Pledge of Allegiance

[Boxlicker101]

I just heard on the News that a federal judge has ruled that the words "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance are unconstitutional. I have to agree with that decision. The words have no place in a required recitation.

I was raised reciting the Pledge every day in elementary school, and don't seem to be harmed. This was mostly in the older days BEFORE those two words were imposed on it so I was not usually required to recite that version. I don't remember just when that happened but I do remember being in a group reciting the Pledge with everybody stumbling over the addition so it might have happened before I finished elementary school but I was a teenager by then, with enough enough sense to know what I believed.

 

[Dar~]

Are you saying that the under God wasn't in the original pledge?
I didn't know that.

 

[sweetnpetite]

I just heard on the News that a federal judge has ruled that the words "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance are unconstitutional. I have to agree with that decision. The words have no place in a required recitation.

I was raised reciting the Pledge every day in elementary school, and don't seem to be harmed. This was mostly in the older days BEFORE those two words were imposed on it so I was not usually required to recite that version. I don't remember just when that happened but I do remember being in a group reciting the Pledge with everybody stumbling over the addition so it might have happened before I finished elementary school but I was a teenager by then, with enough enough sense to know what I believed.

Don't you know that if we take the words 'under god' out of our pledge of allegience, the Almighty will strike us down in his infinate wrath?

What have we gotten ourselves into? The secularization of this great Christian Nation will be our downfall. And those heathens who removed the phrase are to blame.

Helfire!!!! Damnation!!!!

Repent and know the Lord. Before it's too late.

PS- buy my book, "Repent and Know the Lord Before It Is Too Late" only $29.95 on Amazon. And for the good spots in heaven, be sure to come to my church and double tithe.

 

[Guest]

Are you saying that the under God wasn't in the original pledge?
I didn't know that.

It was added in 1954.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

I sincerely hope SCOTUS overturns that decision.

 

[impressive]

I sincerely hope SCOTUS overturns that decision.

Curious to why, Colly?

I don't have strong feelings one way or the other. I'm just curious.

 

[Dar~]

Curious to why, Colly?

I don't have strong feelings one way or the other. I'm just curious.

I don't care one way or the other, but I do get irritated when people say that we need to completely take the pledge out of the school room. We need to let kids kno wthat they should take pride in their country and their freedoms. The pledge is one of the ways we can. Although it shouldn't be by rote, they should teach the meaning of the flag and the sacrifces made in the name of their freedoms so that they can really appreciate the words they speak.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Colleen Thomas
I sincerely hope SCOTUS overturns that decision.

Curious to why, Colly?

I don't have strong feelings one way or the other. I'm just curious.

I wonder about that too. I no longer have occasion torecite the Pledge and I have nobody in school who does so and it is no big deal to me personally. Even so, I believe the court decision was correct. Requiring a child in school to express a belief in a supreme being seems to me to be unconstitutional.

 

[impressive]

... so that they can really appreciate the words they speak.

I seriously doubt many do.

 

[Dar~]

I seriously doubt many do.

I know, which is why we need to find a way to teach them. I really feel that if we could instill a sense of pride into our children early ( pride in themselves, their country, and their property) we could reduce so many problems. It's just the finding of a way.

 

[rgraham666]

Although not an American, I wouldn't recite a pledge with the words 'under God' in it.

I'm an agnostic, not a hypocrite.

 

[Honey123]

Here:

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.

 

[impressive]

Although not an American, I wouldn't recite a pledge with the words 'under God' in it.

I'm an agnostic, not a hypocrite.

Well, then you couldn't spend American money, either ... 'cause it says "In God We Trust"

 

[glynndah]

"Under God" was added during the Red Scare so that God could tell we weren't commies. As a child of the 60's a group of us radical preteeners ( a dangerous subversive group if ever there was one!) decided it should be "'seeking' liberty and justice for all" so that's how we said it instead. No one ever called us on it, probably because no one was actually paying any attention to what the class was muttering. I still say "seeking" and just stay silent during the "under God" part.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Curious to why, Colly?

I don't have strong feelings one way or the other. I'm just curious.

If it stands, the far religious right is going to have no trouble convincing your average, everyday christians that they were right. If regular folks feel thier religion is under assault by a liberal, activist, judicial system, they will continue to vote for the GOP in defense of their faith. It dosen't help the justice was in San Francisco.

You are going to have an extremely difficult time convincing folks the left isn't out to remove their faith from the public square alltogether. People whose religion is threatened are capable of great excess. Ignoring the failures of Bush Co. and considering other issues wouldn't evenbe a bump in the road.

Heck, even if SCOTUS does overtun it, that will only serve to convince people they made the right decision onBush if only for his Supreme court nominees.

 

[impressive]

If it stands, the far religious right is going to have no trouble convincing your average, everyday christians that they were right. If regular folks feel thier religion is under assault by a liberal, activist, judicial system, they will continue to vote for the GOP in defense of their faith. It dosen't help the justice was in San Francisco.

You are going to have an extremely difficult time convincing folks the left isn't out to remove their faith from the public square alltogether. People whose religion is threatened are capable of great excess. Ignoring the failures of Bush Co. and considering other issues wouldn't evenbe a bump in the road.

Heck, even if SCOTUS does overtun it, that will only serve to convince people they made the right decision onBush if only for his Supreme court nominees.

I see your point.

 

[sweetnpetite]

I seriously doubt many do.

most of us didn't even know what the words meant. And I'm one of the smart ones.

pledge?
allegience?
republic?
indevisible?
liberty and justice?

um- hello. we said this in elementary school and it was just a jumble of funny souding words. Maybe they should rephrase it all together.

I promise
to honor the flag
of the United States of America
and to honor and protect
The country it stand for
May we always strive for fairness
May we always stand for freedom
May we always stand together.

 

[cloudy]

I have no strong feelings one way or the other, like others have already said, but I can't help but wonder, every time see a news item like this, why people are wasting their energy and time on such a small thing that seems to hold very little significance to many. There are so many important battles to be fought that this just seems silly to me, as well as a waste of time and resources.

 

[Alex756]

I disagree with the reason of the 54 edit to protect ud from the godlessness of comunism, so I obviously support a restoration to the original.

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

Revert BACK to the original. Ever wonder why we stumble on the pledge, because its been edited like 10 times by politicians!

Hmmm does this stance make me left, right, or just wacko

-Alex

 

[Stella_Omega]

If it stands, the far religious right is going to have no trouble convincing your average, everyday christians that they were right. If regular folks feel thier religion is under assault by a liberal, activist, judicial system, they will continue to vote for the GOP in defense of their faith. It dosen't help the justice was in San Francisco.

You are going to have an extremely difficult time convincing folks the left isn't out to remove their faith from the public square alltogether. People whose religion is threatened are capable of great excess. Ignoring the failures of Bush Co. and considering other issues wouldn't evenbe a bump in the road.

Heck, even if SCOTUS does overtun it, that will only serve to convince people they made the right decision onBush if only for his Supreme court nominees.

I do want to remove their faith from the public square. I find it very offensive. They can keep it in their churches- of which there are a plenitude.

 

[impressive]

I have no strong feelings one way or the other, like others have already said, but I can't help but wonder, every time see a news item like this, why people are wasting their energy and time on such a small thing that seems to hold very little significance to many. There are so many important battles to be fought that this just seems silly to me, as well as a waste of time and resources.

Distraction? Divide and conquer?

 

[elfin_odalisque]

Agnostic, atheist or simply non-believer, everyone should have their head.

The problem I've got is how a country that founded itself on repressed religious beliefs, took the 'storm tossed, huddled masses', now wants to act like a Soviet state and prevent people from pledging under the most powerful oath they know.

We began with the Puritans, and, in our favor, we have added every color, race and religion to our melting-pot. Every move to stop free expression is a step towards totalitariatism. "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Please, oh, please can we have Xmas concerts in schools, Hannukah and Hindu celebrations. Kids don't understand if you tell them religion is important and the state tells them to keep it hidden. We are failing the next generation through our intransigence.

Sorry, flame over.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Deleted with apologies to Stella Omega.

 

[matriarch]

Although not an American, I wouldn't recite a pledge with the words 'under God' in it.

I'm an agnostic, not a hypocrite.

Thank heavens we have no such thing.

 

[Weird Harold]

I do want to remove their faith from the public square. I find it very offensive. They can keep it in their churches- of which there are a plenitude.

Is the back-lash worth the effort?

I think Colly has a very good point about how the perception of a threat has affected the political landscape. Suits against the plege of allegiance and ten commandments are seen as repression and ghettoizing religion. As much as those two words offend you, there are many, many more voters who are not offended that see a threat and vote accordingly.

Personally, I was in school when those words were added and it was made very clear to all students that they were not mandatory and that even the pledge itself is not required if it conflicted with personal religious beliefs. The only thing required was passive acceptance of others' beliefs.

While I'm not a particularly religious person I find I'm oneof those people Colly is talking about because I'm far more offended by attempts to remove religion from public sight than I am about two words in a pledge that almost nobody who as ever recited it ever takes seriously.

Like Cloudy, I an think of many more issues the time and money spent coddling a small minority people who are offended by the word "God" could be usefully spent on.