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 58 of 107 FirstFirst ... 848565758596068 ... LastLast
Results 571 to 580 of 1064

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

  1. #571
    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 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.
    In the end, it's the interpretation of the 9 black robed figures that matters. And while you might not be able to see the difference between announcing something in a legal setting and mandating the recitation into public classrooms every day, they do.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  2. #572
    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.
    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.
    Well, if Congress wanted to pass a law saying that certain cases could not be appealed to the Supreme Court, but only to each individual states appellate courts, they'd be well within their rights to do so. I don't see the argument here.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  3. #573
    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
    In the end, it's the interpretation of the 9 black robed figures that matters. And while you might not be able to see the difference between announcing something in a legal setting and mandating the recitation into public classrooms every day, they do.

    Again, one is forced to place ones hand on the bible, and fear God's wrath, "so help you God"

    Another is a tradition is our schools, and one NO ONE is forced to recite, which is the more pressing issue in your mind?

    "They do"? I think that is yet to be detirmined.
    Last edited by Deegan; 09-28-05 at 08:17 PM.

  4. #574
    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
    Again, one is forced to place ones hand on the bible, and fear God's wrath, "so help you God"

    Another is a tradition is our schools, and one NO ONE is forced to recite, which is the more pressing issue in your mind?

    "They do"? I think that is yet to be detirmined.

    In a courtroom, someone is called in individually for a legal reason, in the day to day workings of the government. It is not a process by which every single person who enters a courthouse must, each day, be sworn in.

    You're right, the pledge is a tradition, WITHOUT under god. That was added in as an attempt to "stem the flow to godless communism." It's unnecessary and frankly, is nothing but trouble.

    And yes, they do. In numerous incredibly similar cases, they have already decided in the same way. This should be no different.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  5. #575
    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
    Well, if Congress wanted to pass a law saying that certain cases could not be appealed to the Supreme Court, but only to each individual states appellate courts, they'd be well within their rights to do so. I don't see the argument here.
    Actually they would be misusing their powers to even mention the states appellate courts. If they limited the cases SCOTUS could hear, the final word would be in each of the 12 circuit courts of appeals. Theoretically there could be 12 different answers to the same question.

    The rest of the argument is this. SCOTUS is constitutionally created, but lesser federal courts are created by Congress. They are a creature of Congress and can be handed the same restrictions as SCOTUS.
    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

  6. #576
    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
    In a courtroom, someone is called in individually for a legal reason, in the day to day workings of the government. It is not a process by which every single person who enters a courthouse must, each day, be sworn in.

    You're right, the pledge is a tradition, WITHOUT under god. That was added in as an attempt to "stem the flow to godless communism." It's unnecessary and frankly, is nothing but trouble.

    And yes, they do. In numerous incredibly similar cases, they have already decided in the same way. This should be no different.
    So you're only concerned about the rights of the everyday citizen, not about the citizen who, may, or may not, be forced to swear to God?

    Makes sense.

  7. #577
    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.
    Actually they would be misusing their powers to even mention the states appellate courts. If they limited the cases SCOTUS could hear, the final word would be in each of the 12 circuit courts of appeals. Theoretically there could be 12 different answers to the same question.

    The rest of the argument is this. SCOTUS is constitutionally created, but lesser federal courts are created by Congress. They are a creature of Congress and can be handed the same restrictions as SCOTUS.
    Excuse me, I meant circuit courts.

    And yes, I understand that. It will never happen, just as the executive will never recess both houses of congress (art II sec II), so whats the point.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  8. #578
    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
    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.
    SCOTUS has repeatedly stated that the First Amendment forbids an establishment of religion, and that promotion by any government entity is forbidden, and the 14th applies this to the states. Naturally I disagree, but they are the boss, and I can live with it with no hard feelings.

    BTW, the 14th does not make all provisions of the bill of rights applicable to the state and local governments, down to the lowest dog catcher. If it did, the 10th amendment would in effect negate what your point on the 14th, and it can't do that can it?

    My thoughts are these; No portion of the first clause of the First Amendment concerns people, just Congress and something they cannot do. Even if this were construed to mean state legislatures, in a constructionist sense it still does not prevent a state or local government from establishing a religion, or using religious quotes, because in a constructionist sense the FA doesn't prevent the feds from establishing a religion, or using religious quotes either. It would merely prevent legislatures, as it does Congress from legislating on the subject.

    The first clause of the FA does not enumerate an individual right, or a collective right, but rather it restricts what congress can do. Nothing in the 14th Amendment negates any part of the 10th concerning reserved powers of the states or the people, but portions of the 14th do restrict the legislative powers of the states, and they refer only to actions that affect the privileges, immunities, legal rights and equal legal status of individual citizens and persons.
    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. #579
    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
    Excuse me, I meant circuit courts.

    And yes, I understand that. It will never happen, just as the executive will never recess both houses of congress (art II sec II), so whats the point.
    Quote Originally Posted by RightatNYU
    Excuse me, I meant circuit courts.

    And yes, I understand that. It will never happen, just as the executive will never recess both houses of congress (art II sec II), so whats the point.
    No, it will not ever happen, it's come close a few times, but most congressmen are ignorant enough to not get involved in creating a larger political mess of the courts (I meant that as I said it). My point is that the feds have been gradually intruding in to affairs which they are not constitutionally entitled. The 14th seemed a good idea at the time, but the courts have used it to further intrude, and it makes accomplices of the states.

    As far as the pledge goes, I really do not care if "under God" is included or not, but I do not believe it a federal problem, and I sure do not believe it's an establishment of religion problem. If people were being forced by the government to say it, with or without the phrase, then that's a federal problem, but the solution probably would not be found in the courts. If a school system or state or local government is forcing people to recite it, then it needs to be handled there. For those who do not want to recite it, but have to listen while others do, all I can say is that life sure is hell sometimes.
    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. #580
    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.
    SCOTUS has repeatedly stated that the First Amendment forbids an establishment of religion, and that promotion by any government entity is forbidden, and the 14th applies this to the states. Naturally I disagree, but they are the boss, and I can live with it with no hard feelings.

    BTW, the 14th does not make all provisions of the bill of rights applicable to the state and local governments, down to the lowest dog catcher. If it did, the 10th amendment would in effect negate what your point on the 14th, and it can't do that can it?

    My thoughts are these; No portion of the first clause of the First Amendment concerns people, just Congress and something they cannot do. Even if this were construed to mean state legislatures, in a constructionist sense it still does not prevent a state or local government from establishing a religion, or using religious quotes, because in a constructionist sense the FA doesn't prevent the feds from establishing a religion, or using religious quotes either. It would merely prevent legislatures, as it does Congress from legislating on the subject.

    The first clause of the FA does not enumerate an individual right, or a collective right, but rather it restricts what congress can do. Nothing in the 14th Amendment negates any part of the 10th concerning reserved powers of the states or the people, but portions of the 14th do restrict the legislative powers of the states, and they refer only to actions that affect the privileges, immunities, legal rights and equal legal status of individual citizens and persons.

    My error, I meant to state that the 14th amendment made all the portions of the bill of rights that we're referring to in this case applicable to everyone from fed to dog catcher.

    And what a strict constructionist would or wouldn't do isn't really relevant, since the courts have stated unequivocably

    "We repeat and again reaffirm that neither a State nor the Federal Government can constitutionally force a person "to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion." Neither can constitutionally pass laws or impose requirements which aid all religions as against non-believers, and neither can aid those religions based on a belief in the existence of God as against those religions founded on different beliefs"
    -Torcaso v. Watkins

    "There cannot be the slightest doubt that the First Amendment reflects the philosophy that Church and State should be separated. And so far as interference with the "free exercise" of religion and an "establishment" of religion are concerned, the separation must be complete and unequivocal. The First Amendment within the scope of its coverage permits no exception; the prohibition is absolute."
    -Zorach v. Clauson

    "The fundamental concept of liberty embodied in that Amendment embraces the liberties guaranteed by the First Amendment. 3 The First Amendment declares that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The Fourteenth Amendment has rendered the legislatures of the states as incompetent as Congress to enact such laws. The constitutional inhibition of legislation on the subject of religion has a double aspect. On the one hand, it forestalls compulsion by law of the acceptance of any creed or the practice of any form of worship."
    -Cantwell v. Connecticut
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

Page 58 of 107 FirstFirst ... 848565758596068 ... 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
  •