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 57 of 107 FirstFirst ... 747555657585967 ... LastLast
Results 561 to 570 of 1064

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

  1. #561
    Advisor
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Mississippi
    Last Seen
    03-18-16 @ 09:18 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    409

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

    Quote Originally Posted by RightatNYU
    So you think there should be state churches?
    Of course not, but I do not believe religious issues should be up to the feds to decide.
    I read a report that said the typical symptoms of stress were eating too much, drinking too much, impulse buying, and driving too fast. Who are they kidding? That's my idea of a perfect day.----Unknown

  2. #562
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    12-16-06 @ 02:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,528

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

    Quote Originally Posted by RightatNYU
    The exact same argument was made a few posts back, except regarding the liberty bell. I'll substitute the two in my reply.

    The fact that the Constitution has a religious reference (and an incredibly minor one) in the (non-binding, non-actuary) closing of it, does not necessarily mean that it is not proper for government to be endorsing of it in all cases. There are special exemptions for religion in the public arena that have been deemed constitutional by the courts.

    A) In cases of conflict between Establishment and Free Exercise
    B) Establishment and Exercises in legislative bodies
    C) Non-Devotional use of the Bible in the Public Schools
    D) Uniform tax exemptions incidentally available to religious institutions
    E) Religious considerations in public welfare programs
    F) Activities which, though religious in origin, have ceased to be religious in nature

    The last one there is what the Constitution's closing would fall under. It is also the same precedent that the defendents in the "under God" case will be claiming exonerates them, but the circumstances point pretty clearly toward the pledge not falling under this clause.

    So what say you to the oath one takes on the stand, so help me God, should that be changed as well?

    As I said, if a child, or anyone else is forced to repeat the oath, like at a trial for instance, this could be considered unconstitutional, or should it?

  3. #563
    Advisor
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Mississippi
    Last Seen
    03-18-16 @ 09:18 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    409

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

    Quote Originally Posted by RightatNYU
    And a "strict constructionist" who believed even ONE of those things is so far outside the judicial mainstream that there would be no chance whatsoever of being confirmed. So I'm not really worried about that.
    And one who doesn't, isn't a "strict constructionist." For instance, certainly no judicial nominee would want restraints under Article III section 2, but it's right there in black and white, and very plainly written, so his lack of belief would be immaterial. Would Congress ever use this section? Not a good precedent to establish is it?
    I read a report that said the typical symptoms of stress were eating too much, drinking too much, impulse buying, and driving too fast. Who are they kidding? That's my idea of a perfect day.----Unknown

  4. #564
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 10:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Deegan
    So what say you to the oath one takes on the stand, so help me God, should that be changed as well?

    As I said, if a child, or anyone else is forced to repeat the oath, like at a trial for instance, this could be considered unconstitutional, or should it?
    "It is true that religion has been closely identified with our history and government. As we said in Engel v. Vitale, "The history of man is inseparable from the history of religion. And . . . since the beginning of that history many people have devoutly believed that `More things are wrought by prayer than this world dreams of.'" In Zorach v. Clauson, we gave specific recognition to the proposition that "[w]e are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being." The fact that the Founding Fathers believed devotedly that there was a God and that the unalienable rights of man were rooted in Him is clearly evidenced in their writings, from the Mayflower Compact to the Constitution itself. This background is evidenced today in our public life through the continuance in our oaths of office from the Presidency to the Alderman of the final supplication, "So help me God." Likewise each House of the Congress provides through its Chaplain an opening prayer, and the sessions of this Court are declared open by the crier in a short ceremony, the final phrase of which invokes the grace of God...

    ...This is not to say, however, that religion has been so identified with our history and government that religious freedom is not likewise as strongly imbedded in our public and private life...

    ...Almost a hundred years ago in Minor v. Board of Education of Cincinnati, 7 Judge Alphonso Taft, father of the revered Chief Justice, in an unpublished opinion stated the ideal of our people as to religious freedom as one of:

    "absolute equality before the law, of all religious opinions and sects...The government is neutral, and, while protecting all, it prefers none, and it disparages none."

    Before examining this "neutral" position in which the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment place our Government it is well that we discuss the reach of the Amendment under the cases of this Court.

    First, this Court has decisively settled that the First Amendment's mandate that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" has been made wholly applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment.

    Second, this Court has rejected unequivocally the contention that the Establishment Clause forbids only governmental preference of one religion over another. Almost 20 years ago in Everson, supra, at 15, the Court said that "[n]either a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another." And Mr. Justice Jackson, dissenting, agreed:

    'There is no answer to the proposition . . . that the effect of the religious freedom Amendment to our Constitution was to take every form of propagation of religion out of the realm of things which could directly or indirectly be made public business and thereby be supported in whole or in part at taxpayers' expense. . . . This freedom was first in the Bill of Rights because it was first in the forefathers' minds; it was set forth in absolute terms, and its strength is its rigidity."

    The conclusion follows that in both cases the laws require religious exercises and such exercises are being conducted in direct violation of the rights of the appellees and petitioners. Nor are these required exercises mitigated by the fact that individual students may absent themselves upon parental request, for that fact furnishes no defense to a claim of unconstitutionality under the Establishment Clause. Further, it is no defense to urge that the religious practices here may be relatively minor encroachments on the First Amendment. The breach of neutrality that is today a trickling stream may all too soon become a raging torrent and, in the words of Madison, "it is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties."

    Abington School District v. Schempp

    That pretty much makes my argument for me.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  5. #565
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 10:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

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

    Quote Originally Posted by C.J.
    Of course not, but I do not believe religious issues should be up to the feds to decide.
    Shouldnt be (correction, isn't) up to the states or local school boards to decide either.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  6. #566
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 10:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

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

    Quote Originally Posted by C.J.
    And one who doesn't, isn't a "strict constructionist." For instance, certainly no judicial nominee would want restraints under Article III section 2, but it's right there in black and white, and very plainly written, so his lack of belief would be immaterial. Would Congress ever use this section? Not a good precedent to establish is it?
    What restraints are you referring to? Art. III Sec II is pretty comprehensive.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  7. #567
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    12-16-06 @ 02:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,528

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

    So it's o.k to use the words in a situation where one must speak them, but not in a situation when one has every right not to speak them?

    It would seem to me, and many others, that the wrong practice is under attack here.

  8. #568
    Advisor
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Mississippi
    Last Seen
    03-18-16 @ 09:18 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    409

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

    Quote Originally Posted by RightatNYU
    What restraints are you referring to? Art. III Sec II is pretty comprehensive.
    In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
    I read a report that said the typical symptoms of stress were eating too much, drinking too much, impulse buying, and driving too fast. Who are they kidding? That's my idea of a perfect day.----Unknown

  9. #569
    Advisor
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Mississippi
    Last Seen
    03-18-16 @ 09:18 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    409

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

    Quote Originally Posted by RightatNYU
    Shouldnt be (correction, isn't) up to the states or local school boards to decide either.
    I totally agree, but they are not constitutionally prohibited, only Congress is prohibited by the FA from making laws respecting an establishment of religion, not states or local schol boards.
    I read a report that said the typical symptoms of stress were eating too much, drinking too much, impulse buying, and driving too fast. Who are they kidding? That's my idea of a perfect day.----Unknown

  10. #570
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 10:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

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

    Quote Originally Posted by C.J.
    I totally agree, but they are not constitutionally prohibited, only Congress is prohibited by the FA from making laws respecting an establishment of religion, not states or local schol boards.
    That's wrong.

    The 14th amendment made all provisions of the bill of rights applicable to the state and local governments, down to the lowest dog catcher.

    This is commonly held principle under the equal protection clause, and has been precedent for decades.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

Page 57 of 107 FirstFirst ... 747555657585967 ... 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
  •