http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/09/14/pledge.ruling.ap/index.html

ok, it isn't forcing any specific God upon the kids, also when the kids grow up they should be able to deduce for themselves there is some sort of higher power (God) that is at work.  Even science leads to a belief in some sort of God.

The pledge doesn't mention any particular God.
`

Totally agree with the court. God should stay at home.

This country was founded on the fact that we wouldn't force our beliefs on anyone in any way what-so-ever.  However patriotic the pledge may be, it shouldn't be recited in schools.

This kind of crap should also be kept out of schools.

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=12814.msg128240#msg128240 date=1126820329]
Totally agree with the court. God should stay at home.
[/quote]

God is a term, not a religion. It refers to an omniscient, infinite, supernatural being that created the Earth. This is retarded, it will probably get tried in the high court and pwned, and then (in a dream world) the judge will lose his position for being a complete moron.

[quote author=Lord[nK] link=topic=12814.msg128241#msg128241 date=1126820725]
This country was founded on the fact that we wouldn't force our beliefs on anyone in any way what-so-ever. However patriotic the pledge may be, it shouldn't be recited in schools.

This kind of crap should also be kept out of schools.
[/quote]

Please explain to me how having the word "God" in the pledge is forcing a beleif (name the religion/beleifs too Lord, don't make us guess, as there's obviously only one religion that uses the word God, right?)

Nobody is being forced to do anything, saying the pledge is optional. Go cry  or cut yourself or something, I'm sure the facts hurt you.

the US is full of stupid people

IMHO, there is no point to have a pledge. You just say some words and you're done. wtf is the point of saying that every day? NONE

[quote author=Mangix link=topic=12814.msg128247#msg128247 date=1126822689]
the US is full of stupid people

IMHO, there is no point to have a pledge. You just say some words and you're done. wtf is the point of saying that every day? NONE
[/quote]


You're supposed to say it, and beleive it, not just say it.

[quote author=hismajesty[yL] link=topic=12814.msg128250#msg128250 date=1126824484]
You're supposed to say it, and beleive it, not just say it.
[/quote]

This here sums it all up. "You are supposed to say it, and believe it." Which means believing in a god. Which if demanded by the government would be against freedom of religion. Which means it's got to go.

First of all, saying God doesn't violate any Freedom of Religion. Secondly, you very well know that's not what I meant. I meant beleive in it*, as it's a symbol of sorts for America.

[quote author=hismajesty[yL] link=topic=12814.msg128253#msg128253 date=1126827506]
First of all, saying God doesn't violate any Freedom of Religion. Secondly, you very well know that's not what I meant. I meant beleive in it*, as it's a symbol of sorts for America.
[/quote]

Well, requiring someone to say the word God isn't bad. But if you are supposed to believe in what the pledge says, you also have to believe in the existence of a god. How else would there be a nation under god?

It's a few words designed to incite patriotism in schoolchildren all over the nation. What's the big deal?

[quote author=hismajesty[yL] link=topic=12814.msg128245#msg128245 date=1126822109]
Please explain to me how having the word "God" in the pledge is forcing a beleif (name the religion/beleifs too Lord, don't make us guess, as there's obviously only one religion that uses the word God, right?)
[/quote]

Well, thankfully, I don't have to recite the pledge.

Nonetheless: using the word 'God' presumes that one believes in God. I do not. I would object to being made to recite something that implies otherwise. I would similarly object to swearing an oath on a Bible, or getting married in a church.

[quote author=hismajesty[yL] link=topic=12818.msg128243#msg128243 date=1126821898]
God is a term, not a religion. It refers to an omniscient, infinite, supernatural being that created the Earth.
[/quote]

Yes. It refers to something I do not believe in. See above.

God just refers to a diety, the pledge doesn't make a reference to any monotheistic religion, so I don't see what the debate is.

I don't believe in a deity. Any deity. That's why. We don't even need to go as far as a religion!

[quote author=hismajesty[yL] link=topic=12818.msg128258#msg128258 date=1126830483]

the pledge doesn't make a reference to any monotheistic religion[/quote]

It doesn't matter if it directly relates to any specific religion — the belief in God is a religious matter and that alone should be reason enough to not to mix it with state.

[quote]Go cry  or cut yourself or something, I'm sure the facts hurt you.[/quote]

Now that's the mature response I was looking for.

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=12818.msg128260#msg128260 date=1126830652]
I don't believe in a deity. Any deity. That's why. We don't even need to go as far as a religion!
[/quote]

If you did in fact go to school in America, you would have the option of reciting the pledge.

That solves the problem for all of the other people. All public schools in America have a moment of silence, people can pray, or do whatever in this moment, so if somebody would like to recite something other than the pledge they can do it to themselves in this time.

[quote author=Lord[nK] link=topic=12818.msg128261#msg128261 date=1126830840]
[quote author=hismajesty[yL] link=topic=12818.msg128258#msg128258 date=1126830483]

the pledge doesn't make a reference to any monotheistic religion[/quote]

It doesn't matter if it directly relates to any religion — God is a religious matter in itself.
[/quote]

What religion? You all talk about it as if the pledge is pushing the Christian faith upon school children.

[quote author=hismajesty[yL] link=topic=12818.msg128262#msg128262 date=1126830867]
If you did in fact go to school in America, you would have the option of reciting the pledge.

That solves the problem for all of the other people. All public schools in America have a moment of silence, people can pray, or do whatever in this moment, so if somebody would like to recite something other than the pledge they can do it to themselves in this time.
[/quote]

Well, that sounds ok, broadly. Doesn't it potentially raise other problems though? I can imagine scenarios where kid A gets bullied for not being patriotic enough because of not reciting the pledge, or somesuch.

I haven't seen any thing like that. Some teachers ask that the student stand up with the other students, but not requiring them to recite it or place their hand over their heart. The standing is just out of respect, however others don't mind if they just sit. If other schools are like mine (which I'm sure they are) most kids don't like reciting it, and find it to be a pain. A lot of students at my school don't do it because they're too lazy to stand up. I say it everytime, and I also say it sometimes when they don't do it over the loud speaker. I say it, or at least mouth it, instead of just listening as well.

This entire thing is just retarded. They already have a national law (or maybe its a state law?) that school staff (nor students, hehe) can force us to say the pledge if we don't want to. We discussed this in social studys and I brought that up (starting with "well thats just stupid"). Aparently its a prayer, and seeing as how (public) school staff are not allowed to force religious topics on students, we aren't allowed to say it anymore, because we are forcing the fact that their is a God upon the other students. In the student handbook (at my school), it says that students may hold religious clubs, groups, etc at school, as long as its student led (and initiated), so basically we're allowed to hold huge events but not say "one nation under God". Makes me want to move to Canada.

I'd continue to say it, it's your right. National law supercedes local, and the federal government says you can say it.

It is absolutely your right to read the pledge yourself. What is not is the school or teacher's right to organize reciting the pledge in his/her class.



[quote author=daRktYpE link=topic=12822.msg128255#msg128255 date=1126828622]
It's a few words designed to incite patriotism in schoolchildren all over the nation. What's the big deal?
[/quote]

And to this: Well, I do not think it should be a big deal. Just remove the reference to god, let it read as it did in the 30's. Then it will be just a few words of patriotism. Having god in it just messes things up.

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=12822.msg128239#msg128239 date=1126820042]
http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/09/14/pledge.ruling.ap/index.html
[/quote]
Thank God!
</pun>

Anyway, I'm not concerned about this. I'm pretty sure it will go to the high court and they will say how stupid the judge is (maybe with nicer words.) Yay<3RepublicanCourt.

[quote author=Hitmen link=topic=12822.msg128272#msg128272 date=1126833939]
[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=12822.msg128239#msg128239 date=1126820042]
http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/09/14/pledge.ruling.ap/index.html
[/quote]
Thank God!
</pun>
[/quote]HA!  good stuff

As far as "under God", screw it, take it out.  It didn't used to be there so who cares, let the damn athiests go to hell...then they'll rethink what they did.

You're kicked out of the party, CrAz3D!

Trust, whether reciting the pledge is optional or not, it is very difficult for school children, where the peldge is namely recited every morning (my experience) to comprehend the concept of God/Relgion.  At this young age they are persuaded into reciting it believing it's a requirement, and because the school/teacher insists on doing so.  Regardless of whether it's optional more over, it is being excercised in a public sanction, therefore violating the first ammendment.

I should also note to everyone that the Supreme Court did not rule on this case, which many people who refuse to do a bit of research proclaim.  They avoided the case due to the potential controversy of the case by justifying rejection by the fact that the plaintiff did not have custody of his child in a public school, therefore had no grounds to bring the case up.  However, that has obviously changed now, and it will be interesting whether this case is brought the the Supreme Court.  It's an interesting era of U.S. History, and what better time to be studying it.  :)

Here's a bit of education for you all to which formulates into my opinion on the matter.  The phrase "under God" was put into the pledge due to factors of the 1950's where the Cold War was in its peak.  Atheism was becomming a popular term in America with speculation on the Cold War and due to fears regarding Communism becoming a potential influence in America it motivated legislators to add the phrase into the constitution.  The fear of Communism/Atheism was a concern for the Government in maintaining what they interpreted "American Patriotism" and declared that "God -> Christianity" was a symbol of America Patriotism against Communism which they were struggling to promote in their campaign against Communism (Korean War, Vietnam, etc.).

I think it's time that the phrase "under God" be removed from the pledge, for obvious reasons.  It was added for a reason, and that reason has ceased to be relevant to this day.  Moreover, it was as equally unconstitutional back then as it is now, but only now it has no reason for being.  It is simply an exercise of relgion in a public sanction, optional or not, which is clearly stated a violation in the U.S. Constitution; and last time I checked, the term God related to religion, and the reason for the phrase as explained above clearly identifys "God" as the "Christian God."

It seems you are argueing off topic. There is a seperation between church and state. The pledge is a state thing, but  it is bringing religion into it. Simple. It does not matter what religion, by using the word "God", it is enforcing the stereotypical Christain American. Even if that is not the point of it, that is what it is doing.

[quote author=Lord[nK] link=topic=12818.msg128261#msg128261 date=1126830840]
It doesn't matter if it directly relates to any religion — God is a religious matter in itself.
[/quote]

Further more, the Christian religion seems to be pouring out of almost every part of the government. On the money you handle, on every peice, it says "In God we trust". This to me is even more outrageous than the word "God" in the pledge. "God" has no place in the government. In military graveyards, each grave has a cross. The only thing that you can bring to mind when you see a cross is, you guessed it, Christianity!

I sincerly hope that "God" is taken out of the pledge. The whole pledge itself just seems like some sort of weird cult thing to me.

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=12822.msg128276#msg128276 date=1126834386]
As far as "under God", screw it, take it out. It didn't used to be there so who cares, let the damn athiests go to hell...then they'll rethink what they did.
[/quote]

No comment.

This reveals a lot of pettiness in most of you, or at least, the devils advocate :x I don't recall anyone ever having a problem with the nation's pledge before that person brought it up. Why the big fuss?

[quote author=daRktYpE link=topic=12822.msg128294#msg128294 date=1126841819]
This reveals a lot of pettiness in most of you, or at least, the devils advocate :x I don't recall anyone ever having a problem with the nation's pledge before that person brought it up. Why the big fuss?
[/quote]

I have always had a problem with it. Before all this shit happened, when I was like in third grade, I would constantly get in trouble for not saying the pledge.

[quote author=daRktYpE link=topic=12822.msg128294#msg128294 date=1126841819]
This reveals a lot of pettiness in most of you, or at least, the devils advocate :x I don't recall anyone ever having a problem with the nation's pledge before that person brought it up. Why the big fuss?
[/quote]

We aren't all Christian Bible thumping believers like you.

I'm not Christian, actually. Try devils advocate instead.

Since there was some confusion over my post, let me rephrase it:

I don't recall anyone having the balls to complain about this before it was brought to the courts, so why the big fuss now?  If it bothers you so much, then move to another country - the pledge isn't going to change.

There's also the fact that you can choose to stand and not say the pledge, this has been in effect for a while now - or at least, in my school district.

On another note, what effect is this having on you? Is it causing you pain, or some kind of mental suffering to you when repeating a few words every schoolday? I can tell you that most schoolchildren don't contemplate the meaning of the pledge, and this is mostly affecting them. If you're old enough to understand the meaning, you're old enough to make your own decisions about religion. Mindless droning of a pledge every day is unlikely to affect your choices.

[quote author=daRktYpE link=topic=12822.msg128308#msg128308 date=1126846104]
On another note, what effect is this having on you? Is it causing you pain, or some kind of mental suffering to you when repeating a few words every schoolday? I can tell you that most schoolchildren don't contemplate the meaning of the pledge, and this is mostly affecting them. If you're old enough to understand the meaning, you're old enough to make your own decisions about religion. Mindless droning of a pledge every day is unlikely to affect your choices.
[/quote]

That is not the point. The point is there is religion poking into places where it does not belong.

It's a pledge for patriotism, quit trying to break it down and over analyze a ruling. It does't specifically mention a "God" or what religion is refers to. The word is synonymous to any religion.

Religion brought this country into existence.

Whether we have the balls to complain or not, you cannot tell from whether we complain. There are endless things that are wrong in the world. One cannot point them all out at the same time. Right now we are pointing at the wrong in the pledge, other times we will be pointing out other wrongs.

Does a particular wrong have to be causing me pain for me to shine a light on it? Of course not. When ignorance, stupidity or just plain evil walk the world, we must all do what we can to banish them.

If you live in a place where religion is not forced upon you, be glad. Not everyone is as lucky as you are.

There are very few places now where people are persecuted for their religion.

[quote author=daRktYpE link=topic=12822.msg128324#msg128324 date=1126849828]
There are very few places now where people are persecuted for their religion.
[/quote]

We went to war because someone believed according to their religion it was their right to attack America. Is that not persecution?

Concerning your arugment about "what effect is this having on you," that same argument can be said against you. Why do you care that it is not in there? As some have already pointed out, the phrase "under god" wasn't always in the pledge of allegiance.

[quote author=JTN Designer link=topic=12822.msg128311#msg128311 date=1126846322]
It's a pledge for patriotism, quit trying to break it down and over analyze a ruling. It does't specifically mention a "God" or what religion is refers to. The word is synonymous to any religion.
[/quote]

You didn't read any of this thread, did you?

Edit: Regardless of the problems with the "under god" part, the act of asking children to recite some pledge is questionable and reeks of brainwashing. Some more history, orginally the pledge was recited while extending the arm out and upward until Hitler came into power.

[quote author=dxoigmn link=topic=12822.msg128326#msg128326 date=1126852721]
We went to war because someone believed according to their religion it was their right to attack America. Is that not persecution?
[/quote]

How do you know what their motives were? Have you even seen the videos released by Osama? You know nothing.

You could also say that I don't care, this is all mostly for the sake of arguing. I'm also -quite sure that the pledge of allegiance has been unchanged for... at least two hundred years.

dxiogmn: I suggest you read some more of the thread - I typed something relating to "reeks of brainwashing".

[quote author=daRktYpE link=topic=12822.msg128329#msg128329 date=1126854928]
How do you know what their motives were? Have you even seen the videos released by Osama? You know nothing.
[/quote]

Yes. In fact, those videos were plastered on the screens of American television for a year or so, post 9/11. Therefore, I have some sort of insight into what their motives were and are.

[quote author=daRktYpE link=topic=12822.msg128329#msg128329 date=1126854928]
You could also say that I don't care, this is all mostly for the sake of arguing. I'm also -quite sure that the pledge of allegiance has been unchanged for... at least two hundred years.
[/quote]

What you just wrote totally discredits you and goes to show that you know next to nothing about the history of the pledge. Read and think. You won't get very far otherwise.

Key facts to note:
[list]
[li]The pledge hasn't even been around for 200 years. It was written in 1892 (2005-1892=113), only to be officially recognized in 1942 (2005-1942=63) by Congress.[/li]
[li]The pledge has changed 2 times since it was written. Those changes include: "my Flag" to "the Flag of the United States of America"; and adding "under God" (a campaign initiated by the KKK!)[/li]
[/list]

[quote author=daRktYpE link=topic=12822.msg128329#msg128329 date=1126854928]
dxiogmn: I suggest you read some more of the thread - I typed something relating to "reeks of brainwashing".
[/quote]

You didn't type anything relating to "reeks of brainwashing." The closest reference is you saying children are not affected by the pledge because they do not understand it, which has no basis and is total speculation. In fact, it does have an affect (effect? help me grammar-nazis!) by your very words: it is used to incite patriotism. Although, I'm sure it has more than just the affect of inciting patriotism.

[quote author=Mephisto link=topic=12822.msg128287#msg128287 date=1126839056]
Regardless of whether it's optional more over, it is being excercised in a public sanction, therefore violating the first ammendment.[/quote]

Are you not familiar with the Establishment Clause of the 1st amendment which defines the criteria for this?

[quote]Here's a bit of education for you all to which formulates into my opinion on the matter.  The phrase "under God" was put into the pledge due to factors of the 1950's where the Cold War was in its peak.  Atheism was becomming a popular term in America with speculation on the Cold War and due to fears regarding Communism becoming a potential influence in America it motivated legislators to add the phrase into the constitution.  The fear of Communism/Atheism was a concern for the Government in maintaining what they interpreted "American Patriotism" and declared that "God -> Christianity" was a symbol of America Patriotism against Communism which they were struggling to promote in their campaign against Communism (Korean War, Vietnam, etc.).[/quote]

I'm pretty sure we already know when the words were added into the pledge, but thanks for wasting my time anyway.

[quote]
I think it's time that the phrase "under God" be removed from the pledge, for obvious reasons.  It was added for a reason, and that reason has ceased to be relevant to this day.  Moreover, it was as equally unconstitutional back then as it is now, but only now it has no reason for being.  It is simply an exercise of relgion in a public sanction, optional or not, which is clearly stated a violation in the U.S. Constitution; and last time I checked, the term God related to religion, and the reason for the phrase as explained above clearly identifys "God" as the "Christian God."
[/quote]

God is a general term that can be applied to any monothesistic religion - Muslims say God to refer to Allah. God can also be applied to polythesitic religions as well, which adds more substance to why this is not unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause.

The option to not say it is in no way an excuse.  By the schools having a sanctioned time to recite a pledge stating you believe the country was founded under a God, and *not* having another sanctioned time to pledge to the country being founded without any type of godly reference, is placing the belief in a God over the belief in no gods.  This is against the constitution if you ask me...

[quote]God is a general term that can be applied to any monothesistic religion - Muslims say God to refer to Allah. God can also be applied to polythesitic religions as well, which adds more substance to why this is not unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause.[/quote]

The true meaning of the clause is unclear, however Thomas Jefferson specifically stated that we needed to establish "a wall of separation" between church and state.  Jefferson's views, however reputable he may be, are not credited because Jefferson was in France when the first admendment was written.

Personally, I think the meaning of the admendment is perfectly clear — a wall of separation between church and state and I think it's ridiculous that people don't understand that.

[quote]God is a general term that can be applied to any monothesistic religion - Muslims say God to refer to Allah. God can also be applied to polythesitic religions as well, which adds more substance to why this is not unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause.[/quote]

But how is that fair to me? I believe in no god/gods. You are making an assumption that everyone is religious, and *not* all religions involve a god.

Edit: Forgot a word

&& btw, not all religions involve a god, so that argument is silly anyway.

Looks like I picked up bad information, but see what Eisenhower said when approving "Under God":

"In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country's most powerful resource in peace and war."

Please tell me how reciting words everyday will affect religious choices.

Reciting words involving God is a religious choice.

Again, you people are arguing points indirectly related; the word "God", no matter how skewed your interpretation, directly relates to religion.

[quote author=Lord[nK] link=topic=12822.msg128339#msg128339 date=1126870722]The true meaning of the clause is unclear[/quote]

How the heck is unclear? Have you ever actually even read the clause? It's perfectly clear! It says that the Government cannot place one religion over another, or establish a national religion. This clause is the reason they don't allow religious groups to meet in places like schools - because they'd have to allow EVERY religion without discriminating. If the pledge said "One nation, under Jesus" or "One nation, under Allah" or "One nation, under a Christian God" then that would be unconstitutional. Be familar with the Constitution before you claim something to be unconstitutional.

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=12822.msg128346#msg128346 date=1126884274]
Reciting words involving God is a religious choice.
[/quote]

CHOICE, it's their choice to say the pledge.

----

Shockingly, today, when I did the pledge I looked around the room. Everybody stood up, except for one kid (because he's in a wheelchair.) Also, everybody recited it (or at least put their hand over their heart) except the kid who is from Poland - but this makes sense since he isn't (I don't beleive) a citizen, and his dad (likewise for a few other kids in my school from Poland) are here on a Government contract to do something. I thought that it was great.

This post is aimed directly at trust:

What about religions without a God? What about athiests? You are beating around the bush with your arguments. You argue as if you have simply skipped me and Arta's posts, and if you do aknowledge someone, you take their argument out of context. You still have yet to argue the point that God directly implies religion and that religion has no place in public schools.

You have provided no evidence for your claims.

There are plenty of Christians (for example) in public schools, why should we be stopped from saying something we beleive in to fit some "politically correct" ideal? Eventually, America is going to kill itself because it won't settle for pissing somebody off over something like this. You people are lucky you don't live in other countries, that's for sure. I do,however, sometimes with that America would have a more take-no-shit policy on this sort of thing. It's totally destroying core American values. Like it or not, when the first Americans got here, God was a HUGE part of it, and it was a HUGE part of the founding of America. People take this whole seperation TOO far and I clearly explained what it means.

[quote author=hismajesty[yL] link=topic=12822.msg128358#msg128358 date=1126899220]
CHOICE, it's their choice to say the pledge.
[/quote]

I'm aware of that. I was responding to darktype's post.

You don't >have to recite the pledge. It's no longer a requirement - also note that I am Topaz.

[quote author=daRktYpE link=topic=12822.msg128369#msg128369 date=1126909326]
You don't >have to recite the pledge. It's no longer a requirement - also note that I am Topaz.
[/quote]

That has been said multiple times.

Nobody's getting the point - at THIS point, it's no longer an issue. If you don't want to say it, then you don't need to.

[quote author=hismajesty[yL] link=topic=12822.msg128358#msg128358 date=1126899220]
[quote author=Lord[nK] link=topic=12822.msg128339#msg128339 date=1126870722]The true meaning of the clause is unclear[/quote]

How the heck is unclear? Have you ever actually even read the clause? It's perfectly clear! It says that the Government cannot place one religion over another, or establish a national religion. This clause is the reason they don't allow religious groups to meet in places like schools - because they'd have to allow EVERY religion without discriminating. If the pledge said "One nation, under Jesus" or "One nation, under Allah" or "One nation, under a Christian God" then that would be unconstitutional. Be familar with the Constitution before you claim something to be unconstitutional.

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=12822.msg128346#msg128346 date=1126884274]
Reciting words involving God is a religious choice.
[/quote]

CHOICE, it's their choice to say the pledge.

----

Shockingly, today, when I did the pledge I looked around the room. Everybody stood up, except for one kid (because he's in a wheelchair.) Also, everybody recited it (or at least put their hand over their heart) except the kid who is from Poland - but this makes sense since he isn't (I don't beleive) a citizen, and his dad (likewise for a few other kids in my school from Poland) are here on a Government contract to do something. I thought that it was great.
[/quote]
If you apply the CHOICE argument to your own post, one could say it would be people's CHOICE to attend religious group meetings in schools, and therefore having them is fine.  Once again I shall say, where is the pledge recited over the speaker and with it's own time set aside in schools which does not include pledging your agreement that the country was founded under God?  Unless there is one, I don't see how people can say that this isn't supporting one branch of religon over another.

I don't understand your question, could you reword it?

The first part of your argument, about meeting in schools, the governement does this (according to AP Government freshmen year) to just simply avoid conflict. If they allowed say, Jews, to hold a religious meeting in a school, they'd have to allow Satanists, which wouldn't look good, etc.

I've always thought it was stupid and unnecessary. At the begining of the year in 8th grade I got a detention for not reciting the pledge. After that I figured out a surefire way to not have to do it anymore. The next day I help my hand up in a nazi salute facing the teacher, which got me sent to the office. After arguing with the principal I never had to stand up or recite some stupid words against my will again. Ever since then I've had teachers that weren't over patriotic asstards and it hasn't been a problem.

You're a jerk, and the reason that I have a strong detest towards teenagers. Doing a Nazi salute was trashy and uncalled for.

[quote author=hismajesty[yL] link=topic=12822.msg128427#msg128427 date=1126927623]
You're a jerk, and the reason that I have a strong detest towards teenagers. Doing a Nazi salute was trashy and uncalled for.
[/quote]

That is what you were originally supposed to do when reciting the pledge...

There's the feeling that Hitmen's intent was just to be an asshole.

[quote author=daRktYpE link=topic=12822.msg128438#msg128438 date=1126931757]
There's the feeling that Hitmen's intent was just to be an asshole.
[/quote]

Or patriotic? After all he was excercising his freedom of speech. Is not patriotic now-a-days?

How does a Nazi salute show patriotism towards America - you know, the country that lost countless men fighting the Nazi's...

Sounds like hitmen didn't have the choice.

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=12822.msg128468#msg128468 date=1126953592]
Sounds like hitmen didn't have the choice.
[/quote]

By law he did, the federal government can't check in with every teacher in America every morning to make sure they allowed people to optionally participate.

If my teacher was an asshole I was going to be an asshole back. The nazi salute was just a symbol to make others aware of the oppressive reign of a stupid teacher. I was in 8th grade and didn't know shit about law, all I know was I got a detention for a stupid reason. It was plenty called for.

[quote author=hismajesty[yL] link=topic=12822.msg128469#msg128469 date=1126964016]
[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=12822.msg128468#msg128468 date=1126953592]
Sounds like hitmen didn't have the choice.
[/quote]

By law he did, the federal government can't check in with every teacher in America every morning to make sure they allowed people to optionally participate.
[/quote]

More reason why it shouldn't exist in the pledge.  Your rationale sucks.

[quote author=hismajesty[yL] link=topic=12822.msg128427#msg128427 date=1126927623]
You're a jerk, and the reason that I have a strong detest towards teenagers. Doing a Nazi salute was trashy and uncalled for.
[/quote]

Last time I checked you were a 16-year-old teenager like many of us here.  You've also done some pretty immature things on this board, like I have too, and HitMan, and others.  :P

[quote author=hismajesty[yL] link=topic=12822.msg128411#msg128411 date=1126921971]
I don't understand your question, could you reword it?

The first part of your argument, about meeting in schools, the governement does this (according to AP Government freshmen year) to just simply avoid conflict. If they allowed say, Jews, to hold a religious meeting in a school, they'd have to allow Satanists, which wouldn't look good, etc.
[/quote]
So then, if they have a time set aside, and reading over the speaker system, for a pledge which states your belief that the country was founded under God... shouldn't they also have one that doesn't require the reciters to believe in that religious aspect?  It's the same as allowing everyone *but* satanists, athiests, etc, to hold meetings in schools.

Well, they should absolutely set a time aside for reciting a godless pledge, stating how the USA is "a country with no god".

[quote author=Mephisto link=topic=12822.msg128484#msg128484 date=1126971079]Last time I checked you were a 16-year-old teenager like many of us here. You've also done some pretty immature things on this board, like I have too, and HitMan, and others. :P
[/quote]

I may be a teenager, but that doesn't mean I like it. I was upset the day I turned 13 because I was now something I didn't like (even then.)

[quote author=Soul Taker link=topic=12822.msg128485#msg128485 date=1126971490]
[quote author=hismajesty[yL] link=topic=12822.msg128411#msg128411 date=1126921971]
I don't understand your question, could you reword it?

The first part of your argument, about meeting in schools, the governement does this (according to AP Government freshmen year) to just simply avoid conflict. If they allowed say, Jews, to hold a religious meeting in a school, they'd have to allow Satanists, which wouldn't look good, etc.
[/quote]
So then, if they have a time set aside, and reading over the speaker system, for a pledge which states your belief that the country was founded under God... shouldn't they also have one that doesn't require the reciters to believe in that religious aspect? It's the same as allowing everyone *but* satanists, athiests, etc, to hold meetings in schools.
[/quote]

Ah. Well, we have a moment of silence prior to the pledge where they can do what they wish (religious or not).

[quote author=hismajesty[yL] link=topic=12822.msg128492#msg128492 date=1126973881]
[quote author=Mephisto link=topic=12822.msg128484#msg128484 date=1126971079]Last time I checked you were a 16-year-old teenager like many of us here. You've also done some pretty immature things on this board, like I have too, and HitMan, and others. :P
[/quote]

I may be a teenager, but that doesn't mean I like it. I was upset the day I turned 13 because I was now something I didn't like (even then.)[/quote]

Well, I feel very sorry for you.  Teenage years aren't something to waste lighly IMO.  :)

[quote author=Hitmen link=topic=12822.msg128423#msg128423 date=1126926509]
I've always thought it was stupid and unnecessary. At the begining of the year in 8th grade I got a detention for not reciting the pledge. After that I figured out a surefire way to not have to do it anymore. The next day I help my hand up in a nazi salute facing the teacher, which got me sent to the office. After arguing with the principal I never had to stand up or recite some stupid words against my will again. Ever since then I've had teachers that weren't over patriotic asstards and it hasn't been a problem.
[/quote]

Thats just being an asshole, people give their lives so that you can be free and you can't even attempt to return the favor by saying a few simple words? Go kill yourself.

Around here everyone stands when the pledge is being said even though they aren't forced to. Its a matter of respect and realizing that if the thing that sucks most during your day is saying the pledge then you have it easy.

As for the ruling, I suspect it will be overturned if it goes to the Supreme Court. It will end up a lot like the ten commandments decision in that if its not forcing a specific religion onto someone then its ok. On can't deny the fact that America was founded with religion being a part of it, theres absolutely no reason to hide it or be ashamed of it. I'll restate the fact that if the hardest part of your day is saying 'god' then you are a lucky son of a bitch.

[quote author=Zorm link=topic=12822.msg128562#msg128562 date=1127012528]
[quote author=Hitmen link=topic=12822.msg128423#msg128423 date=1126926509]
I've always thought it was stupid and unnecessary. At the begining of the year in 8th grade I got a detention for not reciting the pledge. After that I figured out a surefire way to not have to do it anymore. The next day I help my hand up in a nazi salute facing the teacher, which got me sent to the office. After arguing with the principal I never had to stand up or recite some stupid words against my will again. Ever since then I've had teachers that weren't over patriotic asstards and it hasn't been a problem.
[/quote]

Thats just being an asshole, people give their lives so that you can be free and you can't even attempt to return the favor by saying a few simple words? Go kill yourself.

Around here everyone stands when the pledge is being said even though they aren't forced to. Its a matter of respect and realizing that if the thing that sucks most during your day is saying the pledge then you have it easy.

As for the ruling, I suspect it will be overturned if it goes to the Supreme Court. It will end up a lot like the ten commandments decision in that if its not forcing a specific religion onto someone then its ok. On can't deny the fact that America was founded with religion being a part of it, theres absolutely no reason to hide it or be ashamed of it. I'll restate the fact that if the hardest part of your day is saying 'god' then you are a lucky son of a bitch.
[/quote]

No one is saying, at least I don't think, that saying 'God' in the pledge is easy or not.  Additionally, I don't believe the argument is about showing respect to those fight for our country, or what our country stands for, etc.  It's about religion, and how God, and moreover the reason it was put in the pledge, is an issue for many people in the USA.

Please erode my rights as long as it's not too hard on my everday life.

[quote author=Zorm link=topic=12822.msg128562#msg128562 date=1127012528]
[quote author=Hitmen link=topic=12822.msg128423#msg128423 date=1126926509]
I've always thought it was stupid and unnecessary. At the begining of the year in 8th grade I got a detention for not reciting the pledge. After that I figured out a surefire way to not have to do it anymore. The next day I help my hand up in a nazi salute facing the teacher, which got me sent to the office. After arguing with the principal I never had to stand up or recite some stupid words against my will again. Ever since then I've had teachers that weren't over patriotic asstards and it hasn't been a problem.
[/quote]

Thats just being an asshole, people give their lives so that you can be free and you can't even attempt to return the favor by saying a few simple words? Go kill yourself.
[/quote]

Not everyone wants to buttfuck the country they live in, it just happens to be the place I live and I'm not exactly at the point in my life where I could change that.

Are you planning to leave, maybe move to France?

As a libertarian, I am against the government forcing anyone to say any pledge to the United States, except those we elect to office.

What about people that are employeed by the government?  I had to say a pledge and take an oath when I was hired at the IRS.  It seems logical since it was mostly about pledging that I'm not a terrorist or anarchist.

[quote author=Grok link=topic=12822.msg128674#msg128674 date=1127141061]
As a libertarian, I am against the government forcing anyone to say any pledge to the United States, except those we elect to office.
[/quote]

What if somehow an atheist president gets elected?

There should be a pledge that doesn't include a reference to God. "One nation, bonded by a common ideal" or something like that.

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=12822.msg128706#msg128706 date=1127165397]
There should be a pledge that doesn't include a reference to God. "One nation, bonded by a common ideal" or something like that.
[/quote]

There already is (was) the pledge prior to 1954 was "One nation, indivisible, ..."

It was changed? lol. 'indivisible' is much better. Having it changed to 'under God' was obviously some silly right-wing religious nonsense. It should be restored to its earlier state as soon as possible!

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=12822.msg128716#msg128716 date=1127170014]
It was changed? lol. 'indivisible' is much better. Having it changed to 'under God' was obviously some silly right-wing religious nonsense. It should be restored to its earlier state as soon as possible!
[/quote]

"indivisible" is still there.

"One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty, and justice for all."

God was added during the Cold War.

We won, didn't we? :)

[quote author=hismajesty[yL] link=topic=12822.msg128717#msg128717 date=1127170427]
[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=12822.msg128716#msg128716 date=1127170014]
It was changed? lol. 'indivisible' is much better. Having it changed to 'under God' was obviously some silly right-wing religious nonsense. It should be restored to its earlier state as soon as possible!
[/quote]

"indivisible" is still there.

"One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty, and justice for all."

God was added during the Cold War.
[/quote]


Hmm you sure?  I thought I saw on the news that it was 1954, not 1861.

It was added during the Macarthy Red Scare decade.

My point still stands, and I've changed my mind. This has nothing to do with schools. This has to do with including religious language in a pledge of support to a secular government. It doesn't make sense, and feels to me like the religious right trying to worm their way into the everyday life of secular people - something the American religious right seems to feel a strange need to do.

[quote author=Grok link=topic=12822.msg128756#msg128756 date=1127191908]
[quote author=hismajesty[yL] link=topic=12822.msg128717#msg128717 date=1127170427]
[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=12822.msg128716#msg128716 date=1127170014]
It was changed? lol. 'indivisible' is much better. Having it changed to 'under God' was obviously some silly right-wing religious nonsense. It should be restored to its earlier state as soon as possible!
[/quote]

"indivisible" is still there.

"One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty, and justice for all."

God was added during the Cold War.
[/quote]


Hmm you sure? I thought I saw on the news that it was 1954, not 1861.
[/quote]

1861 was the Civil War.

Edit: Grok, yes, 1954, which was during the Cold War.


Also, here are the 3 versions:

[quote]    * 1892 to 1923:
      "I pledge allegiance to my Flag and to the Republic for which it stands: one Nation indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all."
    * 1923 to 1954:
      "I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands: one Nation indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all."
    * 1954 to Present:
      "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."
[/quote]

It doesn't sound quite right without "Under God": breaks the flow.

Seems to me "under God" breaks the flow.  Every time I've ever heard it said, speaker pauses at "under God" then continues.  How can that NOT be considered breaking the flow?

People pause after 'one nation' when they shouldn't.

It should be "one nation under God"...

I think it flows fine either way

lOne nation, under God, indivisiblel has much less flow than lOne nation indivisblel if you ask me.

It goes....

One nation under god, indivisible (you had an extra comma)

I've never heard it without a pause before 'under God'.

Having a pledge in general seems silly to me.

[quote author=Blaze link=topic=12822.msg129070#msg129070 date=1127494595]
Having a pledge in general seems silly to me.
[/quote]Bingo Batman!

Another thing, what about the people who have the misfortune of living in the United States (I'd much rather be in Canada), and hate our country, specifically our leader? It also infringes upon our freedom of speach too, if we're forced to say it.

Ok, if you think you have the "misfortune of living" in this country GET THE FUCJ OUT!  I hate people that hate America.  You can hate the government/leaders but if you hate America you are the reason that America is falling.

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=12822.msg131959#msg131959 date=1130335742]
Ok, if you think you have the "misfortune of living" in this country GET THE FUCJ OUT! I hate people that hate America. You can hate the government/leaders but if you hate America you are the reason that America is falling.
[/quote]

You can't prove that.

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=12822.msg131959#msg131959 date=1130335742]
Ok, if you think you have the "misfortune of living" in this country GET THE FUCJ OUT!  I hate people that hate America.  You can hate the government/leaders but if you hate America you are the reason that America is falling.
[/quote]
I wish the country's leaders had taken that stance about the people being oppressed in Iraq, and just told them to get out on their own.

Joe, you're young and a not very well informed, so I'll cut you some slack. But, beleive me, once you have the freedoms and lifestyle you're accustomed to in America taken away you'll realize how lucky you are. There are tons of people in other countries that would give anything to live here, and they're honestly risking their lives to get here. I feel very fortunate to live and truely beleive that we are much better off/lucky than those in other countries.

Canada, of course, isn't as extreme of an example of those countries and I don't think it'd be too much different from the US there. But places like in eastern Europe and Russia and especially the middle east - they've got it pretty harsh.

Another thing you probably would have a hard time adjusting too - the lack of stuff. America has a surplus of goods on our stores, people come here from other countries and are literally blown away by the stuff even in our grocery stores. You have to remember that a lot of other countries don't have super markets, or a walmart and stuff like that. If you want grocerys you go to a small building, similar to the old-time drug stores, you tell a person what you want and he'll bring it up front for you. You don't have tons of options or brands or flavors, you have 1 or 2. (Of course, again, some countries are better off than others with this sort of thing.)

Plus, furthermore, it's not an infringement on freedom of speech - IT'S OPTIONAL. Read the rest of the thread before you try to debate something.

As hismajesty said, Joe, you'll recognize the freedoms more as you get older, and eventually come to appreciate them. I'd suggest building self-awareness of the world around you, and in doing so, you'll build character.

Poor those people who live in the USA. They should move to a country where they can have freedom of thought, not just freedom of capitalism/money.

[quote author=Adron link=topic=12822.msg131981#msg131981 date=1130360955]
Poor those people who live in the USA. They should move to a country where they can have freedom of thought, not just freedom of capitalism/money.
[/quote]

We have freedom of thought, definitely. Especially thoughts of political criticism, probably moreso than is allowed anywhere else in the world. We're too caught up on being "politically correct" that the government never just says "shut the hell up and leave" which I wish they would.

You are indeed too caught up in being politically correct. "Non-patriotism" has been a reason for persecuting people to various degrees over different periods. Consider the hunt for communists and what happened to people suspected of communist associations. Or any other "unpatriotism".

I believe it is ok to 'persecute' (I use that term lightly) someone for not being patriotic.  If you don't love the country why are you in it? 

In this case, I used "non-patriotism" or "unpatriotism" to mean people critical of their regime or voicing concerns about official policy. They may actually love their country very much, but for not agreeing with the current leader of the country, they are made to suffer. That is the lack of freedom, the lack of freedom to disagree.

I think the words under god SHOULD be removed.

Think of it this way, if you don't belive in god you can choose not to say the pledge. Right? Ok.

Should the people who don't believe in god be excluded from a pledge because of thier religion? No.

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=12822.msg132024#msg132024 date=1130394011]
I believe it is ok to 'persecute' (I use that term lightly) someone for not being patriotic.  If you don't love the country why are you in it? 
[/quote]
I was born in it, and it isn't a terrible country.  To move would throw off my entire life.  Throw in the fact that I don't see any other country that is better than the U.S, I might disagree with a lot of things the country does, but I also agree with a lot of it.  I take a nuetral stand on the U.S, don't really like it, don't really dislike it. 

"If you do not love your country, why are you in it?"

People want to be left alone to live their lives.  Wherever they live, there they are.  We often leave behind one government when living becomes intolerable, in search of a government under which living is more pleasant.  In the United States, we established a government "of the people" to supposedly establish "a more perfect union" amongst the people.  The whole idea behind our constitution is to enumerate what things the government is allowed and disallowed to do.

There is no issue of loving your country or not loving it.  The government needs to stay out of the way of the people.  The "pledge of allegiance" is a silly thing really.  You should not have to recite a pledge someone else wrote in order to be deemed a patriotic citizen of that country.  I pledge my allegiance to these ideals.  What is allegiance?  Is that saying you have corresponding beliefs?

If allegiance is a statement of corresponding beliefs, and affirmation to others you belive them, then "under God" does not belong in the pledge.  That is crystal clear.  Not everyone believes in God, your god, or any god for many.  If your goal is creating patriots by offering a pledge for them to recite about your country, why confound it by adding religious allegiance on top?  You're sure to alienate many people who otherwise would have pledged allegiance to the country.

Now if your goal is to establish the United States as an official Christian nation, just say so.  You won't win, but at least you'd be honest.

Here is a quote from Al Thompson's blog:

[pre][size=3][color=white]
As men, we know that there is the establishment of government, which,
at least in our country, is supposed to keep people from hurting each
other, and to protect the liberties that come from God. No government or
constitution bestows rights unto man.  In our country the Declaration of
Independence, Articles of Confederation, and the subordinate Constitution
for the United States are the foundational documents that acknowledge all
mens rights. They are intended to put a rein on government, and at the
same time, they are supposed to be used to help protect the rights of
each and every man and woman.[/color][/size][/pre]

Thus, government cannot tell people to pledge to it at all, as it is of the people entirely and only the people have an ability to choose.  There is no concept of allegiance to a government if you think about it, only allegiance to each other.

Agreed.

NOTE:
My "love it or leave it" comment was directed at Joe because he stated he has the "misfortune" of living in the United States, it wasn't directed at people who don't believe in God.

IRONY is Christians wanting the pledge of allegiance to contain references to God.

God specifically commanded that no swearing or oath may be used which invokes His name.

The Anglo-Saxons decided that January 1st be the start of the year based on Christ's date of circumcision. Perhaps we, to avoid controversy, should change when the calendar year begins to make sure it isn't religious?

[quote author=hismajesty[yL] link=topic=12822.msg132497#msg132497 date=1130874358]
The Anglo-Saxons decided that January 1st be the start of the year based on Christ's date of circumcision. Perhaps we, to avoid controversy, should change when the calendar year begins to make sure it isn't religious?
[/quote]
Jesus had quite a bit of attention payed to his foreskin, that is an interesting peice of info.

Christians shouldn't care when the first day of the calendar is or is not.  To focus on any dates other than Christ's death and ascension into heaven should be a sin.  There are some sects which do this correctly, for example Jehovah's Witness.  Say what you want about many of their beliefs, but they practice what they believe for the most part.  Most denominations have lots to say about how things should be, but go about leading terribly sinful lives with a big evil grin on their faces.  Baptists are probably the worst that I have encountered.  Among Baptists, the Southern Baptists are the least Christian.

God has no place in the pledge.  God has already commanded that his name not be used to swear, which is the pledge.  "I swear to God that I love the United States".

Christians should be the ones suing to have God removed from the pledge.

The pledge isn't a swearing to God that one loves the US, it is just saying that the US is under God's watch (or something similar as I see it)

Agreed with CrAz3D.

"One nation, under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all"

is not saying "I swear to God..."

It's saying: "One nation, under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all"

"I pledge ...."

That is an oath, invoked using God's name, and is swearing.

I notice since I originally posted that Christians shouldn't want God in the pledge, that this thread has died.  In my experience this only happens to a "hot topic" when someone has posted something so obvious and irrefutable as to make any continued conversation pointless.

So I'll graciously accept your conceding to my argument and take a bow.  :)

I WIN
I WIN
I WIN
I WIN

"I pledge allegiance to THE FLAG of the United States of America."

[quote]one Nation under God - These 50 individual states are united as a single Republic under the Divine providence of God, "our most powerful resource" (according to the words of President Eisenhower)[/quote]
http://www.homeofheroes.com/hallofheroes/1st_floor/flag/1bfc_pledge.html
God as our most powerful resource? That just doesn't sound right, God isn't a resource.

Maybe not a physical resource but a resource of hope and comfort