Slashdot Mirror
Pledge of Allegiance Ruled Unconstitutional
VUSE g-EE-k and entirely too many other people wrote in about an Appeals Court decision holding that the Pledge of Allegiance, as recited in its current form in various public schools (often by law), is unconstitutional. The court's decision (PDF) is available.
It's not like our country protects us with military and law enforcement or anything. We don't owe them nothing, 'specially no dumb 'pledge of allegiance'.
using namespace slashdot;
troll::post();
This is totally absurd. The foundation and tradition of our country has been deemed 'unconstitutional' Could someone please explain what this country is going to? The next thing you know it will be illegial or unlawful to utter the word 'God' in public. So much for the founding fathers with their Christian beliefs.
# fuser -v
#
Maybe it was God's fault for existing.
is a stupid nigger.. he should have his penis and testicles cut off
no, i am not a racist.. i'm going by the definition of nigger as per defined by Chris Rock
-robert turner
When our nation is so obsessed with stuff like this.
We waste billions on lawsuits which do nothing but remove the moral fabric of our country. Ever since the "liberation" of the people in the twenties this country has had an incredible exponential increase in social problems. Crime, disease, civil unrest, and violence have all increased dramatically while actual personal freedom has been destroyed.
Our education system is a joke because there is no enforcement anymore. It's becomming impossible to enforce any discipline at all because everyone attempts to justify their POV on why they should be exempt from law, responsibility and accountability.
Our real freedoms are being drained away while we bicker and fight over the freedom not to hear what's good for us.
God have mercy on this country. I believe our foolishness will soon destroy this country.
My $0.02 will always be worth more than your â0.02, so
Score: -1 Troll
Since when is a blatant "hook-line-and-sinker" troll rate a 3?
i think not
Since atheism was as shocking in the 18th century as admitting that you're gay was in the 1950's, there's really no way of knowing who was atheist and who wasn't. Many of the founding fathers were Freemasons (all-seeing eye on the back of a $1 bill), which at that time was quite a bit more of a scary, dark order than the Wal-Mart Shriner variety that you see today (and was decisively not Christian). The French Revolution, which borrowed heavily from the American Revolution's example, was definitely atheistic.
Regardless of whether the founding fathers were atheistic or not, they made it clear that the government shall have no influence in the church or in any religion or lack thereof, or in any person's religious views,and that's what the parent comment was all about. The "under god" part forces children to make an affirmation that they believe in god, and this is offensive to atheists and to fundamentalist jews who believe that using the word in that context is taking god's name in vain.
As far as polytheistic religions go, how is a Hindu supposed to say under God when he believes in multitudes of deities, some who are rather jealous?
What about Bhuddists? Bhuddists may deify Buddah, but it's a bit different than the Judaeo-Christian deity, in that God is far too vaugue (or too specific if we're talking about Zen) a term.
What about Moslems? The first "pillar" (rite of passage) in Islam is to submit to Allah by saying, "There is no other god but Allah and Mohommad is his prophet." So if during the pledge, the word "God" is said in the proper form then it is showing a disrespect to Allah's proper name.
Congress approved it in the 1950's, when everyone was finger-pointing at "known communists". Communism is an atheistic form of government, and so by affirming the "under god" part you are reaffirming your lack of atheism, thus Communism loses in the elementary schools.
Well, communism has pretty much lost now so I think it's safe to declare it unconstitutional, which it is, no matter if atheists or theologians wrote the constitution.
The scenes of schoolchildren making loyalty oaths to the flag every day remind Europeans such as myself more of the types of society that Stalin and Hitler tried to impose than the values of liberal democracy.
Er, it's not a coincidence that Hitler and Stalin arose in socialist countries.
One of the Hitler or Stalin will never arise in the US is BECAUSE of the pledge. The "flag" is representative of the principles of the US, liberty and justice. It's through the pledge the children start to learn that there are higher principles than simple "me first moral relativism".
of the United Snakes of America
And to the Republican
for which it stands
One corporation
invisible
under cash
with liberty and justice
for $ome
Amen
"Only in their dreams can men truly be free 'twas always thus, and always thus will be."
--Tom Schulman
4 Insightful?!?! What the hell are you moderators thinking?
Any sufficiently well-organized Government is indistinguishable from bullshit.
Our money says "In God We Trust" because there wasn't enough room to write "America is populated and run by a bunch of ignorant crackers who don't deserve the enlightened system of government Jefferson and Madison established for them."
- Have a picture
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Gee--thanks a lot for challenging the moderators to change it--now it's "5 Insightful"
char *mySig;
Now, before anyone goes and claims that the phrase "separation of church and state" is "right there" in the constitution, perhaps a trip to the U.S. Consitution is in order. It doesn't even have the word "church" in it.
Still insistent that we should have separation of church and state? Fine, then stop prosecuting the Catholic priests for molesting children, as that's a violation of the law, and priests are church officials. They should be separate, shouldn't they?
I enjoy the crap you people spew from your mouths. "Seperation of church and state", "the forcing of beliefs on others by any faith".
You people disgust me completely. The statement in the Constitution and it's AMendments don't say anything about seperation of church and state. It is regarding AND SPECIFICALLY stating that there is to be no "state"(not as on one of the States) sponsored religion. But freedom to chose what you will, and freedom from the opression that our forbearer fought against in Europe, aisa and throughout the world.
This talk about removeing God from our country is like wecoming the Assyrians into our country and letting them ravage us as they did back then.
For years, people and liberal monkeys were screaming to take God out of our public, out of our schools. Let the homosexuals run rampant and keep the Hetro's PDA out of the public eye. Then tragedy befalls our country, Not just Sept 11th which so many of you lemmings so boldy quote, bombings of embassys, our military forces abroad.
Then everyone starts praying and saying Oh dear God help us , boo hoo, then all of the sudden people WANT GOD again! What is this crap? You people have to learn to take the consiquences that are handed to you for your ignorance and lack of respect. That can be interpereted ANY way you like it. I'm sure the pagans and athiests will think I'm spewing God'isms and the Christians will think I'm rooting for God.
You people need to get a grip. Learn our history and understand it well or we will be doomed to repete it over and over again until we fall. Much like the fall of the Roman Empire.
And if anyone of you have a clue as to what I'm talking about, compare rome to us today and how close in comparisons are we NOW, to when the empire fell and was destroyed?
Any good historian or kid who payed attention in High School should be able to figure this out.
Or they are upset because people are using insignificant gestures as a means to sue the government for money, which is exactly what this guy was doing. While your logic sounds ok like most liberal/socialist views it is very narrow in its view and looks only at the here and now. The pledge of allegiance is for the United States of America founded by Christians and predominantly just that. To please the liberal's yes there were others here first the use of the term founded is to indicate when they arrive a movement was started that developed us into the country we are today. I think 100% of the people who are opposed to the pledge of allegiance are so because they don't like to be reminded of their minority status. I for one am Christian so I know I am biased and I won't claim not to be but I also feel that we are focusing in this country way to much on pleasing minority interests for political gain because we have been convinced it is the right thing to do. I'm starting to get the feeling this may only be in the interests of the minorities and in the best interests of the country as a whole. And I do fear were this type of liberal/socialist attitude will lead this country over the next decade. I know this Michael Newdow isn't thinking about it he just wants his monetary return and I wonder sometimes when we stopped thinking about the long term effects of our actions in favor of what is going to effect me here and now.
I heard that ALL Europeans are VERY tolerant people. Except for some minor incidences of Peaceful Differences of Opinions getting out of hand during the late 1930's through the first half of the 1940's (WWII, Holocaust, Genocide, Raping, Pillaging and the like) and generally for most of the people in Eastern Europe from the 1940's to around the early 1990's (Iron Curtain, Communist Puppet States, Secret Police, People with different opinions disappearing after friendly knocks on their doors in the middle of the night, Walls being erected to keep people I N S I D E), and oh yah, there was some Minor Difference of Opinion during the 1990's (a few years ago) in the Balkans (The Genoicide of Serb-Muslim minorities, Warfare, Raping and Pillaging, Western Europe just sitting there and Watching it happen). Oh yah, most of the countries in Western Europe are also nolonger even have self rule now that the EU has been firmly established. The EU has no democratic elections of its countless Chairman-Presidents-Governing Bodies, intead its just a big Technocratic bureaucracy, neither a Democracy or a Republic. So back your bags and take a nice big Breath of Freedom from Oppression when get off the plane and reach the Promised Land...
I suppose this was inevitable... I mean, after all, this is one nation under [insert favorite villain here, such as Bob, or Bill, or what's his name]... The constitution states that there will be a separation of church and state, and that all people will have freedom of religion. It never says freedom from religion. Atheism is a religion too...
As for my personal opinion, I think that removing the "under God" part is really lame, perhaps more so than adding it in the first place. I mean, if little Johnny's parents are upset about him being exposed to other beliefs, why not just explain to him that in their home, God means evolution, or DNA, or money, or something like that? It's getting to the point where people who believe in a God or many gods are treated unjustly because of their religious beliefs.
As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.
A solution to the problem with music today
Why am I reading so many posts that say "Don't Panick"? Why should we panick? Where is our right to force certain beliefs on people? Let us choose what we believe.
Remember why so many people came here? Why the Declaration of Independence and Constitution were originally made? I don't either, I wasn't there. But I hear it was because of the oppression felt in Mother England to worship how the government deemed right, and not how the people wanted. That would explain why religious freedom was established so early in these founding documents.
How can we, as a nation, determine which God to worship? I am Christian (or as some critics would say, Mormon) but I see no offense in letting my Wiccan, Pagan, Jewish, or (could it be?) other-Christian-sect neighbors worship how and what they please. Freedom has many reaches in US history, and thankfully one of them is to (theoretically) worship in peace.
Leave it out, put it in, it doesn't matter to me. I know who I worship, I know what I worship. I want my kids to go to school to become educated, and to go to church to become wise. Hopefully we can let others do the same.
Well, if you don't believe in God, you have no morals, so you're going to lie anyway.
---
Two rights don't make a wrong, but three rights make a left. -Me
OBL's religion demands that he kill us for violating sacred laws. We refuse to allow that and have the gall to tell him he is mis-interpreting Islam. That's a religious war if ever there was one. The very idea that we could entertain a separate notion of morality outside of religious faith is an attack on his notion of religion.
I knew someone would bring this up, and that's fine.
First, if you can't see the distinction between slavery and a minor mention to "Under God" in the Pledge inasmuch as its negative affect on society and individuals, you need to really take a good look at what you are saying.
Second, as the descenting judge commented in the court ruling, the extremely miniscule possibility that "under God" could be construed as an establishment of religion is so minimal so as to not be a violation. His words were: "Lest I be misunderstood, I must emphasize that to decide this case it is not necessary to say, and I do not say, that there is such a thing as a de minimis constitutional violation. What I do say is that the de minimis tendency of the Pledge to establish a religion or to interfere with its free exercise is no constitutional violation at all."
Third, as the judge also commented, such references are only viewed as an establishment of religion by those extremists that would insist that all mention of religion be deleted from all public discourse. "Normal," rational people, even if they don't believe in God, will not be significantly affected by the words "Under God." Only extremists, such as Newdow, are. As the judge wrote, "such phrases as "In God We Trust," or "under God" have no tendency to establish a religion in this country or to suppress anyone's exercise, or non-exercise, of religion, except in the fevered eye of persons who most fervently would like to drive all tincture of religion out of the public life of our polity."
Fourth, we are not talking about slavery. We are talking about reference to God in a government-supported or tolerated setting. The Supreme Court has already permitted prayers in Legislatures, etc. based on them having become accepted and traditional parts of the fabric of our society. This decision will be overturned for the same reason. I.e., precedent exists, whether you like it or not, to overturn the current ruling.
I don't accept it as part of my culture and it is obvious, through the fact that this is in the courts at all, that someone else doesn't accept it as part of their culture. You are not everyone.
In a word, "tough." There are 270 million people in this country. It's impossible to please all of them all of the time. But to say that the current Pledge isn't part of American culture and tradition because a few percentage points of the population doesn't like it is to distort the definition of "culture" which, by definition, is a collective entity. The Pledge IS part of your culture even though you might not like that part of the culture.