[Vision2020] One Should Have Right To Object To 'Under God'

Tue Sep 12 03:22:55 PDT 2006

"The pledge does amount to state sponsored promotion of a specific form or religion." Ted Moffett.

  Ted which specific religion does it promote?

  I do not understand why this is such a big deal. If you do not believe  in God so what. I don't believe in the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, or  little Leprechauns. But you don't see me out there smashing the fun and  whatever others get out of it, do you? Who cares, really, if there is  no God, it won't hurt to let others say His/Her/Its name?

  Second, it isn't asking you to believe in God, or that you pledge  allegiance to a God, it isn't even saying saying that God is real. It  is simply making a statement that it is under God, real of fiction.  Does Rudolph pull Santa's slay, or are we going to argue that he  doesn't because the slay and the man he is pulling really doesn't  exist? Regardless of your belief in Santa, everybody knows that Rudolph  has a shiny nose and Santa asked him to guide his slay on Christmas Eve  night. And everybody knows that God is above all things, people, and  nations, real of imaginary. Apollo is the Sun God, I can say that, even  though I personally believe he doesn't exist. 

 Do you agree  with everything else in the pledge? Do you believe that it is one  nation? A nation being one group of people with a shared culture,  religion or ethnic background? I should say that is also a false  statement. What about truth? Does the US ever lie? Is it always  truthful, Ted? Another false statement. How about, "Liberty and justice  for all". Do you believe that the US gives liberty and justice for all?  Do you Ted? No, so if we want to start ripping apart the pledge, and  excluding statements we feel are not true, we would not have a pledge  anymore would we?

 The pledge is simply meant as tool to pull  us together, instill pride and a commonality among all peoples in the  United States, regardless of who or what we claim to be. There is no  one statement, no one sentence, no words in which all peoples in this  country will agree. But we can all generally agree what this country is  suppose to be, or should be, a good nation that is dedicated to doing  what is right, together, as one for everyone.  

  Best,

  _DJA

Ted Moffett <starbliss at gmail.com> wrote:  Donovan et. al.

  http://www.aclunc.org/opinion/020903-pledge.html

  In  adding "under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954, Congress  intended to put religion in public school. As President Eisenhower said  in signing the law, from "this day forward, the millions of our  schoolchildren will daily proclaim, in every city and town, every  village and rural schoolhouse, the dedication of our nation and our  people to the Almighty." Since students were praying daily in many  public schools, the new Pledge language was not subject to an immediate  constitutional challenge. Courts had not yet recognized the rights of  minority faiths to be free of religious coercion in public schools. 
  --------------------------------
  I  recall in a 5th grade public school in North Carolina in 1961  starting every school day with the Lord's prayer... The pledge of  allegiance's "under God" phrase was then a minor issue!

  The  words "In God We Trust" on currency are not a pledge that I am  compelled to recite with my hand over my heart.  The pledge of  allegiance is, or was when I was in the public school system.  

  The  out for those who defend the pledge of allegiance with the words "under  God" continuing in public schools, despite the apparent state promotion  of specific religious beliefs (monotheism over the State), is that any  student can refuse to recite it without being officially compelled to  conform, or officially punished.  The student can legally opt out  of saying the pledge.  It is not "forced" on any student,  technically speaking.  

  The  pledge, to be more religiously broad, might read "under whatever God,  Gods, Goddesses or other forms of spiritual beings or powers, or the  lack of them, that prevail" to avoid state promotion of specific  forms of religious belief, but this is cumbersome and wordy for a  pledge.  And the reason the words "under God" were placed in the  pledge during the 1950s was not to be open minded about including  different religious beliefs, but to send a specific message to the  atheists of the godless Communist Soviet Union, and other communist  nations, that the USA was a nation under God, a specific sort of  God.  The words "under God" added to the pledge are thus a legacy  of cold war politics. 

  I find the  argument that the words "under God" are spiritually generic,  and can refer to all forms of spiritual belief, and thus are  not state endorsement of a specific religion, disingenuous.   I heard this exact argument from a federal lawyer working in the  federal court in Boise, a lawyer who knew the justices involved in the  9th US Circuit Court who ruled that the pledge's "under God"  was unconstitutional.  

  Given  the pressures young students face to be popular, accepted, to conform  to the dominant values of their peers and adult leaders, odds are many  students will recite the pledge anyway, even if they object, or don't  understand the meaning of the words they parrot.  

  The pledge does amount to state sponsored promotion of a specific form or religion.

  Ted Moffett

  On 9/11/06, Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com> wrote:    More  BAD NEWS for people that are offended by the word "GOD" being  incorporated into the state. It is now also on some of your printed  currency. That is right, George Bush is having the words "In God we  Trust" printed on your money. He is violating the constitutional  separation of Church and State, AGAIN! 

You can protest this  violation of separation of church and state, and tell GEORGE BUSH, NO,  by looking through all your coins and bills and sending every one of  those unconstitutionally BUSH branded with this religious propaganda to  me. 

Every dollar I raise will be a petition to the US Congress  on how much you disagree with BUSH and his forcing of religion on the  people. 

Please send this unconstitutional BUSH currency to:

Donovan Arnold  
325 Main Street
Moscow, ID, 83843

Best,

_DJA

Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com>   wrote:   I'd  rather just fight this thing from a religious equality angle.  I,  personally, could care less if it's idolatry or not.  I'm  more-or-less a pagan (it's complicated), and the term "God" appears to  mean the judaeo-christian "God" and not just any old "god".  I  don't like the implication that our nation is "under God" in that  sense, especially when we're forcing our children to recite it at  school like some kind of 1984-esque loyalty pledge.  It sounds too  much like brain-washing to me, anyway. 

I don't understand why  Christians care so much about those two words belonging in the Pledge,  especially in a country with express freedom of religion and that was  built in part by people who were escaping religious persecution and who  wanted to ensure that the same thing didn't happen to future  generations. 

Paul

Taro Tanaka wrote:   
Sins can be committed in ignorance, and the fact that they were committed in 
ignorance doesn't cause the sin to just disappear, but God in His mercy does 

cut us all a great deal of slack for our manifold sins committed in 
ignorance. At the same time, the effects of sins committed in ignorance 
don't just magically disappear, and when we start to feel those effects 

strongly enough, sometimes we put two and two together and realize we have 
an issue that we need to repent of.

-- Princess Sushitushi

"keely emerinemix" 
<kjajmix1 at msn.com> wrote:

I would not say that a Christian who does recite the pledge is
 committing 
idolatry; I am saying that I would be if I were to violate my own 
conscience in this matter.

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! 

http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

=======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet, 
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   

http://www.fsr.net                       
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================

=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet, 
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. 
  http://www.fsr.net 
mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================  

---------------------------------
  Why keep checking for Mail? The all-new Yahoo! Mail shows you when there are new messages.   

=======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet,
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
                http://www.fsr.net
         mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================

  =======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet, 
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
               http://www.fsr.net                       
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================

---------------------------------
Why keep checking for Mail? The all-new Yahoo! Mail shows you when there are new messages.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20060912/7395cb68/attachment-0001.htm 