, said that when President Eisenhower signed the 1954 legislation, he wrote that “millions of our schoolchildren will daily proclaim in every city and town, every village and rural schoolhouse, the dedication of our nation and our people to the Almighty.”

The court noted that the U.S. Supreme Court has said students cannot hold religious invocations at graduations and cannot be compelled to recite the pledge. But when the pledge is recited in a classroom, a student who objects is confronted with an “unacceptable choice between participating and protesting,” the appeals court said.

“Although students cannot be forced to participate in recitation of the pledge, the school district is nonetheless conveying a message of state endorsement of a religious belief when it requires public school teachers to recite, and lead the recitation of, the current form of the pledge,” the court said.

Those judges can go F*ck themselves. Don't like it? move back to your own f*ckin country.

Jeese, no wonder it was easy for these morons to destroy the WTC, our government let 'em.

[M.W.]

Originally posted by sirknight6


Don't like it? move back to your own f*ckin country.


Yes, all Americans must believe in God...

[eric strt6]

Originally posted by Random


Thats nuts I did a quick check on Supreme court and Pledge and came up with this case



I never said it in school and I never had problems with any teachers or students. I even had some teachers that didn't say it.

and wallace never barred blacks from the front of a bus. Laws and Court rulings are generally ignored when the majority in a region feel passionatly about something. in the 70's Santa Monica was extremly right wing WASP, The general accepted practice for dealing with non conformance was to receive a "swat" [read hit with a large (up to 3 ft long) wooden paddle in front of your classmates.

[SK6]

A littlw weird that the more we remove God from our country the more it goes to hell..........

Why am I the minority?

Remember majority rules? when did the minority decide whats best for the majority? These folks need to be glad they have freedom living here!!!

My parents amd family did when they emigrated here...........

[BikeGeek]

Originally posted by Zonic Man
basically, it is likely to be overturned on the theory that "God" is universal and does not support one particular religion, thus the state or government is not "sponsoring" one religion over another.

I don't think "God" (the name, not the deity) is universal. "God" is a Christian name for the supreme being, just like Allah is the Muslim name for the supreme being. In a sense, Christianity is being promoted over other religions. Looking at the time frame that the "under God" was added, it makes sense, the US was a Christian nation.

Should the "under God" be removed? Probably not, but there has to be a way to state a nation's faith in the Almighty without offending anyone...except I guess the Atheists since they don't believe in a supreme being. They're all going to Hell anyway so screw them. :devil:

Just kidding atheists! I don't believe in Hell either. :)

edit: it would be so much easier if people would realize that the Almighty probably doesn't even care what name we give It. They're all names for the same thing. IMHO

[Spud]

Originally posted by sirknight6


Those judges can go F*ck themselves. Don't like it? move back to your own f*ckin country.

Jeese, no wonder it was easy for these morons to destroy the WTC, our government let 'em.

:p The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals destroyed the WTC? :p And all this time I thought it was a group of fanatics driven by religious zeal.... :rolleyes:

[ibismojo]

Originally posted by sirknight6
Those judges can go F*ck themselves. Don't like it? move back to your own f*ckin country.

Jeese, no wonder it was easy for these morons to destroy the WTC, our government let 'em.

what a bitch.

[SK6]

Fine,

Stop paying the f*ckin teachers!!!!!!!

It says God on the back of the dollar bill!!!!

Heceforth, it is unconstitutional to pay these A$$holes!!!!!!!!

[El Jefe]

Originally posted by sirknight6


Those judges can go F*ck themselves. Don't like it? move back to your own f*ckin country.

Jeese, no wonder it was easy for these morons to destroy the WTC, our government let 'em.

Whoa hoss, back up. If you don't like something that goes on here in America, you have the right to speak up about it and to lobby for change. This country was founded on the idea of freedom. Because we are free to express our opinions and views, some things people think and say may not agree with your belief system. They have the right to express their views without threat of harm or expulsion by the government or by the citizens.
I can't stand when people say stupid things like "Don't like it? Move back to your own f*ckin country." ...but I won't try to stop you from saying it. It's your opinion and you have a right to it as long as you don't actually make someone do it.

Oh yeah, and I think the judges are right on with this.

[dirtgirl]

Originally posted by BikeGeek
edit: it would be so much easier if people would realize that the Almighty probably doesn't even care what name we give It. They're all names for the same thing. IMHO

Yes, I should be more explicit:

Everyone, it doesn't matter what you call me (God, Allah, dirtgirl).

:D :D :D

[BikeGeek]

Originally posted by sirknight6
It says God on the back of the dollar bill!!!!


Yeah...we need to print all new money too. ;) :p

[BikeGeek]

Originally posted by dirtgirl


Yes, I should be more explicit:

Everyone, it doesn't matter what you call me (God, Allah, dirtgirl).

:D :D :D

How about Pookie? or Snookums?

[I Are Baboon]

guys, try to keep the conversation calm. I'd hate to close this thread.

[BikeGeek]

Originally posted by I Are Baboon
guys, try to keep the conversation calm. I'd hate to close this thread.

Sorry, I'll refrain from referring to dirtgirl as Pookie or Snookums in the future.

[eric strt6]

Originally posted by I Are Baboon
guys, try to keep the conversation calm. I'd hate to close this thread.

so the"girls" can be as nasty as they want to be?:D

[El Jefe]

Originally posted by eric strt6


so the"girls" can be as nasty as they want to be?:D
let's hope. :eek: :devil: :D

[BikeGeek]

Originally posted by eric strt6


so the"girls" can be as nasty as they want to be?:D

Only if they don't scream out "oh God!" while in the act of being nasty. That will only get them in trouble. :rolleyes:

[SK6]

Originally posted by El Jefe


Whoa hoss, back up. If you don't like something that goes on here in America, you have the right to speak up about it and to lobby for change. This country was founded on the idea of freedom. Because we are free to express our opinions and views, some things people think and say may not agree with your belief system. They have the right to express their views without threat of harm or expulsion by the government or by the citizens.
I can't stand when people say stupid things like "Don't like it? Move back to your own f*ckin country." ...but I won't try to stop you from saying it. It's your opinion and you have a right to it as long as you don't actually make someone do it.

Oh yeah, and I think the judges are right on with this.

Hate me you may, but I'm right on the money. When our forefathers included "freedom of religion", it ment choose your denomination, not godlessness. Every document that founded and forged our great country was BASED on God!!!!
Period, you cannot even come close to beggining an argument on that point.

Next, It was because of morons that make this ruling in the first place help find our land, to get away from opinionation of the Government.

next, it was a christian orginazation that founded our public school system.

Our country was founded based on CHRISTIAN principles.

so what you call a stupid statement pisses you off because of were we came from. like you said, you are entitled to your own opinion like the rest of us.

Every negative comment about God and removal of God from our country, is just another way to get away without having any accountability..................

peace.

(PS, these are my own opinions largly founded upon fact. I mean no insult to any Monkey nor target any monkey here personally, nor there personall beliefs)


Even if ther wrong!!! :p

:D

[I Are Baboon]

Originally posted by eric strt6


so the"girls" can be as nasty as they want to be?:D

Girls being nasty will always be encouraged on the :monkey:

[SK6]

Originally posted by BikeGeek


Sorry, I'll refrain from referring to dirtgirl as Pookie or Snookums in the future.


ahh, ditto!!!

LOL!!!!

Really, No need for personall attacks, nor will I tolerate it..........

A little thing called respect!!


for example:

"I respect nasty Girls!!!"

:p

:D

[eric strt6]

Originally posted by BikeGeek


Only if they don't scream out "oh God!" while in the act of being nasty. That will only get them in trouble. :rolleyes:

IMHO they can scream anything they want in those circumstances

[dirtgirl]

Originally posted by BikeGeek


Only if they don't scream out "oh God!" while in the act of being nasty. That will only get them in trouble. :rolleyes:

Yea, I don't want girls screaming out my name(S) when they are with other people....

:eek: :D

[Damn True]

Originally posted by BikeGeek


I don't think "God" (the name, not the deity) is universal. "God" is a Christian name for the supreme being, just like Allah is the Muslim name for the supreme being. In a sense, Christianity is being promoted over other religions. Looking at the time frame that the "under God" was added, it makes sense, the US was a Christian nation.




Still is.

The VAST majority of the US populace are "Christian" (blanket inclusion of religions that accept God-Jesus-Holy Spirit) including Catholic and Protestant.

So why is it that when we are supposed to be "By the people-For the people." the will of the majority of the people gets subverted by a vocal minority?

[SK6]

Originally posted by eric strt6


IMHO they can scream anything they want in those circumstaces

Aaahhhh HA!!!!!


:p


:D

[ibismojo]

hmm...separation of church and state....i'd say screw the government and let the damn church run this country. let the "majority" get what they want. I'll be moving to England when that happens, cause Canadians are retarded lameasses...........alright alright, you know i was joking about the whole moving thing, right :thumb: :D

[Damn True]

Originally posted by M.W.


Honestly, I think that kicking kids out of school for wearing crosses and such, is complete sh*t. But if I'm gonna get in trouble for wearing my Bad Religion shirt, or kids are gonna get in trouble for wearing their Little Devil shirts, then it should be universal.

And what about the kids at my school who would yell at me and proclaim that I was going to hell and blah blah blah? I always got in trouble for arguing back at them, but they never got in trouble for claiming that I was going to be eternally damned, which I think is more offensive...


On a side note:
I really dig Bad Religion.

[Spud]

Originally posted by Damn True



Still is.

The VAST majority of the US populace are "Christian" (blanket inclusion of religions that accept God-Jesus-Holy Spirit) including Catholic and Protestant.

So why is it that when we are supposed to be "By the people-For the people." the will of the majority of the people gets subverted by a vocal minority?

Majority rule is always mentioned, but what is overlooked? Minority Rights - i.e. equal protection. Think of the Jim Crow laws of the South prior to the civil rights movement. Majority rule was pretty dang handy unless you were on the short end of the stick.

[SK6]

Originally posted by Spud


Majority rule is always mentioned, but what is overlooked? Minority Rights - i.e. equal protection. Think of the Jim Crow laws of the South prior to the civil rights movement. Majority rule was pretty dang handy unless you were on the short end of the stick.

Man kind corrupts, not God......

Being human makes everything we do faleable(sp?).

so, here we go in a circle again.......:rolleyes:


LOL!!!!!

:p

:D

[Damn True]

Originally posted by sirknight6


Every negative comment about God and removal of God from our country, is just another way to get away without having any accountability..................



[/SIZE]

You hit the proverbial nail right on the head.

[El Jefe]

Originally posted by sirknight6


Hate me you may, but I'm right on the money. When our forefathers included "freedom of religion", it ment choose your denomination, not godlessness. Every document that founded and forged our great country was BASED on God!!!!
Period, you cannot even come close to beggining an argument on that point.

Next, It was because of morons that make this ruling in the first place help find our land, to get away from opinionation of the Government.

next, it was a christian orginazation that founded our public school system.

Our country was founded based on CHRISTIAN principles.

so what you call a stupid statement pisses you off because of were we came from. like you said, you are entitled to your own opinion like the rest of us.

Every negative comment about God and removal of God from our country, is just another way to get away without having any accountability..................

peace.

(PS, these are my own opinions largly founded upon fact. I mean no insult to any Monkey nor target any monkey here personally, nor there personall beliefs)


Even if ther wrong!!! :p

:D


I never said anything about hating you. Just because I can't stand what you said about "getting the f......" does not mean I hate you.

You're absolutely correct that this nation was founded on christianity. As we as a nation have grown, the presence and influence of other religions, and the idea of no religion has become a reality. Is it change for the better? Well, I guess it depends on your personal views and beliefs. I have not expressed my personal beliefs because they are in fact irrelevent to this thread. I have the right to my beliefs, and I have the right not to have the government ask me to believe anything else.

I do think it somewhat ironic that money has "In God We Trust" printed on it, but that's a different discussion topic.

By the way, I vote Republican in case you're accusing me of being a flaming liberal.....not that there's anything wrong with that.

[SK6]

Originally posted by El Jefe
I never said anything about hating you. Just because I can't stand what you said about "getting the f......" does not mean I hate you.

You're absolutely correct that this nation was founded on christianity. As we as a nation have grown, the presence and influence of other religions, and the idea of no religion has become a reality. Is it change for the better? Well, I guess it depends on your personal views and beliefs. I have not expressed my personal beliefs because they are in fact irrelevent to this thread. I have the right to my beliefs, and I have the right not to have the government ask me to believe anything else.

I do think it somewhat ironic that money has "In God We Trust" printed on it, but that's a different discussion topic.

By the way, I vote Republican in case you're accusing me of being a flaming liberal.....not that there's anything wrong with that.

ROFLMAO!!!!!

That was SO politically correctly put it's scarey!!!! LOL!!!!!

peace!!!!:thumb:

[ibismojo]

Originally posted by El Jefe
I never said anything about hating you. Just because I can't stand what you said about "getting the f......" does not mean I hate you.

You're absolutely correct that this nation was founded on christianity. As we as a nation have grown, the presence and influence of other religions, and the idea of no religion has become a reality. Is it change for the better? Well, I guess it depends on your personal views and beliefs. I have not expressed my personal beliefs because they are in fact irrelevent to this thread. I have the right to my beliefs, and I have the right not to have the government ask me to believe anything else.

I do think it somewhat ironic that money has "In God We Trust" printed on it, but that's a different discussion topic.

By the way, I vote Republican in case you're accusing me of being a flaming liberal.....not that there's anything wrong with that.

Republican's drink Guiness??!! No way!! Republican's are so cool now! :D Nothing wrong with Republicans but I swear, there must have been a better candidate than George Bush. He seems like a swell guy but he's just an idiot most of the time it's embarassing.

[El Jefe]

Originally posted by sirknight6


ROFLMAO!!!!!

That was SO politically correctly put it's scarey!!!! LOL!!!!!

peace!!!!:thumb:

Haha! You're right. Too much time spent working for a university.... I have to rewrite audit reports sometimes because certain terms could possibly be construed as offensive. So I can have someone arrested on fraud charges, but I can't say they committed fraud. :rolleyes:

[SK6]

Originally posted by ibismojo


Republican's drink Guiness??!! No way!! Republican's are so cool now! :D Nothing wrong with Republicans but I swear, there must have been a better candidate than George Bush. He seems like a swell guy but he's just an idiot most of the time it's embarassing.


true dat,


BUT,

he is kicking the ever lovin' hell out of those terrorists!!!!!

[SK6]

Originally posted by El Jefe


Haha! You're right. Too much time spent working for a university.... I have to rewrite audit reports sometimes because certain terms could possibly be construed as offensive. So I can have someone arrested on fraud charges, but I can't say they committed fraud. :rolleyes:

A leason I too must learn!!!!!

Or

A skill I too must learn!!!!!

LOL!!!!

[ibismojo]

Originally posted by sirknight6



true dat,


BUT,

he is kicking the ever lovin' hell out of those terrorists!!!!!

perhaps for this presidential term....but we could be screwed later on. someone out there is paying very close attention to the politics in this country.

it's funny how things shift so dramatically with each president. when clinton was president, we made significant progress in brain treatment for disorders such as Parkinson's disease. the use of stem cells helped a lot but now that Bush is in office...everyone just kinda stopped what they're doing or moved to europe to continue the research.

edit: now that reminds me of the last south park episode...hehe. Woohoo!! new one tonight! finally...after all these months (3 btw).

[eric strt6]

OK here is a prayer that we can all agree on


Grant me the serenity to accept the things that I cannot change.
The
courage to change the things I can. And the wisdom to hide the bodies of
those I had to kill today because they pissed me off. And also, help me to
be careful of the toes I step on today. As they may be connected to the ass
I may have to kiss tomorrow. Help me to always give 100% at work... 12% on
Monday, 23% on Tuesday, 40% on Wednesday, 20% on Thursday, and 5% on
Friday.
And help me to remember when I'm having a really bad day, and it seems that
people are trying to piss me off...

It takes 42 muscles to frown and only 4 to extend my middle finger
and say, "Bite me." Amen

[El Jefe]

Originally posted by ibismojo


Republican's drink Guiness??!! No way!! Republican's are so cool now! :D Nothing wrong with Republicans but I swear, there must have been a better candidate than George Bush. He seems like a swell guy but he's just an idiot most of the time it's embarassing.

Wow, I guess I am a Republican. Although I do have some views that fall well outside of party lines, so I don't vote straight ticket. Oh, and Bush? He was the lesser of the two evils. Now more importantly, Guinness. I bleed Guinness. I drank one while riding a road century last year, and this year on my birthday (this coming Sunday) I'll be tossing back a couple Pub Draughts before, during and after my ride.:D

[El Jefe]

Originally posted by sirknight6


A leason I too must learn!!!!!

Or

A skill I too must learn!!!!!

LOL!!!!

What's that, fraud? It's easy. :eek: I mean... umm oh you mean that pc crap. Yeah it took me a while, but I think I have it down pat now.

:thumb:

[dirtgirl]

Originally posted by ibismojo


perhaps for this presidential term....but we could be screwed later on. someone out there is paying very close attention to the politics in this country.

it's funny how things shift so dramatically with each president. when clinton was president, we made significant progress in brain treatment for disorders such as Parkinson's disease. the use of stem cells helped a lot but now that Bush is in office...everyone just kinda stopped what they're doing or moved to europe to continue the research.

oh no, thats a whole other thread right there... don't get me started... sigh. valuable time is being lost in the search for cures because of political agendas.

[ibismojo]

Originally posted by El Jefe


Wow, I guess I am a Republican. Although I do have some views that fall well outside of party lines, so I don't vote straight ticket. Oh, and Bush? He was the lesser of the two evils. Now more importantly, Guinness. I bleed Guinness. I drank one while riding a road century last year, and this year on my birthday (this coming Sunday) I'll be tossing back a couple Pub Draughts before, during and after my ride.:D

you should have been at Paul McCartney's wedding. Not that I was there or anything but the dude brought a truckload of Guinness kegs. And I'm talking about a serious truckload. Wish I could remember where I saw the picture.

[SK6]

Originally posted by El Jefe


Wow, I guess I am a Republican. Although I do have some views that fall well outside of party lines, so I don't vote straight ticket. Oh, and Bush? He was the lesser of the two evils. Now more importantly, Guinness. I bleed Guinness. I drank one while riding a road century last year, and this year on my birthday (this coming Sunday) I'll be tossing back a couple Pub Draughts before, during and after my ride.:D

It's all just relative, since,

Leatherface is my hero!!!!

[LeatherFace]

Originally posted by sirknight6


It's all just relative, since,

Leatherface is my hero!!!!

There we go...I was wondering how I was going to get dragged into this one ;)

[Spud]

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20020611/capt.1023811277.ireland_mccartney_wedding_lrl104.j pg

[ibismojo]

Originally posted by dirtgirl


oh no, thats a whole other thread right there... don't get me started... sigh. valuable time is being lost in the search for cures because of political agendas.

well....i wouldn't take stem cell research too lightly. as a researcher or scientist....you should have the highest regards to ethics and morals. and not every researcher and scientist have that sadly.

[ibismojo]

Originally posted by Spud
http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20020611/capt.1023811277.ireland_mccartney_wedding_lrl104.j pg

nice, there we go :D

[El Jefe]

Originally posted by Spud
http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20020611/capt.1023811277.ireland_mccartney_wedding_lrl104.j pg Oh man, I may have to go spank my monkey after seeing that one.:eek: :monkey: :D

[Spud]

Originally posted by ibismojo


nice, there we go :D

One of my most memorable scenes from touring Europe at the Tender age of 19 was the Heiniken Tanker Truck delivering to pubs in Amsterdam.... :love:

[ibismojo]

Originally posted by Spud


One of my most memorable scenes from touring Europe at the Tender age of 19 was the Heiniken Tanker Truck delivering to pubs in Amsterdam.... :love:

I'd like to see a Tanker Truck deliver Budweiser in Amseterdam :D

edit: better yet, let's make it Pabst Blue Ribbon.

"Heiniken?! F*ck that sh*t! Pabst Blue Ribbon!"
-- Dennis Hopper in Blue Velvet

[ohio]

Originally posted by Spud


Must not have gone to school in rural Idaho. Lots of examples here.....

Ditto for public school in Ohio. We had prayers at the flag every morning. I had to kneel with my fellow wrestlers while our Coach asked Jesus to help us win. We had li'l Jesus crosses up in some of our classrooms...

That was all public school. Once I was old enough to know what it meant, I felt very uncomfortable saying "under God." It could easily be removed without making little christian children feel uncomfortable all over the US every time they say "One nation indivisible." They can still express their devotion to god anytime they want to, or not express it anytime they don't want to.

This IS a different issue than children being discriminated against for expressing their beliefs.

[eric strt6]

Originally posted by Spud


One of my most memorable scenes from touring Europe at the Tender age of 19 was the Heiniken Tanker Truck delivering to pubs in Amsterdam.... :love:

mine was being first in line two days in a row for the free Heiniken brewery tour and tasting [toss back 8-10 freeone in 15 minutes then stumble over to the Karel Apfel to purchase the stuff that made Amsterdam famous

[SK6]

Originally posted by eric strt6


mine was being first in line two days in a row for the free Heiniken brewery tour and tasting [toss back 8-10 freeone in 15 minutes then stumble over to the Karel Apfel to purchase the stuff that made Amsterdam famous

Mine was drinking a Legends will reciting the Pledge of allegiance!!!!:p


:D

:rolleyes:

:D

[ohio]

Originally posted by El Jefe

You're absolutely correct that this nation was founded on christianity. As we as a nation have grown, the presence and influence of other religions, and the idea of no religion has become a reality.

Exactly. The country was founded by Christians... but in an amazing stroke of genius they recognized that while they fell under that umbrella they had different beliefs, therefore it was best to allow for ANY belief system to find a place comfortably in US society, as its practices didn't infringe on the rights of others. Why is this such a difficult concept to grasp?

edit: Wow, I'm a little behind in this discussion. Ummmm... yeah, beer's alright.

Just because I'm Jewish doesn't mean that any venture I start has the stamp of the star of David it, and anyone involved needs to pray to Yahweh. The governments job is not to encourage the majority belief system (the majority , by it's very nature of being most of society, already does that well enough itself through it's weighted influence on societal norms), but to protect the practice of all of them.

[Toshi]

Originally posted by Damn True
The VAST majority of the US populace are "Christian" (blanket inclusion of religions that accept God-Jesus-Holy Spirit) including Catholic and Protestant.

So why is it that when we are supposed to be "By the people-For the people." the will of the majority of the people gets subverted by a vocal minority?
From the Federalist Paper #10, by James Madison:
Complaints are everywhere heard from our most considerate and virtuous citizens, equally the friends of public and private faith, and of public and personal liberty, that our governments are too unstable, that the public good is disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties, and that measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority. However anxiously we may wish that these complaints had no foundation, the evidence, of known facts will not permit us to deny that they are in some degree true. It will be found, indeed, on a candid review of our situation, that some of the distresses under which we labor have been erroneously charged on the operation of our governments; but it will be found, at the same time, that other causes will not alone account for many of our heaviest misfortunes; and, particularly, for that prevailing and increasing distrust of public engagements, and alarm for private rights, which are echoed from one end of the continent to the other. These must be chiefly, if not wholly, effects of the unsteadiness and injustice with which a factious spirit has tainted our public administrations.


Source: http://memory.loc.gov/const/fed/fed_10.html

If we take the vocal, active Christian component of our population to be a faction (and I think this is a fair characterization), then it seems quite clear that the founding fathers didn't want their (or any radical group) voice to prevail. Furthermore, since they took the trouble of including the right of freedom of religion, it shows that they recognized that they, while perhaps a majority at the time, did not exclusively hold the truth.

With these tidbits of history in mind, it can be seen that a government "by the people and for the people" doesn't necessarily mean one in which the majority has its way.

[SK6]

Originally posted by Toshi

From the Federalist Paper #10, by James Madison:


Source: http://memory.loc.gov/const/fed/fed_10.html

If we take the vocal, active Christian component of our population to be a faction (and I think this is a fair characterization), then it seems quite clear that the founding fathers didn't want their (or any radical group) voice to prevail. Furthermore, since they took the trouble of including the right of freedom of religion, it shows that they recognized that they, while perhaps a majority at the time, did not exclusively hold the truth.

With these tidbits of history in mind, it can be seen that a government "by the people and for the people" doesn't necessarily mean one in which the majority has its way.

because I'm a Christian, your calling me a factionist.............???

(you will soon be hearing a knock on your door, followed by a loud crash, then, you WILL be grabed and forced to ride ALL downhill courses in the world, Backwards and UP the hill while reciting 1 million Hail Mry's and 100,000 Our Father's!!! That'll teach ya!!!!!! Oh yeah, and all the while, we, shall rejoice in a frothy beverage while you..........won't!)


LOL!!!! I could NOT resist!

[ummbikes]

Originally posted by eric strt6


meet me. I was suspended for not reciting the pledge on exactly these grounds [ I refused to say under god and I still do] in Jr High 1971, Santa Monica Unified School District.


Eric strt6 defender of not saying God, or as he says "god" since 1972:)

The good "old" pledge is optional. Nobody needs to say any of it.

It's funny the pledge has been attacked from the right for making relgious people pledge allegiance to a false idol...

I don't say it, because I said once, and like weding vows, don't think they need to repeated every day.

Whoo hoo, new stuf to talk about!

[eric strt6]

Originally posted by ummbikes



Eric strt6 defender of not saying God, or as he says "god" since 1972:)

The good "old" pledge is optional. Nobody needs to say any of it.

It's funny the pledge has been attacked from the right for making relgious people pledge allegiance to a false idol...

I don't say it, because I said once, and like weding vows, don't think they need to repeated every day.

Whoo hoo, new stuf to talk about!

You know nothing of my religion, in which it it forbidden to speak our "gods" name out loud or in public . I leave it at this I have mine you have yours, they don't mix. but show respect for beliefs that are different and try to understand....

[narlus]

Originally posted by kafin8ed
how bout "one nation on two wheels..." i like the sounda that...

nah, parliament-funkadelic had it right:

One Nation, Under A Groove

:D

apologies if someone has already posted this. haven't waded through the thread yet.

[eric strt6]

Originally posted by narlus


nah, parliament-funkadelic had it right:

One Nation, Under A Groove

:D

apologies if someone has already posted this. haven't waded through the thread yet.

I am Mr Wiggles the Worm and these are my two ladies "Giggles & Squirm":D

[ummbikes]

Originally posted by eric strt6


You know nothing of my religion, in which it it forbidden to speak our "gods" name out loud or in public . I leave it at this I have mine you have yours, they don't mix. but show respect for beliefs that are different and try to understand....

Umm yes, just when you pulled in my Christianity when discussing sending rescue teams out for pets...

Practice it brother, so I may see the way.

[eric strt6]

Originally posted by ummbikes


Umm yes, just when you pulled in my Christianity when discussing sending rescue teams out for pets...

Practice it brother, so I may see the way.

Point taken, apology extended

[ummbikes]

Originally posted by eric strt6


Point taken, apology extended

Good 'nuff :) It's all good.

[BMXman]

Originally posted by I Are Baboon


I agree with that. Hopefully they will ratify the Pledge and not abolish it altogether. It should be used to pledge your allegiance to the USA, not to a god. It'd be a shame to see them eliminate the Pledge entirely.

Pledge my allegiance to the USA???...yeah because the USA has certainly shown some allegiance to me and my people..I think not!

oops wrong subject...BTW I always hated the pledge ever since I started school......D

[Joe Pozer]

Originally posted by BMXman


Pledge my allegiance to the USA???...yeah because the USA has certainly shown some allegiance to me and my people..I think not!

oops wrong subject...BTW I always hated the pledge ever since I started school......D

Well, no country per say can show allegiance but I do still believe that the US offers the best opportunity for an individual to succeed. Hence the reason why so many individuals from foreign countries (some risking their lives) migrate to this country.

Yes, there is still much racism...yes, there is still much proverty...but most importantly a person as the opportunity to succeed and improve their lives. That's something that's not possible in other countries. You are stuck in the same level in society that you were born into.

[LeatherFace]

I just read what DT said about "no one is making them say it" and I have to disagree. I remember being in first grade (in Catholic school, no less) and being taught the pledge of allegience, along with just about every prayer, rhyme, and song, and not really pondering what I was saying. You were expected to say it, you were taught to say it, and it all wasn't necessarily explained to you. I remember thinking "what does indivisible mean?" but I said it anyway.

So why does the word "God" have to be in the pledge anyway?

[DH40]

This is a very long thread, did anyone mention that this
country was not founded by Christians?

T FF's were Atheists, Deists, Agnostics and Unitarians, and Don't Give a Damns..

now let's all have a sandwich

[Joe Pozer]

Originally posted by DH40


now let's all have a sandwich

You got roast beef?

[bomberz1qr20]

How 'bout "One nation under dog..."

[Sniper]

Originally posted by sirknight6


Hate me you may, but I'm right on the money. When our forefathers included "freedom of religion", it ment choose your denomination, not godlessness. Every document that founded and forged our great country was BASED on God!!!!
Period, you cannot even come close to beggining an argument on that point.

Next, It was because of morons that make this ruling in the first place help find our land, to get away from opinionation of the Government.

next, it was a christian orginazation that founded our public school system.

Our country was founded based on CHRISTIAN principles.

so what you call a stupid statement pisses you off because of were we came from. like you said, you are entitled to your own opinion like the rest of us.

Every negative comment about God and removal of God from our country, is just another way to get away without having any accountability..................

peace.

(PS, these are my own opinions largly founded upon fact. I mean no insult to any Monkey nor target any monkey here personally, nor there personall beliefs)


Even if ther wrong!!! :p

:D




preach that on a reservation....

the way i see it, the only people who have THE RIGHT to say 'go back to your effin country' are native americans.

[Damn True]

Originally posted by LeatherFace
I just read what DT said about "no one is making them say it" and I have to disagree. I remember being in first grade (in Catholic school, no less) and being taught the pledge of allegience, along with just about every prayer, rhyme, and song, and not really pondering what I was saying. You were expected to say it, you were taught to say it, and it all wasn't necessarily explained to you. I remember thinking "what does indivisible mean?" but I said it anyway.

So why does the word "God" have to be in the pledge anyway?

Those kinds of explainations are what parents are for.

Daddy, we learned the pledge of ambulance today.

Son, its called the pledge of allegience, and no matter what that liberal wacko teachers union freak tells you it includes the word God.

-or-

Son, its called the pledge of allegience, and no matter what that liberal wacko teachers union freak says you don't have to say the word God.

[SK6]

Originally posted by astral


preach that on a reservation....

the way i see it, the only people who have THE RIGHT to say 'go back to your effin country' are native americans.

Tis a good point, but I apologize to NO ONE for that!!!! Why you may ask, well, I was not there, nor responsiblefor what occured.

A travisty non-the-less.....................

Oppression sucks!!! I'm a direct result of it.

[narlus]

Originally posted by sirknight6


Those judges can go F*ck themselves. Don't like it? move back to your own f*ckin country.

Jeese, no wonder it was easy for these morons to destroy the WTC, our government let 'em.

let me get this right, you're a moderator? :rolleyes:

good choice, RM. :dead:

[RideMonkey]

Originally posted by sirknight6


Those judges can go F*ck themselves. Don't like it? move back to your own f*ckin country.

Jeese, no wonder it was easy for these morons to destroy the WTC, our government let 'em.

Its my country and I don't like it one bit. Separation of church and state is a founding principle of this country. Its about time that was recognized. I'd like to see "In God We trust" removed from the dollar as well. I don't "Trust In God", but I do trust that dollar in my hand.

As for the WTC comment, one of the most asinine things I have ever heard. Our country is AT WAR!!! This is not some obscure little conflict in some far flung part of the world that affects none of us here at home. It affects all of us. Our economy is imploding, partly due to investors fears of another terrible attack to our cities. Our friends and families are losing their jobs.

If you don't have the sense to speak out in favor of our government in this terrible episode in our history, then its YOU that needs to leave.

I have always wanted to do something worth while in my life. This site may not have any important social impact, but the least I can do is spread the word to the few thousand that will listen:

Our country, our way of life, our very survival is threatened!! Speak out in support of this great country before its too late!!

If you can't do that, you are not my brother in this great nation.

[Babar]

Separation of church and state was originally came from founding fathers to avoid what it happened in England (Church Of England), they did not want Church of USA. Doing Nasty stuff at em.

According those some experts and writing.

[LeatherFace]

Originally posted by Joe Pozer


Yes, there is still much racism...yes, there is still much proverty...but most importantly a person as the opportunity to succeed and improve their lives. That's something that's not possible in other countries. You are stuck in the same level in society that you were born into.

Ahh...I'd have to disagree with you on that one. Not everyone has an opportunity to succeed and improve his or her life. Sure, there may be cases where people overcame tremendous odds, but bottom line is, the majority of the folks in the US of A do not have access to the resources to get them where they dream to go. I mean, look at us...we have the luxury to have computers and the time to sit at them all day pontificating about everyone else who is not like us. We are in priviledged positions, and for the world's richest nation, there are too many people in poverty in this country. Now...would you like the long or the abridged sociology lesson? ;)

[Shortbus]

What's this about other girls calling dirtgirl while getting nasty??? :p Now you haf ma imaginashun going and it's not even 8am :rolleyes:




Anyways, once thing I definitely agree with in this thread is that the farther we drift (ARE drifting) from GOD, the closer to hell/anarchy we ARE getting. Just simply look @ the news everyday...

Someone also mentioned that they don't trust god, but they trust $$$$. That's a perfect example of my previous paragraph... $$$ gets you mountain bikes and cars, but it can never buy you happiness.

[dmvprof]

Originally posted by Damn True


I'm not talking specificly about religion. Moreso the clamping down on your right to say what you believe to be true lest it offend somone.

OK, you can dish it out, lets see if you can take it.

Your arbitrary, unsubstantial belief in the Bible is at best dillusional. The dogma of the bible is in direct contradiction with the world around us that we observe, and yet you still believe it. When people deny truth that is based on observable evidence that is repeatable it makes me question their sanity. Eithor you are brainwashed or are clinging to your beliefs because they form your image of who you are in such a deep way, that to acknowledge the facts before you would be to discrediting your entire life and the beliefs and dogma instilled into you by your parents and the church. Your ego would come crashing down if you accepted the facts, so in effect, your mind has evoked a defense mechanism that has allowed it to deny reason and rational thought for the sake of your ego and the worldview that you have developed, no matter how arbitrary it is. You sir, are the victim of a meme, I suggest you search for a cure.



Originally posted by Damn True



But you have to do so quietly so as not to offend anyone. Which by doing so infringes on the tennants of my faith that state I am supposed to preach the good news and carry the light of Jesus into the darkness of the world.

By disallowing that you are preventing freedom of "religion


You live in a secular country. And to correct waht IBISMOJO said, our founding fathers were not christian. This includes George Washington, Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams. These were all men of the enlightenment, and could only be described as deists. In fact, Thomas Jefferson once reffered to the revelation of John as the "ravings of a madman".

You are free to evangelize, but you are not free to do it with the sponsorship of the government. So to equate this ruling as infringing on your freedom of religion is absolutely and completely absurd. By your reasoning, as weak as it is, the pledge should not only mention , "Under God", it should include "Buddah, Confusios, Allah, Zues, and Hercules, etc... Otherwise, the government is directly supporting a Judeo-Christian religion, and that, my dillusional friend, is a violation of the constitution that so many have fought and died for.

[I Are Baboon]

Originally posted by dmvprof


OK, you can dish it out, lets see if you can take it.

Your arbitrary, unsubstantial belief in the Bible is at best dillusional. The dogma of the bible is in direct contradiction with the world around us that we observe, and yet you still believe it. When people deny truth that is based on observable evidence that is repeatable it makes me question their sanity. Eithor you are brainwashed or are clinging to your beliefs because they form your image of who you are in such a deep way, that to acknowledge the facts before you would be to discrediting your entire life and the beliefs and dogma instilled into you by your parents and the church. Your ego would come crashing down if you accepted the facts, so in effect, your mind has evoked a defense mechanism that has allowed it to deny reason and rational thought for the sake of your ego and the worldview that you have developed, no matter how arbitrary it is. You sir, are the victim of a meme, I suggest you search for a cure.






You live in a secular country. And to correct waht IBISMOJO said, our founding fathers were not christian. This includes George Washington, Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams. These were all men of the enlightenment, and could only be described as deists. In fact, Thomas Jefferson once reffered to the revelation of John as the "ravings of a madman".

You are free to evangelize, but you are not free to do it with the sponsorship of the government. So to equate this ruling as infringing on your freedom of religion is absolutely and completely absurd. By your reasoning, as weak as it is, the pledge should not only mention , "Under God", it should include "Buddah, Confusios, Allah, Zues, and Hercules, etc... Otherwise, the government is directly supporting a Judeo-Christian religion, and that, my dillusional friend, is a violation of the constitution that so many have fought and died for.

:eek:

[Shortbus]

Your arbitrary, unsubstantial belief in the Bible is at best dillusional.

I think that was uncalled for. But now let's see what YOU believe in.

The dogma of the bible is in direct contradiction with the world around us that we observe, and yet you still believe it.

So you'd rather trust in the world around you and what you can OBSERVE it I suppose? I.e. all the latest mass marketing of brain-washing products in the like of Britney Spears Music? Or maybe all those Nike adds that get you to pay 140 bucks for a shoe that cost them less than 30 cents to manufacture???

The Dogma of the bible is in direct contradiction wif the world around us IF you take what that bible has to say LITTERALLY. Problem is, when books are interpreted litterally, you usually end up with religious fanatics who support their distorted vision of a holy book (i.e. O. Binladen). The true meaning of holy books is usually underlying the first impressions they give.

MOREOVER, I don't think you TRUELY understand what faith means. People who run around trying to JUSTIFY, EXPLAIN, PROVE the existance of God (for example saying that the bible is in contradiction with our modern world) , are all after a lost cause. If you could PROVE the existence of God, then there would be no more FAITH. Faith is based on being grateful and appreciating what has been offered as a gift to you, life.

[fourgivn1]

Originally posted by dmvprof


OK, you can dish it out, lets see if you can take it.

Your arbitrary, unsubstantial belief in the Bible is at best dillusional. The dogma of the bible is in direct contradiction with the world around us that we observe, and yet you still believe it. When people deny truth that is based on observable evidence that is repeatable it makes me question their sanity. Eithor you are brainwashed or are clinging to your beliefs because they form your image of who you are in such a deep way, that to acknowledge the facts before you would be to discrediting your entire life and the beliefs and dogma instilled into you by your parents and the church. Your ego would come crashing down if you accepted the facts, so in effect, your mind has evoked a defense mechanism that has allowed it to deny reason and rational thought for the sake of your ego and the worldview that you have developed, no matter how arbitrary it is. You sir, are the victim of a meme, I suggest you search for a cure.


Oh man. It is obvious that you have not done any serious studies as far as historical and archaeological proof of Christianity goes. Big words don't mean much if you can't back it up with research.

If you REALLY believe that (that belief in Christianity is essentially a surrender of rational thought, and that we're all 'victims of a meme') then you need to spend some serious time (a few years, not a few days or even weeks) researching the historical and archaeological proof for the existence of Jesus, proof of His resurrection, and all of that. Josh McDowell did the same thing - spent a few years researching it - so he could DISPROVE Christianity. He's now one of the most hardcore Christians, and for a reason - the concrete evidence convinced him.

In all honesty, I do not mean to be rude, but I REALLY get tired of people saying stuff like this. Yes, you will NEVER find 100% proof for Christianity. That would defeat the entire purpose - to accept Him out of our own free will, instead of being coerced into believing. But you won't find 100% proof for a lot of science's 'theories' today either. I think it's a bit telling that every single archaeological discovery has done nothing but CONFIRM Biblical history (or 'stories' as people love to call them). There's a reason you don't hear much of an outcry from the scientific community concerning Biblical archaeological discoveries. It's because they can't say much when the discoveries confirm 'the meme we're victim to.'

Yeah, I may be flamed and shot and tarred and feathered for saying this, but then again, what sort of Christian am I if I don't speak out for what I believe in?

[dmvprof]

Originally posted by Shortbus


I think that was uncalled for. But now let's see what YOU believe in.


He complained about "worrying about hurting other peoples feelings". So I'm only playing his game.


Originally posted by Shortbus
So you'd rather trust in the world around you and what you can OBSERVE it I suppose? I.e. all the latest mass marketing of brain-washing products in the like of Britney Spears Music? Or maybe all those Nike adds that get you to pay 140 bucks for a shoe that cost them less than 30 cents to manufacture???


You are referring to cultural and market properties that are irrelevant. I'm speaking about archeology, geology, astronomy, cosmology, biology, etc...


Originally posted by Shortbus
The Dogma of the bible is in direct contradiction wif the world around us IF you take what that bible has to say LITTERALLY. Problem is, when books are interpreted litterally, you usually end up with religious fanatics who support their distorted vision of a holy book (i.e. O. Binladen). The true meaning of holy books is usually underlying the first impressions they give.


I could just about guarantee you that 'Damn True' is one of the funamentalist xians. And when you water the bible down with contextual interpretations and you pick and choose what is metaphorical, you end up with a book that can tell you nothing. If the bible is meant to be interpreted that way, then who has the wisdom or authority to decide what is literal and what isn't?


Originally posted by Shortbus
MOREOVER, I don't think you TRUELY understand what faith means. People who run around trying to JUSTIFY, EXPLAIN, PROVE the existance of God (for example saying that the bible is in contradiction with our modern world) , are all after a lost cause. If you could PROVE the existence of God, then there would be no more FAITH. Faith is based on being grateful and appreciating what has been offered as a gift to you, life.

You go out on a limb when you tell me what I don't understand. But to satisfy your conjecture, I'll explain my view of faith. If I have faith in something, it means I don't have proof, therefore science is not a part of it. So I don't need proof for faith. But one thing is for certain, any faith I have, while unsupported by facts, will not contradict them as the bible does. Faith in accord with science what I believe in. Science is driven by faith. Ideas are formed in ones head without science, and through faith in the ideas science is applied to achieve proof.

Did you know that in the 16th century the Catholic church embraced science as the means by which we would prove the factuality of the bible. Then when they results came in, they changed their tune and began to spew dogma and then claimed the infallability of the pope.

[fourgivn1]

A quick reply to Shortbus.

You're right. Trying to prove the existence of God IS, in and of itself, a lost cause.

BUT gathering evidence in favor of His existence, and of the life, death, resurrection and ascendance of Jesus, is something different, and I think we can agree on that. Gathering evidence is the same thing courts do for cases they're trying. There will never be 100% proof for Christianity, but when the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of it, I'm not going to NOT believe in it just because I can't find 100% concrete proof. Then, there'd be no reason for faith.

[fourgivn1]

By the way, when DID the results come in? Disproving Christianity once and for all, that is.

[dmvprof]

Originally posted by fourgivn1
A quick reply to Shortbus.

but when the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of it,


Fourgiv

Put up or shut up.

I realize I'm somewhat new here, so I'll let the crack about me "obviously not knowing" slide. Before I lower the boom, let me just ask you where is your overwhelming evidence? Ken Hamm, ROFLMAO....

[fourgivn1]

BTW, Shortbus, I wasn't arguing with you...might have come off as such. I was just sort of 'adding/clarifying.' :)

[fourgivn1]

dmvprof, my purpose here was not to slander your name or make fun of you. If you're trying to bug or upset me or make fun of me, have a ball.

I did not say "Sit still while I provide you with evidence I've found." I SAID, and I quote,

"you need to spend some serious time (a few years, not a few days or even weeks) researching the historical and archaeological proof for the existence of Jesus, proof of His resurrection, and all of that."

I don't contain the entire sum of knowledge of the evidence in favor of Christianity in my head. That's why I read books and research stuff I'm interested in. You can do the same.

[fourgivn1]

I'll add one more thing, and then 'shut up.' :)

I'm not here to convert the entire board to Christianity. However, I will ALWAYS defend what I believe in. No less would be expected of a believer of any religion. I'm not going to waste time arguing why/why not Christianity is 'the right religion.' You will either go do research, or you won't. That's your choice. But making jokes isn't helping out.

[dmvprof]

You see what you have done dontcha. You have claimed that I don't know anything because there is evidence out there that proves that I don't know what I'm talking about. And when I ask you to back it up, you bail out.

Typical christian response.

If you were to inquire what evidence I have, well, let me just say that this thread would triple in size very quickly.


So come on fourgivn, just post a link regarding the "evidence" that you are so familiar with. Just one little link, you can do it cantcha? Show me a little respect, and I'll do the same. I have friendly respectful discussions with Theologins quite often. You may even learn something about christianity that you didn't know, and of course, I wouldn't expect you to believe an infidel like me, I'd use a reference.

[fourgivn1]

Actually, I don't remember claiming you don't know anything.

Here's a link......http://www.josh.org. It's the website of the guy I told you about, Josh McDowell.

As far as providing evidence to back it up (in other words, starting a debate, and arguing the case for Christianity right here and now), there's one very simple reason I'm not doing so. It is because you're just as capable of researching to find that evidence as I am. By the tone you're using, it is obvious that you DON'T respect me. You say such things as "typical Christian response," and you're putting words in my mouth (saying I'm claiming you don't know anything.)

I will be glad to give you respect, providing you do the same. Otherwise, I won't bother to reply.

For the record, I DO apologize if anything I said was offensive. As I said, my purpose here is not to convert everyone (or even anyone), but when people imply that I'm 'brainwashed' or that I'm 'clinging to my beliefs because my world would crash down if I did not' it bugs me a bit. I don't 'cling' to them because I'll be destroyed if I don't. I 'cling' to them because there are facts in support of Christianity. Just as there are facts in support of scientific discoveries.

A side note (this was added just after my post asking where you live). I don't WANT you to post all your evidence. It WOULD take up too much room. I CAN say for a fact that if you refer me to books and stuff like that, I will go read them. I DEVOUR books of any sort. I may be Christian, but I will read pretty much ANYTHING. (Well, not the Satanic Bible, but then again, you can figure out why not. :)) Both of us posting here, trying to disprove the other, arguing, would not serve a constructive purpose.

[fourgivn1]

On a COMPLETELY different topic (and not that I'm trying to change the topic - far from it), where in Georgia are you from? I used to live in Canton, if you know where that is, for about 5 years.

[ummbikes]

Originally posted by dmvprof
You see what you have done dontcha. You have claimed that I don't know anything because there is evidence out there that proves that I don't know what I'm talking about. And when I ask you to back it up, you bail out.

Typical christian response.

If you were to inquire what evidence I have, well, let me just say that this thread would triple in size very quickly.


So come on fourgivn, just post a link regarding the "evidence" that you are so familiar with. Just one little link, you can do it cantcha? Show me a little respect, and I'll do the same. I have friendly respectful discussions with Theologins quite often. You may even learn something about christianity that you didn't know, and of course, I wouldn't expect you to believe an infidel like me, I'd use a reference.

You're painting your arguments with too broad a brush and coming across as a narrow minded and mean spirted.

Are you narrow minded, and mean spirited?

Are you trying to be divisive?

What is your agenda?

Why are you here?

Welcome to the board, lower your rancor to simple disagreement, and it just might be fun to discuss our lives with you.


Peace

Rob

[LeatherFace]

Originally posted by dmvprof



Fourgiv

Put up or shut up.

I realize I'm somewhat new here, so I'll let the crack about me "obviously not knowing" slide. Before I lower the boom, let me just ask you where is your overwhelming evidence? Ken Hamm, ROFLMAO....

Hey dmvprof...You are new here and I am not saying that you cannot express your views, but this thread is turning from a interesting argument about the pledge of allegiance and its unconstitutionality to you and forgiv having a holy war. Tone it down...both of you. You aren't going to disprove each other, and you should respect the other's view, and I don't think the comment "put up or shut up" shows much respect. Agree to disagree and be done with it alr