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 63 of 107 FirstFirst ... 1353616263646573 ... LastLast
Results 621 to 630 of 1064

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

  1. #621
    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 dragonslayer
    I am sorry but the phrase under God did not have anything to do with the founding fathers. It came into the pledge in 1949 right after the Second World War. A little history lesson, is what you need. Remember the year was was 1789 not 2005. 1: Our founding fathers and their immediate ancestors in Europe had just experienced over five hundred years of Religious wars. Protestant against catholic, protestant against protestant. Some of them had been very bloody. Even in 178o, religious strife and conflict was still going on in Europe. Blood ran freely in Europe. Religion was a major killer. Almost as bad as the plague in some counties. 2: Many of our founding fathers, including three of four of our first president were 33rd degree Masons. The Masonic Lodge was very big in America, and Europe at this time. Many of the leaders of our colonies were Masons.

    Oh yes our leaders were for the most part Chriistian by tradition and practice, and they expected the Nation to be Christian. Yet they did not want to have the united States experience the Reiligious wars of Europe, the political wars, of Europe. Some of this conflict had started in the united States under the Articles of Confederation. Some of our former colonies had State Religions. So at the Constitutional Convention, a constitution that created a unified federation, created with a National government dominant over the states was adopted,,, not without some hard opposition from Virginia and some other states. They did this on pupose, to prevent civil and religious discord. They created the Bill Of Rights, to prevent the civil and religious wars, death, and strife of Europe from happening in the United States. They demanded Freedom of Speech, and got it. They demanded freedom of religion, no matter what the religion, to be part of America. Later Courts in 1820 first interpreted that Freedom of Religion also meant freedom from Religion too. Choice--- the right to choose to belong to not belong to any reliigion, Christian, pagan, Islamic, Jewish and have the protection of the Law even if the Judge or sheriff was a Christian.

    In 1949, the debate in Congress that created, Under God, in the Pledge of Allegiance, made it's decision more in keeping with Tradition, rather than a religious preference. The Pledge give allegiance to the United States not to a religion. In 1957, when we put IN God We Trust, on the Silver ceritificate One Dollar bill. It was the tradition, not the religion.

    I personally don't care, one way or the other, about Under God being in the pledge, or In God We Trust on our paper money.. I am a Christian, but the Pledge or our paper money have nothing to do with my faith in Jesus.

    I am definitely a Christian and Bush is the worse president in our history and he is destroying America, and our constitution. I don't support any of those on the fascist right wing. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Leaders of Congress, and the new Chief Justice. They are against the American People.

    1953 was the year they amended the pledge.

    I won't bother to get into the rest of your conspiracy theory ramble.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  2. #622
    Banned 26 X World Champs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
    Last Seen
    07-04-08 @ 07:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    7,536

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

    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl
    Most anti-Pledge people do go to the 'religious agenda' angle at some point, especially after they run out of all other ammunition.
    Anti-pledge? Who are you referring to? If you mean those of us who are against any mention of GOD in the pledge then I am confused? I am not anti-pledge? I've not read anything here that suggests anyone who is against the mention of GOD in the pledge is against the pledge? You've written this before, and I find it is your way of inciting arguments. Why are you doing that?

    I think it is quite "anti-pledge" to have a "$hit-fit" over the removal of 2 words that were illegally inserted into the pledge by Commie fearing crazies in the 50s.

    Anti-pledge! What a bunch of propaganda!
    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl
    The 'under God' phrase in the Pledge is not indoctrination. It is a cultural and historical reference and symbolic of the inalienable rights that we all have.
    Not according to the courts and to the Constitution, but hey, do you care?
    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl
    If you look at it that way, it seems almost unpatriotic or at the least short sighted to take it out. Doesn't it?
    Unpatriotic? My reaction to that type of absurd logic is "My GOD man, what in God's name are you talking about?"

    I just don't understand how anyone can think that including the words "UNDER GOD" is not religious!

    This type of thinking is looney tunes, convoluted logic made by people who want to insert religion into government. It doesn't and won't work. I don't even think the Supreme Court will even rule on this case as it is so blatantly a violation of the 1st and 14th amendments.

  3. #623
    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 26 X World Champs
    Anti-pledge? Who are you referring to? If you mean those of us who are against any mention of GOD in the pledge then I am confused? I am not anti-pledge? I've not read anything here that suggests anyone who is against the mention of GOD in the pledge is against the pledge? You've written this before, and I find it is your way of inciting arguments. Why are you doing that?

    I think it is quite "anti-pledge" to have a "$hit-fit" over the removal of 2 words that were illegally inserted into the pledge by Commie fearing crazies in the 50s.

    Anti-pledge! What a bunch of propaganda!

    Not according to the courts and to the Constitution, but hey, do you care?

    Unpatriotic? My reaction to that type of absurd logic is "My GOD man, what in God's name are you talking about?"

    I just don't understand how anyone can think that including the words "UNDER GOD" is not religious!

    This type of thinking is looney tunes, convoluted logic made by people who want to insert religion into government. It doesn't and won't work. I don't even think the Supreme Court will even rule on this case as it is so blatantly a violation of the 1st and 14th amendments.

    If I was a betting man, I'd put a wager on the court granting this case cert, and spearheaded by John Roberts, deciding 7-2 (depending on when they hear it, and who O'connor's replacement is) in favor of removing "under god" from the pledge.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  4. #624
    Banned 26 X World Champs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
    Last Seen
    07-04-08 @ 07:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    7,536

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

    Quote Originally Posted by RightatNYU
    If I was a betting man, I'd put a wager on the court granting this case cert, and spearheaded by John Roberts, deciding 7-2 (depending on when they hear it, and who O'connor's replacement is) in favor of removing "under god" from the pledge.
    Time will tell but as you are, I am very confident that the two words "Under God" will be forever removed, either by the Supremes not hearing the case or a very strong majority will put an end to this subject.

    I must admit to me that I feel like the people who state that "UNDER GOD" is not religious are trying to convince us that 2+2=5 and no matter how many times you prove to them that 2+2=4 they refuse to accept the facts. Very, very weird.

  5. #625
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    11,133

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

    Quote Originally Posted by 26 X World Champs
    Anti-pledge? Who are you referring to? If you mean those of us who are against any mention of GOD in the pledge then I am confused? I am not anti-pledge? I've not read anything here that suggests anyone who is against the mention of GOD in the pledge is against the pledge? You've written this before, and I find it is your way of inciting arguments. Why are you doing that?:
    Several on the thread think the entire Pledge is unconstitutional. Several others have been clear that they don't like the words 'under God' in the Pledge, but none of them have expressed an opinion about the Pledge otherwise. You have to take the discussion as a whole and not just the part that has involved you.

    I think it is quite "anti-pledge" to have a "$hit-fit" over the removal of 2 words that were illegally inserted into the pledge by Commie fearing crazies in the 50s.
    Who's having a **** fit except those who are hellbent on seeing that the two words are removed? If they are so unimportant, why a **** fit from either side?

    Anti-pledge! What a bunch of propaganda!
    Yes, several in this thread have been anti-Pledge period. It's kind of like pro choice and pro life. They mean different things to different people.

    Not according to the courts and to the Constitution, but hey, do you care?
    There is absolutely nothing in the Constitution declaring the words 'under God' in or on anything, let alone a voluntary Pledge of Allegiance, to be unconstitutional. The Constitution is specific that nobody should be denied the right to say those words.

    As far as the opinion of the courts, I do not take my view of right and wrong from them. Do you? If so, that could explain a lot.

    Unpatriotic? My reaction to that type of absurd logic is "My GOD man, what in God's name are you talking about?"

    I just don't understand how anyone can think that including the words "UNDER GOD" is not religious!
    If you're going to have a rant about my posts, at least put the words in context. It will make it a lot simpler to have a reasonable debate.

    The words 'under God' refer to a cultural and historical religious belief which is not unconstiutitonal. They are not an establishment of any kind of religion, and this is a further reason they are not unconstitutional.

    Some of you people really do need to learn to differentiate between a religious symbol, religious history, religious heritage, religious influenced culture, etc. and an 'establishment of religion.' You also should brush up on your Consitutional history and theory and thus not so badly misinterpret the content of the Constitution, especially its amendments.

    This type of thinking is looney tunes, convoluted logic made by people who want to insert religion into government. It doesn't and won't work. I don't even think the Supreme Court will even rule on this case as it is so blatantly a violation of the 1st and 14th amendments
    Oh the Supreme Court will sooner or later rule on it. And we can only hope we have enough strict constructionists on the Court at the time they do that we won't have more of the Constitution dismantled. You're right, some of this type of thinking is looney tunes, but I don't think my thinking is very far off the mark of what a constructionist-minded Court will come up with.
    "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

  6. #626
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    22,056

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

    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl
    Several on the thread think the entire Pledge is unconstitutional. Several others have been clear that they don't like the words 'under God' in the Pledge, but none of them have expressed an opinion about the Pledge otherwise. You have to take the discussion as a whole and not just the part that has involved you.



    Who's having a **** fit except those who are hellbent on seeing that the two words are removed? If they are so unimportant, why a **** fit from either side?



    Yes, several in this thread have been anti-Pledge period. It's kind of like pro choice and pro life. They mean different things to different people.



    There is absolutely nothing in the Constitution declaring the words 'under God' in or on anything, let alone a voluntary Pledge of Allegiance, to be unconstitutional. The Constitution is specific that nobody should be denied the right to say those words.

    As far as the opinion of the courts, I do not take my view of right and wrong from them. Do you? If so, that could explain a lot.



    If you're going to have a rant about my posts, at least put the words in context. It will make it a lot simpler to have a reasonable debate.

    The words 'under God' refer to a cultural and historical religious belief which is not unconstiutitonal. They are not an establishment of any kind of religion, and this is a further reason they are not unconstitutional.

    Some of you people really do need to learn to differentiate between a religious symbol, religious history, religious heritage, religious influenced culture, etc. and an 'establishment of religion.' You also should brush up on your Consitutional history and theory and thus not so badly misinterpret the content of the Constitution, especially its amendments.



    Oh the Supreme Court will sooner or later rule on it. And we can only hope we have enough strict constructionists on the Court at the time they do that we won't have more of the Constitution dismantled. You're right, some of this type of thinking is looney tunes, but I don't think my thinking is very far off the mark of what a constructionist-minded Court will come up with.

    Explain how following the constutition's establishment clause is dismantling the constitution.
    Please explain.

  7. #627
    Banned 26 X World Champs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
    Last Seen
    07-04-08 @ 07:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    7,536

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

    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl
    Several on the thread think the entire Pledge is unconstitutional. Several others have been clear that they don't like the words 'under God' in the Pledge, but none of them have expressed an opinion about the Pledge otherwise. You have to take the discussion as a whole and not just the part that has involved you.
    Oh thank you for clarifying for all of us who are not as smart as you are. The words in your post come across, to me, as outrageously pompous and arrogant, you know? I read your words, and over and over again each post is repetitive, they all restate the same thing, never do I read anything new. Maybe you should just cut and paste the same post each time, you might save yourself some time?
    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl
    Who's having a **** fit except those who are hellbent on seeing that the two words are removed? If they are so unimportant, why a **** fit from either side?
    UNDER GOD is ILLEGAL and NOT HISTORIC. Not clear enough on this, are we?
    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl
    Yes, several in this thread have been anti-Pledge period. It's kind of like pro choice and pro life. They mean different things to different people.
    More than 100 people voted in this poll. Please show me FIVE who are completely against the pledge? Can't do it? Then maybe posts that regularly use the BS term "Anti-Pledge" with the intent of addressing the majority of those who are in reality only "Anti Under God" would have a shred of validity, but IMHO, as already stated, the words "Anti-Pledge" are simply a ploy to incite argument, not debate. Of course, one can justify any BS in one's mind no matter the truth, you know?
    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl
    The Constitution is specific that nobody should be denied the right to say those words.
    TRUE! No argument my fowl friend. Say them anywhere and everywhere you like! You can say them anywhere, the government CAN'T say them ANYWHERE.
    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl
    As far as the opinion of the courts, I do not take my view of right and wrong from them. Do you? If so, that could explain a lot.

    Oh snap! You got me good dude! I am not worthy of debating someone as self-confident as you are. As all of my posts have shown, I am only capable of accepting what other people tell me, especially the Supremes and our Government. You nailed me dude!
    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl
    The words 'under God' refer to a cultural and historical religious belief which is not unconstiutitonal. They are not an establishment of any kind of religion, and this is a further reason they are not unconstitutional.
    Too bad our judicial system disagrees with you, really too bad. So, using your "logic" then it is also OK to use UNDER GOD in the OATH that all Americans must sign when applying for a US PASSPORT, right?
    US Passport Oath

    (If any of the below-mentioned acts or conditions have been performed by or apply to the applicant, the portion which applies should be lined out, and a supplementary explanatory statement should be attached, signed, and made part of this application.)

    I have not, since acquiring United States citizenship, been naturalized as a citizen of a foreign state; taken an oath, or made an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state; entered or served in the armed forces of a foreign state; accepted or performed the duties of any office, post, or employment under the Government of a foreign state or political subdivision thereof; made a formal renunciation of nationality either in the United States or before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state; or been convicted by a court or court martial of competent jurisdiction of committing any act of treason against, or attempting by force to overthrow, or bearing arms against the United States, or conspiring to overthrow, put down or destroy by force the Government of the United States.

    DECLARATION: I declare (UNDER GOD???)that the statements made in this application are true and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief, that the attached photographs are a true likeness of me, and that I have not been issued a passport subsequent to the one submitted herein.
    Source: http://www.globalpolicy.org/nations/citizen/oath.htm

    So are the words UNDER GOD (highlighted above) also legal in your America?
    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl
    Some of you people really do need to learn to differentiate between a religious symbol, religious history, religious heritage, religious influenced culture, etc. and an 'establishment of religion.' You also should brush up on your Consitutional history and theory and thus not so badly misinterpret the content of the Constitution, especially its amendments.
    You also wrote:
    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl
    Oh the Supreme Court will sooner or later rule on it. And we can only hope we have enough strict constructionists on the Court at the time they do that we won't have more of the Constitution dismantled.
    Interestingly today on ABC's THIS WEEK there was an interview with Associate Justice Stephen Breyer, did you see it? He made some really RELEVANT points re the Constitution. Breyer mentioned that our Founding Fathers never anticipated things like automobiles, airplanes, TV, the Internet etc. His point was that the Constitution was constructed in such a way that it can be altered to changing times, that it would be foolish, if not down right stupid to interpret it literally rather than interpreting the meaning of each article or amendment. So those of you who keep praying to God that Rove errr Bush will appoint a "strict constructionist" to Court are, IMHO not understanding the TRUE meaning of the Constitution.

    M. Scott Peck, author of The Road Less Traveled who died this week wrote (before he died) Isn't he the guy in your signature?
    "The current message of our culture is that we're here to be happy and fulfilled. I think that the meaning of life is that we're here to learn."
    The meaning of life for human beings is to LEARN, continuosly learn, never stop learning for that is our purpose on this planet. Seems to me that those of you who are "strict constuctionists" do not grasp this simple idea that all of us, including the Constitution are living and breathing entities that are always growing and expanding our knowledge as we learn new things.

    Do you know what Bill Wilson once wrote?

    "If you do what you've always done you'll get what you always got."
    Last edited by 26 X World Champs; 10-02-05 at 03:37 PM.

  8. #628
    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?

    As far as the opinion of the courts, I do not take my view of right and wrong from them. Do you? If so, that could explain a lot.
    I don't take my views of right and wrong from the courts, but I do take my views of constitutionality from them.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  9. #629
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    11,133

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

    Quote Originally Posted by 26 X World Champs
    Oh thank you for clarifying for all of us who are not as smart as you are. The words in your post come across, to me, as outrageously pompous and arrogant, you know? I read your words, and over and over again each post is repetitive, they all restate the same thing, never do I read anything new. Maybe you should just cut and paste the same post each time, you might save yourself some time?

    UNDER GOD is ILLEGAL and NOT HISTORIC. Not clear enough on this, are we?

    More than 100 people voted in this poll. Please show me FIVE who are completely against the pledge? Can't do it? Then maybe posts that regularly use the BS term "Anti-Pledge" with the intent of addressing the majority of those who are in reality only "Anti Under God" would have a shred of validity, but IMHO, as already stated, the words "Anti-Pledge" are simply a ploy to incite argument, not debate. Of course, one can justify any BS in one's mind no matter the truth, you know?

    TRUE! No argument my fowl friend. Say them anywhere and everywhere you like! You can say them anywhere, the government CAN'T say them ANYWHERE.

    Oh snap! You got me good dude! I am not worthy of debating someone as self-confident as you are. As all of my posts have shown, I am only capable of accepting what other people tell me, especially the Supremes and our Government. You nailed me dude!

    Too bad our judicial system disagrees with you, really too bad. So, using your "logic" then it is also OK to use UNDER GOD in the OATH that all Americans must sign when applying for a US PASSPORT, right?

    Source: http://www.globalpolicy.org/nations/citizen/oath.htm

    So are the words UNDER GOD (highlighted above) also legal in your America?

    You also wrote:

    Interestingly today on ABC's THIS WEEK there was an interview with Associate Justice Stephen Breyer, did you see it? He made some really RELEVANT points re the Constitution. Breyer mentioned that our Founding Fathers never anticipated things like automobiles, airplanes, TV, the Internet etc. His point was that the Constitution was constructed in such a way that it can be altered to changing times, that it would be foolish, if not down right stupid to interpret it literally rather than interpreting the meaning of each article or amendment. So those of you who keep praying to God that Rove errr Bush will appoint a "strict constructionist" to Court are, IMHO not understanding the TRUE meaning of the Constitution.

    M. Scott Peck, author of The Road Less Traveled who died this week wrote (before he died) Isn't he the guy in your signature?

    The meaning of life for human beings is to LEARN, continuosly learn, never stop learning for that is our purpose on this planet. Seems to me that those of you who are "strict constuctionists" do not grasp this simple idea that all of us, including the Constitution are living and breathing entities that are always growing and expanding our knowledge as we learn new things.

    Do you know what Bill Wilson once wrote?

    "If you do what you've always done you'll get what you always got."
    You think my post is arrogant? Do you consider anyone with firm convictions about something and willingness to state them as being arrogant?

    You think I am repetitious. There you are right. It is difficult not to be repetitious when my answers remain the same no matter how many times those of you on the other side of the debate state your position over and over and over and over and over while ignoring any argument against it.

    My signature is directly from a Robert Frost poem. I have no idea what his religious affiliation was.
    "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

  10. #630
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    22,056

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

    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl
    You think my post is arrogant? Do you consider anyone with firm convictions about something and willingness to state them as being arrogant?

    You think I am repetitious. There you are right. It is difficult not to be repetitious when my answers remain the same no matter how many times those of you on the other side of the debate state your position over and over and over and over and over while ignoring any argument against it.

    My signature is directly from a Robert Frost poem. I have no idea what his religious affiliation was.
    Probably because our position has legal and constitutional significance.
    Your position that it is "historical" and thus is should stay has no constitutional significance because it is an uniformed opinion.

    The original pledge, without the phrase under god, I believe, has more historical significance than the one created during a time of Communist Paranoia.

Page 63 of 107 FirstFirst ... 1353616263646573 ... 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
  •