one nation, under god

[del]

I don't think so.

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?

you have to give it to get it

 

[del]

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.

that's an extraordinarily courageous thing to do on an anonymous messageboard.

 

[Foxfyre]

will it be frivolous if the catholic church takes obama to court?

because it's the same thing-religious freedom

Whose religious freedoms are being trampled on by The Pledge?

Who is being forced, by rule of law, to say it?

good point, but i think it's intellectually dishonest to give it a pass on one hand, and decry obama's actions toward the catholics on the other.

hypocritical is the word, i believe

Except that Obama's quarrel with the Cathoics is based on a concept of the government dictating that a religious group furnish a product to anybody and/or forcing a private business to provide that product free to anybody.

The phrase 'under God' in the Pledge, however, forces nobody to do anything. It can be understood in a historical framework or not, said or not said, be meaningful or meaningless however anybody chooses.

So we're really comparing apples and oranges there.

 

[del]

Whose religious freedoms are being trampled on by The Pledge?

Who is being forced, by rule of law, to say it?

good point, but i think it's intellectually dishonest to give it a pass on one hand, and decry obama's actions toward the catholics on the other.

hypocritical is the word, i believe

Except that Obama's quarrel with the Cathoics is based on a concept of the government dictating that a religious group furnish a product to anybody and/or forcing a private business to provide that product free to anybody.

The phrase 'under God' in the Pledge, however, forces nobody to do anything. It can be understood in a historical framework or not, said or not said, be meaningful or meaningless however anybody chooses.

So we're really comparing apples and oranges there.

tell that to an eight year old who gets singled out for not saying it.

it has no place in the pledge which is supposed to unite all americans, not just the ones of which you approve.


try again

 

[Intense]

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.

that's an extraordinarily courageous thing to do on an anonymous messageboard.

That ain't going to stop the drones Del. They know where you at.

 

[Foxfyre]

good point, but i think it's intellectually dishonest to give it a pass on one hand, and decry obama's actions toward the catholics on the other.

hypocritical is the word, i believe

Except that Obama's quarrel with the Cathoics is based on a concept of the government dictating that a religious group furnish a product to anybody and/or forcing a private business to provide that product free to anybody.

The phrase 'under God' in the Pledge, however, forces nobody to do anything. It can be understood in a historical framework or not, said or not said, be meaningful or meaningless however anybody chooses.

So we're really comparing apples and oranges there.

tell that to an eight year old who gets singled out for not saying it.

it has no place in the pledge which is supposed to unite all americans, not just the ones of which you approve.


try again

Fire a teacher who would allow an eight year to be called out for not saying it. And how does it unite all Americans to deny those who LIKE saying it the opportunity to do so?

 

[hipeter924]

The pledge of allegiance and currency was changed to include under god, the argument against including under god is that it implies there is a god, and that the state is meant to be submissive to god.

The sensible solution is to print notes and mint coins without 'under god' to give an alternative, while still printing notes and minting coins with 'under god'. As for the pledge of allegiance, no one is forced to use the under god pledge, so I don't see an issue with that really.

But to honest I am not that bothered by what it is now.

 

[SFC Ollie]

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?

you have to give it to get it

Oh come on Del, back up one more post and I'm told Fuck you, and I'm supposed to respect that?

 

[Foxfyre]

The pledge of allegiance and currency was changed to include under god, the argument against including under god is that it implies there is a god, and that the state is meant to be submissive to god.

The sensible solution is to print notes and mint coins without 'under god' to give an alternative, while still printing notes and minting coins with 'under god'. As for the pledge of allegiance, no one is forced to use the under god pledge, so I don't see an issue with that really.

But to honest I am not that bothered by what it is now.

And that's it. It doesn't hurt or harm or coerce you in the least for the words to be there whether or not you believe in anything approximating a god. But more than 90% of Americans still report that they believe in some sort of deity with the huge lion's share of those Americans calling that deity "God". They know why the words are there.

All of the Founders didn't necessarily believe in a personal God, but they to a man believed that humankind is possessed of certain unalienable rights that are God given and they intended that the U.S. Constitution recognize and protect those rights--the first nation in the the history of the world to do so.

So the "God" of the Pledge, of the Declaration of Independence, implied in the Preamble to the Constitution and acknowledged in the Constitutions of all 50 states, inscribed on our coinage and on numerous federal buildings is the historical "god", real or implied, that gave us the unalienable rights that created American exceptionalism.

We should preserve the historical concept regardless of our individual religious beliefs.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Only an idiot would believe that.

Only an idiot like you would defend the indefensible.

More idiocy from the village idiot.

We all remember what we saw and heard on the TV, bucky. Fail on your part.

 

[JakeStarkey]

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.

Not at all, bucky, except in your empty head.

 

[JakeStarkey]

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.

Our nation, bucko, was founded on constitutional principles, separation of church and state being in the first amendment.

 

[SFC Ollie]

There is no such thing as separation of church and state in the constitution.

 

[del]

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.

that's an extraordinarily courageous thing to do on an anonymous messageboard.

That ain't going to stop the drones Del. They know where you at.

nobody lives forever

 

[del]

Except that Obama's quarrel with the Cathoics is based on a concept of the government dictating that a religious group furnish a product to anybody and/or forcing a private business to provide that product free to anybody.

The phrase 'under God' in the Pledge, however, forces nobody to do anything. It can be understood in a historical framework or not, said or not said, be meaningful or meaningless however anybody chooses.

So we're really comparing apples and oranges there.

tell that to an eight year old who gets singled out for not saying it.

it has no place in the pledge which is supposed to unite all americans, not just the ones of which you approve.


try again

Fire a teacher who would allow an eight year to be called out for not saying it. And how does it unite all Americans to deny those who LIKE saying it the opportunity to do so?

there's no need to mention god in a pledge of allegiance to a flag.

the original didn't have it and it seemed to work fine

some people are all about freedom until it's applied to someone they disagree with

*shrug*

 

[del]

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?

you have to give it to get it

Oh come on Del, back up one more post and I'm told Fuck you, and I'm supposed to respect that?

if you called me an asshole, i'd tell you to fuck yourself, too.

 

[del]

There is no such thing as separation of church and state in the constitution.

please

 

[SFC Ollie]

Hell I call myself an asshole, it used to be in my job description............

 

[JakeStarkey]

There is no such thing as separation of church and state in the constitution.

Ollie, you know better. No test oaths for office, meaning church membership means nothing. First Amendment.

Your interpretation is in the small minority and ignored in government and most of our culture.

 

[SFC Ollie]

It's not there. You cannot show me it is there. Sorry but it is from a letter written to a church. Everyone knows this.