one nation, under god

[Intense]

yeah i think so. You want to force people to stand and submit to your opinion or now they are not americans.

Irony

Hey asshole, all I ask for is respect. Isn't that something that we are supposed to teach our children? Or is that something you don't believe in too?

Forcing people to stand isnt respect. I know thats a difficult concept for you..but i know others understand the word logic.

It's more like Manners. You know, Flushing, after use. Rinsing the dishes and putting them in the dishwasher. Returning a borrowed car with a full tank of gas. Daily Hygiene. Waiting for a light to turn green before hitting the gas. You know, the little things that distinguish us from the great unwashed. Wait. You are the great unwashed. Never mind.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I made a simple statement, I spelled it out for you in plain simple terms, and some here are too stupid to understand it.

Let's review what I have said in this thread:

Post 174:
"The 2 words should be removed if the majority wants them removed.

The 2 words should not be removed to please a small minority. "

Post 225

"They shouldn't be forced to say or even learn the pledge, but when it is being said they should at least learn the respect to stand quietly."


Post 261
"Once again, remove the words if the majority wants them removed.

Leave them be if they are to be removed for a small minority. Which seems to be the case.

Unfortunately the majority today won't care unless their handlers tell them to.... Left or right......"


Now I have tried to reason with some of you over these basic concepts of Respect for the flag and respect for others in the room. But it seems as though respect is not what we want our children to learn........ That is not my America........

Majority or minority has nothing to do with this.

The Constitution dictates, not the majority.

 

[Intense]

Majority shouldn't matter, we're a country with laws to protect minority views.

They shouldn't be forced to show respect for something, i prefer freedom.

No one should be forced to respect the flag, if someone doesn't want to stand during the pledge they should have that right, if they want to burn a flag they should have that right, if they want to burn a cross they should have that right. Even if i disagree with someone's view, i'll never disagree with their rights.

So again you think teaching children to disrespect others is OK.........
Don't get me started on burning a flag.........

No, i wouldn't teach them that. But if someone doesn't respect a belief in god, he/she should have that freedom.

I hate burning flags too, should it be illegal? No

Is burning money illegal? Just a thought. Agreed, matters of Conscience cannot be imposed.

 

[Dr.Drock]

The children are not pledging their allegiance to God you moron!

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.

They're pledging that this nation is under god, which assumes there is a god, which not everyone assumes.

You moron lol, yes act like a 3rd grader to try and make your point. Well done.

This is a nation under God. So what's the problem?

Don't believe in God..... then don't invoke His name in recitation.

You do not have the right to not be offended. You liberals need to grow a pair and stop acting like children.

Lol again.

I can only imagine how bad your panties would be in a wad if the plege said "one nation, not under god."

If there were an assumption in the pledge that god didn't exist, you'd have a meltdown, since there's an assumption in the pledge that god does exist, you demand everyone conform and respect it.

Hypocrisy typical of partisan hacks.

 

[Mustang]

SO it is wrong to teach our children respect for others.

Got it...

You are now officially an asshole.

Lol I love it.

I'm asking you to respect a child who is a non-believer and not have him pointed out for his beliefs in a classroom.

But you don't want to respect that child, and you aren't an asshole, you're a morally superior human being for wanting a child to be forced to go against his/her beliefs.

We all should learn from such a wise, moral person like yourself.

The children are not pledging their allegiance to God you moron!

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.

Then maybe you should consider changing your avatar.

 

[Intense]

I made a simple statement, I spelled it out for you in plain simple terms, and some here are too stupid to understand it.

Let's review what I have said in this thread:

Post 174:
"The 2 words should be removed if the majority wants them removed.

The 2 words should not be removed to please a small minority. "

Post 225

"They shouldn't be forced to say or even learn the pledge, but when it is being said they should at least learn the respect to stand quietly."


Post 261
"Once again, remove the words if the majority wants them removed.

Leave them be if they are to be removed for a small minority. Which seems to be the case.

Unfortunately the majority today won't care unless their handlers tell them to.... Left or right......"


Now I have tried to reason with some of you over these basic concepts of Respect for the flag and respect for others in the room. But it seems as though respect is not what we want our children to learn........ That is not my America........

Agreed that there are things that are bad form and shouldn't be encouraged. In the end, free will prevails, for the most part. There is no accounting for taste though. What Jake likes to brush under the rug, is that even though the Constitution as interpreted by the Court stands, it can be overruled by reversal or Amendment with enough support.

 

[Intense]

The Pledge of Allegiance was written in August 1892 by the socialist minister Francis Bellamy (1855-1931). It was originally published in The Youth's Companion on September 8, 1892. Bellamy had hoped that the pledge would be used by citizens in any country.


In its original form it read:

"I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."



In 1923, the words, "the Flag of the United States of America" were added. At this time it read:

"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."




In 1954, in response to the Communist threat of the times, President Eisenhower encouraged Congress to add the words "under God," creating the 31-word pledge we say today. Bellamy's daughter objected to this alteration. Today it 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."

The Pledge of Allegiance




In 2012, in response to an S&P downgrade many citizens encouraged Congress to add the words "under crushing debt" as well as an addendum in defense of traditional Family Values, creating the 35-word pledge we say today. Today it reads:

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under crushing debt, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all (except the gheys)."

Francis Bellamy (1855 - 1931), a Baptist minister, wrote the original Pledge in August 1892. He was a Christian Socialist. In his Pledge, he is expressing the ideas of his first cousin, Edward Bellamy, author of the American socialist utopian novels, Looking Backward (1888) and Equality (1897).

Francis Bellamy in his sermons and lectures and Edward Bellamy in his novels and articles described in detail how the middle class could create a planned economy with political, social and economic equality for all. The government would run a peace time economy similar to our present military industrial complex.

The Pledge was published in the September 8th issue of The Youth's Companion, the leading family magazine and the Reader's Digest of its day. Its owner and editor, Daniel Ford, had hired Francis in 1891 as his assistant when Francis was pressured into leaving his baptist church in Boston because of his socialist sermons. As a member of his congregation, Ford had enjoyed Francis's sermons. Ford later founded the liberal and often controversial Ford Hall Forum, located in downtown Boston.

In 1892 Francis Bellamy was also a chairman of a committee of state superintendents of education in the National Education Association. As its chairman, he prepared the program for the public schools' quadricentennial celebration for Columbus Day in 1892. He structured this public school program around a flag raising ceremony and a flag salute - his 'Pledge of Allegiance.'

His original Pledge read as follows: 'I pledge allegiance to my Flag and (to*) the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.' He considered placing the word, 'equality,' in his Pledge, but knew that the state superintendents of education on his committee were against equality for women and African Americans. [ * 'to' added in October, 1892. ]

Dr. Mortimer Adler, American philosopher and last living founder of the Great Books program at Saint John's College, has analyzed these ideas in his book, The Six Great Ideas. He argues that the three great ideas of the American political tradition are 'equality, liberty and justice for all.' 'Justice' mediates between the often conflicting goals of 'liberty' and 'equality.'

In 1923 and 1924 the National Flag Conference, under the 'leadership of the American Legion and the Daughters of the American Revolution, changed the Pledge's words, 'my Flag,' to 'the Flag of the United States of America.' Bellamy disliked this change, but his protest was ignored.

In 1954, Congress after a campaign by the Knights of Columbus, added the words, 'under God,' to the Pledge. The Pledge was now both a patriotic oath and a public prayer.

Bellamy's granddaughter said he also would have resented this second change. He had been pressured into leaving his church in 1891 because of his socialist sermons. In his retirement in Florida, he stopped attending church because he disliked the racial bigotry he found there.

What follows is Bellamy's own account of some of the thoughts that went through his mind in August, 1892, as he picked the words of his Pledge:

It began as an intensive communing with salient points of our national history, from the Declaration of Independence onwards; with the makings of the Constitution...with the meaning of the Civil War; with the aspiration of the people...

The true reason for allegiance to the Flag is the 'republic for which it stands.' ...And what does that vast thing, the Republic mean? It is the concise political word for the Nation - the One Nation which the Civil War was fought to prove. To make that One Nation idea clear, we must specify that it is indivisible, as Webster and Lincoln used to repeat in their great speeches. And its future?

Just here arose the temptation of the historic slogan of the French Revolution which meant so much to Jefferson and his friends, 'Liberty, equality, fraternity.' No, that would be too fanciful, too many thousands of years off in realization. But we as a nation do stand square on the doctrine of liberty and justice for all...

If the Pledge's historical pattern repeats, its words will be modified during this decade. Below are two possible changes.

Some prolife advocates recite the following slightly revised Pledge: '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, born and unborn.'

A few liberals recite a slightly revised version of Bellamy's original Pledge: 'I pledge allegiance to my Flag, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with equality, liberty and justice for all.'

The Pledge of Allegiance - A Short History

 

[Lonestar_logic]

The pledge endorses the concept of God.

Only an idiot would believe that.

Only an idiot like you would defend the indefensible.

More idiocy from the village idiot.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

They're pledging that this nation is under god, which assumes there is a god, which not everyone assumes.

You moron lol, yes act like a 3rd grader to try and make your point. Well done.

This is a nation under God. So what's the problem?

Don't believe in God..... then don't invoke His name in recitation.

You do not have the right to not be offended. You liberals need to grow a pair and stop acting like children.

Lol again.

I can only imagine how bad your panties would be in a wad if the plege said "one nation, not under god."

If there were an assumption in the pledge that god didn't exist, you'd have a meltdown, since there's an assumption in the pledge that god does exist, you demand everyone conform and respect it.

Hypocrisy typical of partisan hacks.

It wouldn't bother me in the slighest if God wasn't mentioned in the pledge.

I don't demand anything from anyone. You can choose to pledge your allegiance to this nation or not. That's what makes this country great.

But to those that choose not to shows their lack of patriotism IMO.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Lol I love it.

I'm asking you to respect a child who is a non-believer and not have him pointed out for his beliefs in a classroom.

But you don't want to respect that child, and you aren't an asshole, you're a morally superior human being for wanting a child to be forced to go against his/her beliefs.

We all should learn from such a wise, moral person like yourself.

The children are not pledging their allegiance to God you moron!

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.

Then maybe you should consider changing your avatar.

Why?

It's as American as any other flag of that period and part of my heritage.

Don't like it? Don't look at it!

 

[Dr.Drock]

This is a nation under God. So what's the problem?

Don't believe in God..... then don't invoke His name in recitation.

You do not have the right to not be offended. You liberals need to grow a pair and stop acting like children.

Lol again.

I can only imagine how bad your panties would be in a wad if the plege said "one nation, not under god."

If there were an assumption in the pledge that god didn't exist, you'd have a meltdown, since there's an assumption in the pledge that god does exist, you demand everyone conform and respect it.

Hypocrisy typical of partisan hacks.

It wouldn't bother me in the slighest if God wasn't mentioned in the pledge.

I don't demand anything from anyone. You can choose to pledge your allegiance to this nation or not. That's what makes this country great.

But to those that choose not to shows their lack of patriotism IMO.

That's not what I said, I said if the pledge said "one nation, not under god", which is an atheist viewpoint, would you respect that and not want it changed? Hell no.

And someone should have the right to not be a patriot, especially a child, without being exposed to the masses if he/she doesn't want to be.

Like I said I don't care who wins this lawsuit, couldn't care less if the word god remains in it, but I totally respect the views of those who want it out and back to the way it was before the socialist changed it.

 

[AmericanFirst]

They're pledging that this nation is under god, which assumes there is a god, which not everyone assumes.

You moron lol, yes act like a 3rd grader to try and make your point. Well done.

This is a nation under God. So what's the problem?

Don't believe in God..... then don't invoke His name in recitation.

You do not have the right to not be offended. You liberals need to grow a pair and stop acting like children.

Lol again.

I can only imagine how bad your panties would be in a wad if the plege said "one nation, not under god."

If there were an assumption in the pledge that god didn't exist, you'd have a meltdown, since there's an assumption in the pledge that god does exist, you demand everyone conform and respect it.

Hypocrisy typical of partisan hacks.

We are just tired of babies crying about it. This nation was founded on Christian principals. Don't like it, you have the option to leave.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Lol again.

I can only imagine how bad your panties would be in a wad if the plege said "one nation, not under god."

If there were an assumption in the pledge that god didn't exist, you'd have a meltdown, since there's an assumption in the pledge that god does exist, you demand everyone conform and respect it.

Hypocrisy typical of partisan hacks.

It wouldn't bother me in the slighest if God wasn't mentioned in the pledge.

I don't demand anything from anyone. You can choose to pledge your allegiance to this nation or not. That's what makes this country great.

But to those that choose not to shows their lack of patriotism IMO.

That's not what I said, I said if the pledge said "one nation, not under god", which is an atheist viewpoint, would you respect that and not want it changed? Hell no.

And someone should have the right to not be a patriot, especially a child, without being exposed to the masses if he/she doesn't want to be.

Like I said I don't care who wins this lawsuit, couldn't care less if the word god remains in it, but I totally respect the views of those who want it out and back to the way it was before the socialist changed it.

What socialist and what did they change? If you mean socialistw put in under God, that is the funniest thing I have heard today.

 

[Dr.Drock]

It wouldn't bother me in the slighest if God wasn't mentioned in the pledge.

I don't demand anything from anyone. You can choose to pledge your allegiance to this nation or not. That's what makes this country great.

But to those that choose not to shows their lack of patriotism IMO.

That's not what I said, I said if the pledge said "one nation, not under god", which is an atheist viewpoint, would you respect that and not want it changed? Hell no.

And someone should have the right to not be a patriot, especially a child, without being exposed to the masses if he/she doesn't want to be.

Like I said I don't care who wins this lawsuit, couldn't care less if the word god remains in it, but I totally respect the views of those who want it out and back to the way it was before the socialist changed it.

What socialist and what did they change? If you mean socialistw put in under God, that is the funniest thing I have heard today.

A christian socialist who was a member of K of C changed the pledge to put in the word under god, it's all over this thread.

And if you find that funny for whatever reason, i'm glad you got a good laugh.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Lol again.

I can only imagine how bad your panties would be in a wad if the plege said "one nation, not under god."

If there were an assumption in the pledge that god didn't exist, you'd have a meltdown, since there's an assumption in the pledge that god does exist, you demand everyone conform and respect it.

Hypocrisy typical of partisan hacks.

It wouldn't bother me in the slighest if God wasn't mentioned in the pledge.

I don't demand anything from anyone. You can choose to pledge your allegiance to this nation or not. That's what makes this country great.

But to those that choose not to shows their lack of patriotism IMO.

That's not what I said, I said if the pledge said "one nation, not under god", which is an atheist viewpoint, would you respect that and not want it changed? Hell no.

And someone should have the right to not be a patriot, especially a child, without being exposed to the masses if he/she doesn't want to be.

Like I said I don't care who wins this lawsuit, couldn't care less if the word god remains in it, but I totally respect the views of those who want it out and back to the way it was before the socialist changed it.

You don't care but you respect their views. Sounds a little contradictory to me. Either you don't care or you would like to see it removed. Man up and take a position instead of being a punk coward.

As for your weak assed hypothetical. It would never happen therefore no answer is needed.


!

 

[Dr.Drock]

It wouldn't bother me in the slighest if God wasn't mentioned in the pledge.

I don't demand anything from anyone. You can choose to pledge your allegiance to this nation or not. That's what makes this country great.

But to those that choose not to shows their lack of patriotism IMO.

That's not what I said, I said if the pledge said "one nation, not under god", which is an atheist viewpoint, would you respect that and not want it changed? Hell no.

And someone should have the right to not be a patriot, especially a child, without being exposed to the masses if he/she doesn't want to be.

Like I said I don't care who wins this lawsuit, couldn't care less if the word god remains in it, but I totally respect the views of those who want it out and back to the way it was before the socialist changed it.

You don't care but you respect their views. Sounds a little contradictory to me. Either you don't care or you would like to see it removed. Man up and take a position instead of being a punk coward.

As for your weak assed hypothetical. It would never happen therefore no answer is needed.


!

I wouldn't spank my kids, but i can respect parents who do it if they love their kids. I don't have to share a viewpoint to respect it. Respect other points of view rather than resorting to 3rd grade idiot name-calling.

Of course you won't answer it, why would a hypocrite want his hypocritical viewpoint exposed? If the pledge said "one nation, not under god" you'd be throwing more fits and trantrums than a 2 year old with his binky taken away.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

That's not what I said, I said if the pledge said "one nation, not under god", which is an atheist viewpoint, would you respect that and not want it changed? Hell no.

And someone should have the right to not be a patriot, especially a child, without being exposed to the masses if he/she doesn't want to be.

Like I said I don't care who wins this lawsuit, couldn't care less if the word god remains in it, but I totally respect the views of those who want it out and back to the way it was before the socialist changed it.

You don't care but you respect their views. Sounds a little contradictory to me. Either you don't care or you would like to see it removed. Man up and take a position instead of being a punk coward.

As for your weak assed hypothetical. It would never happen therefore no answer is needed.


!

I wouldn't spank my kids, but i can respect parents who do it if they love their kids. I don't have to share a viewpoint to respect it. Respect other points of view rather than resorting to 3rd grade idiot name-calling.

Of course you won't answer it, why would a hypocrite want his hypocritical viewpoint exposed? If the pledge said "one nation, not under god" you'd be throwing more fits and trantrums than a 2 year old with his binky taken away.

If a frog had wings he wouldn't bump his ass on the ground everytime he hopped.

I don't debate what if's.

An insult is an insult no matter what form it takes. But I don't expect you to understand that.

 

[Dr.Drock]

You don't care but you respect their views. Sounds a little contradictory to me. Either you don't care or you would like to see it removed. Man up and take a position instead of being a punk coward.

As for your weak assed hypothetical. It would never happen therefore no answer is needed.


!

I wouldn't spank my kids, but i can respect parents who do it if they love their kids. I don't have to share a viewpoint to respect it. Respect other points of view rather than resorting to 3rd grade idiot name-calling.

Of course you won't answer it, why would a hypocrite want his hypocritical viewpoint exposed? If the pledge said "one nation, not under god" you'd be throwing more fits and trantrums than a 2 year old with his binky taken away.

If a frog had wings he wouldn't bump his ass on the ground everytime he hopped.

I don't debate what if's.

An insult is an insult no matter what form it takes. But I don't expect you to understand that.

The hypothetical is to help you understand the other viewpoint, by putting you in their shoes.

But you already know the answer and don't want to admit it. You know you'd be freaking out if the pledge said "one nation, not under god." You're afraid to admit it on an anonymous message board to someone you don't know and will never meet, and you call me a coward lol.

 

[N4mddissent]

There is something ironic and a touch sad when the solution to saying the pledge is to divide people into those who say the "under god" part and those who choose not to say the "under god" part since it is just before the part that states we are "indivisible".

I have never understood why people don't understand religious neutrality. Why create an issue when there doesn't need to be one? Sticking "under god" into the pledge in the 1950's took an all inclusive pledge that every American could be proud to recite and excluded a small group of Americans who were included in the previous version. If someone tried to insert the words "one nation under no god" it would be obvious how that pledge would no longer be reflective of the beliefs of every American. The neutral position is have a pledge which does not make any assumption as to the existence of any deity.

But having said that, I think educating the public about the origin of the phrase and increasing awareness about how it, like the "In god we trust" motto, is a phrase that unnecessarily marginalizes the world view of certain groups of American citizens is probably warranted prior to trying to use the court system to force change.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I wouldn't spank my kids, but i can respect parents who do it if they love their kids. I don't have to share a viewpoint to respect it. Respect other points of view rather than resorting to 3rd grade idiot name-calling.

Of course you won't answer it, why would a hypocrite want his hypocritical viewpoint exposed? If the pledge said "one nation, not under god" you'd be throwing more fits and trantrums than a 2 year old with his binky taken away.

If a frog had wings he wouldn't bump his ass on the ground everytime he hopped.

I don't debate what if's.

An insult is an insult no matter what form it takes. But I don't expect you to understand that.

The hypothetical is to help you understand the other viewpoint, by putting you in their shoes.

But you already know the answer and don't want to admit it. You know you'd be freaking out if the pledge said "one nation, not under god." You're afraid to admit it on an anonymous message board to someone you don't know and will never meet, and you call me a coward lol.

I'll type slowly so perhaps you can understand.

I don't answer hypotheticals especially ones that are so far from reality.

And yes I called you a coward.