The pledge ruled unconstitutional in public schools

[rushmc 23]

I understand what you are saying but this country was founded as a Christian nation. Just as other countries tie themselves to othre religions.

Judges, not the people or congress have changed things around this seperation issue. (which starts another thread so I will not go there)

It has been twisted into something it is not

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[wmw999 2,534]

Quote

was founded as a Christian nation

No, it was founded by men who were almost exclusively English-heritage Christians, in a society that had almost exclusively English-heritage Christians. They weren't trying to build a blueprint for people just like them.

Other countries that tie themselves to religion include Saudi Arabia and Iran. You may wish to emulate them, I don't.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

was founded as a Christian nation

No, it was founded by men who were almost exclusively English-heritage Christians, in a society that had almost exclusively English-heritage Christians. They weren't trying to build a blueprint for people just like them.

Other countries that tie themselves to religion include Saudi Arabia and Iran. You may wish to emulate them, I don't.

Wendy W.

Nor do I.

My point is that what is now stated as constitutional sepertation is not even close to what the founders intended. Therefor the courts rulings are making law not supporting or interpiting it.......

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[wmw999 2,534]

Quote

My point is that what is now stated as constitutional sepertation is not even close to what the founders intended.

We don't know that. We know that their world had religion far more intertwined with everyday life for most of them, but their world also had slaves, women as chattel, horses as transportation, and muskets as advanced weaponry.

We don't have the founding fathers here. From reading the constitution, it doesn't look like a document that was trying to respect one group over others -- it tries to set a framework that allows all groups to be respected equally. Including those of other religions, now that they are here.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[rushmc 23]

I think we have a good idea. Reading throught the fedralist papers and then reading the Constitution it self.

Simply stated, the government shall not establish a religion. It does not state that (a )God shall not be recognized or spoken of.

Look, I do not want or intend to push religion down someone's throat. But this country is a representitive republic. The intention of this form of government is to have the majority decide. Not a dam judge

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[wmw999 2,534]

That's because religion makes you comfortable.

What if it didn't?

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[mr2mk1g 10]

Quote

The intention of this form of government is to have the majority decide.

No - that would be a Democracy. You live in a Republic. The purpose of a Republic is to protect minorities from the will of the majority.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

The intention of this form of government is to have the majority decide.

No - that would be a Democracy. You live in a Republic. The purpose of a Republic is to protect minorities from the will of the majority.

that is what I said, a represetitive republic. I do not agree with your definition though.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

That's because religion makes you comfortable.

What if it didn't?

Wendy W.

I am not comfortable or uncomfortable with it. Either way it does not make a differnece.....to me anyway.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rasmack 0]

Quote

My point is that what is now stated as constitutional sepertation is not even close to what the founders intended. Therefor the courts rulings are making law not supporting or interpiting it.......

The founding fathers were not necessarily all-knowing and omniscient. However Thomas Jefferson seemed to disagree with you on his intent anyway.

Quote

History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government

or

Quote

May it be to the world, what I believe it will be, (to some parts sooner, to others later, but finally to all), the signal of arousing men to burst the chains under which monkish ignorance and superstition had persuaded them to bind themselves, and to assume the blessings and security of self-government

I invite you to check up on the history of the National Day of Prayer or check out this short biography on mr. Jefferson.

HF #682, Team Dirty Sanchez #227
“I simply hate, detest, loathe, despise, and abhor redundancy.”
- Not quite Oscar Wilde...

[mr2mk1g 10]

Well... whilst I have of course vastly over simplified the matter; it is the generally accepted major conceptual difference between a Democracy and a Republic.

A Democracy is run by an omnipotent majority while a Republic has constraints placed upon it by it's constitution and legal framework to prevent ts views being forced upon minorities and individuals.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Well... whilst I have of course vastly over simplified the matter; it is the generally accepted major conceptual difference between a Democracy and a Republic.

A Democracy is run by an omnipotent majority while a Republic has constraints placed upon it by it's constitution and legal framework to prevent ts views being forced upon minorities and individuals.

I had to do a little refresher for myself. Here is what I found ( I learned something today)

A pure democracy operates by direct majority vote of the people. When an issue is to be decided, the entire population votes on it; the majority wins and rules. A republic differs in that the general population elects representatives who then pass laws to govern the nation. A democracy is the rule by majority feeling (what the Founders described as a "mobocracy" 12); a republic is rule by law. If the source of law for a democracy is the popular feeling of the people, then what is the source of law for the American republic? According to Founder Noah Webster:



So even though I did not have a 100% correct understanding the piont that the judges are not following law is still valid.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[mr2mk1g 10]

I think the best sound bite from Jefferson on the subject is probably: "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibit the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state."

Either that or that Treaty he signed explicitly stating that the Us was not founded on Christian principals.
Alas though, I feel this thread is straying onto a very worn path.

[mr2mk1g 10]

Quote

So even though I did not have a 100% correct understanding the piont that the judges are not following law is still valid.

Yes, that could well be a perfectly valid point... assuming you are right in your interpretation of the constitution and Judges with their years and years of experience in dealing with the US legal system and it's complex interplay with your constitution are wrong.

I personally am not about to start disagreeing with a load of Judges who've spent a long time looking into the subject. I'm sure they know more about it than I.

If the case makes its way up to the Supreme Court I'm sure there'll be a satisfactorily authoritative judgment on the question.

[airtwardo 7]

We can always count on San Fran's to screw something.

***

Hey, it not just the left coasters!

I was saddened a of couple weeks ago, during the briefing segment of an airshow I was performing in...
~at a MILITARY BASE!!!

We were told NOT to use the Pledge segment of our act during the opening Flag Jump...
....it isn't 'Politically Correct'...

All of the performers sat there in silence for a moment after that directive was given...
one old timer War Bird pilot finally spoke up and said~

"Did we lose a war that I'm not aware of?"

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[EricTheRed 0]

Quote

We can always count on San Fran's to screw something.

***

Hey, it not just the left coasters!

I was saddened a of couple weeks ago, during the briefing segment of an airshow I was performing in...
~at a MILITARY BASE!!!

We were told NOT to use the Pledge segment of our act during the opening Flag Jump...
....it isn't 'Politically Correct'...

All of the performers sat there in silence for a moment after that directive was given...
one old timer War Bird pilot finally spoke up and said~

"Did we lose a war that I'm not aware of?"

I love my flag, and my country. I for one did say the pledge every morning during grade school during general assembly. I was always uncomfortable about the "under god" part.

The simple solution is to take that out. It does not belong.

Without those eight letters, there is no argument about the pledge.

Is the pledge about your god or your country?

For me, the flag represents my country, not your god, or anyone elses.

illegible usually

[livendive 8]

Quote

My point is that what is now stated as constitutional sepertation is not even close to what the founders intended. Therefor the courts rulings are making law not supporting or interpiting it.......

Loosely quoting the judge who ruled in this case, how would you feel if the schools required students to say "...one nation, who doesn't believe in god, indivisible..."?

I don't feel really strongly about this, but I can see how the addition of the phrase "under god" turned a patriotic exercise into an affirmation of faith.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[Channman 2]

We just used the words "Under God" at our local foot ball game. With the Crowd shouting UNDER GOD just to piss off the Ninth Circuit, which by the way is the most over turned and laugh at court in America.

As for me and my house will just keep on saying it with a smile.

[livendive 8]

Quote

We just used the words "Under God" at our local foot ball game. With the Crowd shouting UNDER GOD just to piss off the Ninth Circuit, which by the way is the most over turned and laugh at court in America.

That'd be even funnier if this ruling had been by the Ninth Circuit.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

We just used the words "Under God" at our local foot ball game. With the Crowd shouting UNDER GOD just to piss off the Ninth Circuit, which by the way is the most over turned and laugh at court in America.

That'd be even funnier if this ruling had been by the Ninth Circuit.

I thought it was??

Blues,
Dave

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[chuteless 1]

it may or may not be upheld by the Supreme Court, but either way, its just one more nail in the coffin of the United States of America.

Bill Cole



.

[livendive 8]

Quote

Quote

That'd be even funnier if this ruling had been by the Ninth Circuit.

I thought it was??

Nope. It was in a District court.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[livendive 8]

Quote

it may or may not be upheld by the Supreme Court, but either way, its just one more nail in the coffin of the United States of America.

Bill Cole
.

Yeah, cuz this country was dead until the phrase "under god" was added to the pledge, thereby reviving us.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[rushmc 23]

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/LAW/06/26/toobin.pledge.cnna/index.html

CNN) -- A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday that reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools is an unconstitutional "endorsement of religion" because of the addition of the phrase "under God" in 1954 by Congress. If the ruling stands, it would prevent students in the nine states that make up the circuit from reciting the pledge in school.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[mr2mk1g 10]

That article's dated 6/27/2002

This is another court that found the pledge to be unconstitutional.