View Poll Results: Do you believe that the phrase "Under God" should be in the Pledge of Allegiance?

Voters
236. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    133 56.36%
  • No

    103 43.64%
Page 39 of 107 FirstFirst ... 2937383940414989 ... LastLast
Results 381 to 390 of 1064

Thread: Do you believe that the phrase "Under God" should be in the Pledge of Allegiance?

  1. #381
    Banned SKILMATIC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    San Diego
    Last Seen
    04-03-06 @ 10:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,407

    Re: Do you believe that the phrase "Under God" should be in the Pledge of Allegiance?

    Quote Originally Posted by alex
    Again, see post #39 in this thread.

    Ok cool.

  2. #382
    Educator Columbusite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Columbus
    Last Seen
    01-04-07 @ 10:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    808

    Re: Do you believe that the phrase "Under God" should be in the Pledge of Allegiance?

    Quote Originally Posted by 26 X World Champs
    Ahh......this part of this post is pure BS. I am not "anti-religious" and it is the sign of someone prejudiced against anyone who disagrees with their point of view to suggest otherwise. I am against religion in our government, not anti-religious and I am very offended when anyone accuses me of being against religion. It is a bull**** accusation meant to incite trouble, and it is wrong. For example, if I were to say that you are "anti-athiests" because of your stand on this subject it would be equally wrong.
    That term being thrown around is old, tired, and false. Funny thing is he and others like him can't see that separation of church and state is actually very good for religion and is the reason why religions have done so well here. Why they want the government involved I don't know, but some have a very specific prupose in mind and that is to use things like the pledge, "In God we trust" on currency, and the 10 commandments in courthouses to support the claim that this is a "Christian nation". Alone, the pledge certainly can't do much harm, but when it is used in the way mentioned above it will. It isn't much of a stretch for our government to go from acknowledging God (the true Christian one, of course) to the nexxt logical step, which is to obey that God. Unlike others on this board I am not going to wait until constitutional rights have been stripped away because by then it will be too late to fix. I prefer preventative measures, though while on the surface looks like nit-picking, are what can be sure to keep that wall of separation up. Both the religious and non-religious will be much better off in the long run even though some are upset now.

  3. #383
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    11,103

    Re: Do you believe that the phrase "Under God" should be in the Pledge of Allegiance?

    Quote Originally Posted by shuamort
    Wait, so the Declaration of Independence is a variable but Jefferson's letter to the baptists which declared a separation of church and state isn't?
    Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists was nothing more than assurance that they were in no danger from their government. It was in response to a letter from them, and the phrase was never used as more than that until Justice Hugo Black invoked somewhere in the mid century and it caught on mostly with people who want the First Amendment to say 'there shall be no religion' period.

    Or the Treaty of Tripoly where it states that the country is NOT a christian country?
    As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen and as the said States have never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
    This actually should persuade you that the words 'under God' is not a Christian phrase.

    You're cherry picking once again.
    Cherry picking what? I'm not bringing up unrelated analogies. I've been quite consistent in this entire discussion.

    You mean, a Catholic organization that planted Ten Commandments around the country had no religious intentions by unconstitutionally inserting "under God" into the pledge. You can stick your fingers in your ears as deep as they go and the facts are still going to remain.
    What do the Catholics have to do with this? I haven't mentioned any Catholics. The Catholics are pertinent to the phrase 'under God' in the Pledge how?
    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." --Benjamin Franklin 1776

  4. #384
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    There's TWO Reasons The Pledging Should Cease

    Haven't dredged the entire thread yet, but skimmed about every other page.

    Seems like lots of folks don't want to discuss the hearts of this issue. lots of repitition and dodge ball playing, with few catches and fewer hits. Take this little popular quote, for example:

    The First Amendment - Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

    No one disagrees that the United States Congress passed a bill eventually signed into law that added the words "under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance. (Title 4, Chapter 1, Section 4 of the US Code)

    This part of the issue then boils down to "does Congress's addition of the words "under God" represent an "establishment" of religion, or not? If it does, it's in violation of the First Amendment, and the words gotta go.

    How do lawyers define "establishment"? Does Congressional monkeying with the Pledge constitute "establishment"? I contend that the magic words "under God" in the official context of the pledge DO establish a baseline validation in law of the presumption of God's existence, and as such violates the First Amendment.

    But that's only the establishment clause. There's more to this than that, if y'all'll stop and think. There's the act of recitition itself, which is independent of any potential establishment clause violation.

    The education code of the State of California, where Newdow filed his law suit, contains this:

    SECTION 52720. In every public elementary school each day during the school year at the beginning of the first regularly scheduled class or activity period at which the majority of the pupils of the school normally begin the schoolday, there shall be conducted appropriate patriotic exercises. The giving of the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America shall satisfy the requirements of this section.

    In every public secondary school there shall be conducted daily appropriate patriotic exercises. The giving of the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America shall satisfy such requirement. Such patriotic exercises for secondary schools shall be conducted in accordance with the regulations which shall be adopted by the governing board of the district maintaining the secondary school.
    This doesn't exactly mandate the Pledge of Allegience be recited, but neither does it offer alternative acceptable "patriotic exercises". Needless to say, most teachers and school administrators view this code as requiring the Pledge only.

    Read the First Amendment again. For this discussion on Newdow II, no one's posting past the establisment clause, but the next part is just as important:

    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;

    Demanding someone speak specific words is a far more egregious a violation of the freedom of speech as any possible gag. Of couse, there are legal beagles that will state that the word "abridging" is the limiting concept there, ie, the concern was the cutting short, or limiting of speech, and not it's opposite. I can't agree with them.

    (And if someone could tell me how to post links I'd appreciate it)

  5. #385
    Counselor

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Pacific Northwest, Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-07-09 @ 04:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,856

    Re: Do you believe that the phrase "Under God" should be in the Pledge of Allegiance?

    Quote Originally Posted by t125eagle
    also, lets think about it. what exactly does the pledge say?

    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.

    All it impllies is that God is watching over the country. it was implemented by Lincoln during the Civil War, the one nation under God part. as it was put onto our money. It was a dark period in the north, and they were on the verge of loosing. it was to bring the country together as it lwas ment to do here as well. If athiests were really against it, then they would stop using US currency as it is on there too.
    I too, believe that UnderGod is Ok, yes, but you have your facts wrong Under God was added to the Pledge in 1949 or 1950. after the Second world war. I was in school at the time and remember it well. All during WW2, we said the pledge in school daily without saying under God. I can't honestly say if it it important or not to our nation. We certainly did well with out Undergod being in the Pledge., It had nothing to do with Lincoln. In God we trust was added to our Paper currency i(one dollar silver certificate) in 1957, look at old bills in museums. they do not have In God We trust on them.
    It was on some coins before that. Not all. The Famous double eagle 20 dollar gold piece had, IN God we Trust, on it

    http://www.treas.gov/education/fact-...we-trust.shtml
    Last edited by dragonslayer; 09-23-05 at 04:32 AM.

  6. #386
    Pundit-licious
    shuamort's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Saint Paul, MN
    Last Seen
    02-26-09 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,297

    Re: Do you believe that the phrase "Under God" should be in the Pledge of Allegiance?

    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl
    Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists was nothing more than assurance that they were in no danger from their government. It was in response to a letter from them, and the phrase was never used as more than that until Justice Hugo Black invoked somewhere in the mid century and it caught on mostly with people who want the First Amendment to say 'there shall be no religion' period.



    This actually should persuade you that the words 'under God' is not a Christian phrase.

    What do the Catholics have to do with this? I haven't mentioned any Catholics. The Catholics are pertinent to the phrase 'under God' in the Pledge how?
    I've mentioned the Catholics. A couple times and their exact relevence to the inclusion of how "under God" came about. You've denied the fact that the "God" isn't exactly a Christian saying, I've shown that on the contrary that that's the revisers' intent.

  7. #387
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    11,103

    Re: Do you believe that the phrase "Under God" should be in the Pledge of Allegiance?

    Quote Originally Posted by shuamort
    I've mentioned the Catholics. A couple times and their exact relevence to the inclusion of how "under God" came about. You've denied the fact that the "God" isn't exactly a Christian saying, I've shown that on the contrary that that's the revisers' intent.
    If that was their intent, that is what they would have said, and that is what they would have included in the phrase. Intent and actuality are never the same thing. The intent to commit murder is a far lesser crime than the actual committing.

    What 'under God' is supposed to mean to anybody is not specified, nor is it associated with any group, Christian, athiest, or otherwise. It is a cultural and historical phrase only in keeping with the foundations of the beginnings of government for this country. That you prefer that rights be from a source other than God-given is fine. Even the phrase in the pledge does not specify that. But that is the historical basis for it since all the founders believed that is where inalienable rights originate. None attempted to convince the other of who or what God is, however.

    Law should never be made on anybody's unique interpretation of anything. Law should be made on the basis of fact only. The fact is, the phrase 'under God' implies nothing other than what any individual wishes to make of it, it is not the law of the land so far as any federal mandate--the states do make their own rules regarding the use of the Pledge--and nobody anywhere is required to say it, believe it, or do anything related to it.
    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." --Benjamin Franklin 1776

  8. #388
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    11,103

    Re: There's TWO Reasons The Pledging Should Cease

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar
    Haven't dredged the entire thread yet, but skimmed about every other page.

    Seems like lots of folks don't want to discuss the hearts of this issue. lots of repitition and dodge ball playing, with few catches and fewer hits. Take this little popular quote, for example:

    The First Amendment - Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

    No one disagrees that the United States Congress passed a bill eventually signed into law that added the words "under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance. (Title 4, Chapter 1, Section 4 of the US Code)

    This part of the issue then boils down to "does Congress's addition of the words "under God" represent an "establishment" of religion, or not? If it does, it's in violation of the First Amendment, and the words gotta go.

    How do lawyers define "establishment"? Does Congressional monkeying with the Pledge constitute "establishment"? I contend that the magic words "under God" in the official context of the pledge DO establish a baseline validation in law of the presumption of God's existence, and as such violates the First Amendment.

    But that's only the establishment clause. There's more to this than that, if y'all'll stop and think. There's the act of recitition itself, which is independent of any potential establishment clause violation.

    The education code of the State of California, where Newdow filed his law suit, contains this:



    This doesn't exactly mandate the Pledge of Allegience be recited, but neither does it offer alternative acceptable "patriotic exercises". Needless to say, most teachers and school administrators view this code as requiring the Pledge only.

    Read the First Amendment again. For this discussion on Newdow II, no one's posting past the establisment clause, but the next part is just as important:

    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;

    Demanding someone speak specific words is a far more egregious a violation of the freedom of speech as any possible gag. Of couse, there are legal beagles that will state that the word "abridging" is the limiting concept there, ie, the concern was the cutting short, or limiting of speech, and not it's opposite. I can't agree with them.

    (And if someone could tell me how to post links I'd appreciate it)
    Long ago, the court rightfully ruled that the recitation of the Pledge not be mandatory nor are alternate patriotic exercises prohibited for any who would choose to use them. The Pledge is a symbol, a tradition, an emblem if you will not unlike that of the flag and the corresponding rules for saluting, displaying, etc. There is no consequence imposed by law for anybody's failure to do either or for disrespecting either.

    Thus, as the phrase 'under God' implies nothing other than the cultural and historical roots of the founding of the nation, and there is no reward or consequence for saying or not saying the phrase, there is no establishment of religion.

    That is the root of this entire argument. Is any reference to religion an establishment of religion. I say it is not, and to forbid any reference to religion would be a violation of the First Amendment. The only way that government would be guilty of an establishment of religion is if any particular religion was favored (rewarded) over any other, if any particular religion was forbidden or afforded disadvantage for its beliefs.

    There is nothing implied nor stated in the Constitution suggesting that religion would not be permitted within public view, on public lands, or even in government activity.

    Welcome to DebatePolitics by the way. And you post a link by copying it from the website and pasting it into the buffer as you compose your post.
    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." --Benjamin Franklin 1776

  9. #389
    Pundit-licious
    shuamort's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Saint Paul, MN
    Last Seen
    02-26-09 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,297

    Re: Do you believe that the phrase "Under God" should be in the Pledge of Allegiance?

    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl
    If that was their intent, that is what they would have said, and that is what they would have included in the phrase. Intent and actuality are never the same thing. The intent to commit murder is a far lesser crime than the actual committing.

    What 'under God' is supposed to mean to anybody is not specified, nor is it associated with any group, Christian, athiest, or otherwise. It is a cultural and historical phrase only in keeping with the foundations of the beginnings of government for this country. That you prefer that rights be from a source other than God-given is fine. Even the phrase in the pledge does not specify that. But that is the historical basis for it since all the founders believed that is where inalienable rights originate. None attempted to convince the other of who or what God is, however.

    Law should never be made on anybody's unique interpretation of anything. Law should be made on the basis of fact only. The fact is, the phrase 'under God' implies nothing other than what any individual wishes to make of it, it is not the law of the land so far as any federal mandate--the states do make their own rules regarding the use of the Pledge--and nobody anywhere is required to say it, believe it, or do anything related to it.
    The problem with your defense is obvious. You're equating "god", or in this case "God" to mean anything. Which. It. Doesn't. You'll need to back up your claim with facts that "God" could mean anything to anyone, including atheists.

  10. #390
    Educator Columbusite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Columbus
    Last Seen
    01-04-07 @ 10:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    808

    Re: Do you believe that the phrase "Under God" should be in the Pledge of Allegiance?

    Quote Originally Posted by shuamort
    The problem with your defense is obvious. You're equating "god", or in this case "God" to mean anything. Which. It. Doesn't. You'll need to back up your claim with facts that "God" could mean anything to anyone, including atheists.
    With that kind of reasoning I guess "under no God" could mean anything, even God if you want.

Page 39 of 107 FirstFirst ... 2937383940414989 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •