• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

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

  • Yes

    Votes: 68 54.4%

  • No

    Votes: 57 45.6%
  • Total voters
    125
Status
Not open for further replies.
RightatNYU said:
Well, that's mature.
Click to expand...

It's honest. He's outlived his age. No one wants judges that rule by imaginary fiat anymore. At least they shouldn't.

RightatNYU said:
Um, are you serious? You think that people should have freedom to own any and every weapon they can get a hold of? Why stop with grenade launchers? Give everyone a nuke.
Click to expand...

Nukes are a tad expensive. Can't name a soul that could afford to build one of their own. But why stop with grenade launchers is right. I don't see any limits written into the Constitution, do you?

What's your justification for limiting pieces of property owned by citizens?

Remember, 165 people were killed with tractor fuel and bullshit in Oklahoma City.

RightatNYU said:
That's a bold statement. Wanna back it up?
Click to expand...

Kelo vs New London.
 
Pacridge said:
Decided by the majority? Then why didn't Gore become President in 2000?


http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/results/
Click to expand...

Becasue he did not win the electoral votes in enough states........Hell he did not even win them in his home state which is unheard of.......The people in each individual state voted to decide who got the elctoral votes...........

You people on the left have a habit of nominating flawed candidates.......
 
AlbqOwl said:
I'm speculating that if the defense attorneys for the pledge do their job even halfway competently, the SCOTUS vote will be 9-0 that the phrase 'under God' is not an establishment of religion and is not unconstitutional. Even if the most liberal justices stick to their anti-religion stances, the vote will certainly be no worse than 6-3 to keep 'under God' in the Pledge for as long as the people want it to be there.
Click to expand...

There you go again tossing around the "anti-religion" label for anyone who doesn't agree with your stance on the pledge. It's good to see that you don't let common sense or logic get in the way of a good argument.

By the way, the Pledge is 'sanctioned' as a uniform patriotic statement at the national level, but it is not mandated from the national level. The various states decide how, where, and when the Pledge will be used in their state schools, etc. As I have said before, 49 of 50 of these same states acknowledge the historical God in the preambles of their constitutions and to date not one of these has been successfully challenged as being unconstitutional.
Click to expand...

Exactly. And the 14th Amendment took the first amendment, where it says "Congress shall make no law..." and turned it into "Government shall make no law..."

So, it's covered.

And the difference is that the preambles to the state constitutions are not mandated by the state to be recited aloud by the teachers every single day in the public schools.

That's the coercion part.
 
Navy Pride said:
So let me understand, are you saying that when this goes to the SCOTUS that they won't hear the decision or over rule it?:confused:

I am saying if they hear it, and I am not sure they will, that they will strike down the 9th circuit court opinion as they usually do.......
Click to expand...

If the court doesn't grant cert to the case, it's a de facto endorsement of the lower court's decision.

If they do, they will affirm.
 
Navy Pride said:
try 87% in this poll favor it and the one I saw awhile back was 92%


http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/06/29/poll.pledge/

Vast majority in U.S. support 'under God'
June 30, 2002 Posted: 8:51 AM EDT (1251 GMT)

NEW YORK (CNN) -- Nearly nine in 10 Americans believe the phrase "under God" should remain in the Pledge of Allegiance, and most believe it is acceptable for the government to promote religious expression, as long as no specific religion is mentioned, according to a Newsweek poll.
Click to expand...

And the vast majority of americans didn't want integration in schools, didn't want prohibition, don't know anything about politics, and are obese. I have absolutely no faith in the body politic.
 
RightatNYU said:
If the court doesn't grant cert to the case, it's a de facto endorsement of the lower court's decision.

If they do, they will affirm.
Click to expand...

That is true, but they will take the case..........Trust me.........

And the vast majority of americans didn't want integration in schools,
Click to expand...

Do you have a link that supports that statement?
 
Navy Pride said:
It is a democratic form of government that is a republic and elections are decided by the majority......
Click to expand...

Election are decided by the majority...

I was really really impressed with the way President Gore handled the terrorst attacks on September 11th, 2001, weren't you, Chief?
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Election are decided by the majority...

I was really really impressed with the way President Gore handled the terrorst attacks on September 11th, 2001, weren't you, Chief?
Click to expand...

Get a life..........Get over it..you lost.move on.....
 
Navy Pride said:
Becasue he did not win the electoral votes in enough states........Hell he did not even win them in his home state which is unheard of.......The people in each individual state voted to decide who got the elctoral votes...........

You people on the left have a habit of nominating flawed candidates.......
Click to expand...

Oh. So elections in this country AREN'T decided by the majority is what you're saying.

Not that it matters. The Bill of Rights was written specifically to prevent the majority from crafting laws that imposed on the minority. And the first Amendment forbade laws regulating or establishing religions. Which is what the camel's nose of "under God" does in the Pledge of Allegiance.
 
Navy Pride said:
Get a life..........Get over it..you lost.move on.....
Click to expand...

I didn't lose. I know exactly how the system works and didn't waste my vote on either major party candidate here in California. I wasted it on a third party candidate instead. The Libertarians, if you're interested.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
It's honest. He's outlived his age. No one wants judges that rule by imaginary fiat anymore. At least they shouldn't.
Click to expand...

So were you thanking God when Rehnquist died? I mean, he was pretty old too. Or is your vitriol reserved for those you disagree with (not because you know anything about the court, but because your party tells you who to like)

Nukes are a tad expensive. Can't name a soul that could afford to build one of their own. But why stop with grenade launchers is right. I don't see any limits written into the Constitution, do you?
Click to expand...

What if Bill Gates COULD afford a nuke. Should he be allowed to have them? What if the 200 richest people in the country got together and built a massive army with nukes etc galore. Would that be a good thing. The Constitution was not written with today's society in mind. While the vast majority of it is applicable to today's life, it was written with the understanding that it would be updated as time passed.

Remember, 165 people were killed with tractor fuel and bullshit in Oklahoma City.
Click to expand...

And 180,000 were killed with nukes in Japan. Point?

Kelo vs New London.
Click to expand...


HAHAHAAHAHA. Let me get this straight. You claim

"Breyer's self-serving interpretation of the Constitution is the primary reason the country's in the position it's in, socially."

I ask you why you think that, and you cite an EMINENT DOMAIN case at me? Want to explain how eminent domain is the reason for the "downward spiral in social standards" for the US?
 
Navy Pride said:
That is true, but they will take the case..........Trust me.........
Click to expand...

They didn't last time.


Do you have a link that supports that statement?
Click to expand...

Even now, only 59% of people support doing more to integrate schools, while 28% think there should be less done.

http://www.publicagenda.org/issues/...race&id=349&graph=majpropraceschoolbusing.jpg

At the time of Brown v. Board, TWENTY ONE states had LAWS forcing or allowing segregated schools. That's almost half the country, not counting the many many states where segregation was de facto rather than de juro.

http://www.factmonster.com/ce6/history/A0858851.html

In the 1950's, when public support for integration was at it's highest ever, it was barely 50%

http://hnn.us/articles/11371.html
 
RightatNYU said:
So were you thanking God when Rehnquist died? I mean, he was pretty old too. Or is your vitriol reserved for those you disagree with (not because you know anything about the court, but because your party tells you who to like)
Click to expand...

Nope. Never thank the imaginary for anything, but Rehnquist also was too old and should have retired long ago. I think the Constitution should be amended to place term limits on federal judges. For all it's liberal whining, The Pelican Brief had a decent point.


RightatNYU said:
What if Bill Gates COULD afford a nuke. Should he be allowed to have them?
Click to expand...

Sure, why not? He's done more damage with Windows, anyway.

RightatNYU said:
What if the 200 richest people in the country got together and built a massive army with nukes etc galore. Would that be a good thing.
Click to expand...

Sure. Who they gonna use it on? The world's richest people have the most to lose from a nuclear war. With the advent of the ICBM and the thermonuclear warhead, suddenly the rich were right there on the front lines with everyone else. No place to hide when cobalt's out to get you.

RightatNYU said:
The Constitution was not written with today's society in mind. While the vast majority of it is applicable to today's life, it was written with the understanding that it would be updated as time passed.
Click to expand...

The Constitution was written with the means for chaning it deliberately difficult and nigh impossible. The Constitution was written as it was because the writers were most astute about human nature. Human nature hasn't changed, and almost the entire document is still relevant today.

RightatNYU said:
And 180,000 were killed with nukes in Japan. Point?
Click to expand...

That human ingenuity will find a way, laws to the contrary are mere impediments. Dollar for dollar, the OK City bombing killed more.




RightatNYU said:
HAHAHAAHAHA. Let me get this straight. You claim
"Breyer's self-serving interpretation of the Constitution is the primary reason the country's in the position it's in, socially."

I ask you why you think that, and you cite an EMINENT DOMAIN case at me? Want to explain how eminent domain is the reason for the "downward spiral in social standards" for the US?
Click to expand...

The ownership of PROPERTY is the cornerstone of American society. Erosion of that protection is the worst thing that can happen to this country.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Nope. Never thank the imaginary for anything, but Rehnquist also was too old and should have retired long ago. I think the Constitution should be amended to place term limits on federal judges. For all it's liberal whining, The Pelican Brief had a decent point.
Click to expand...

The Constitution was written with the means for chaning it deliberately difficult and nigh impossible. The Constitution was written as it was because the writers were most astute about human nature. Human nature hasn't changed, and almost the entire document is still relevant today.
Click to expand...

So, in these two paragraphs, you're both in favor of making it almost impossible to amend the Constitution, and also amending it to place term limits on federal judges, something that almost everyone would agree is a non-issue?

Good to see you're consistent...

Sure, why not? He's done more damage with Windows, anyway.

Sure. Who they gonna use it on? The world's richest people have the most to lose from a nuclear war. With the advent of the ICBM and the thermonuclear warhead, suddenly the rich were right there on the front lines with everyone else. No place to hide when cobalt's out to get you.
Click to expand...

There's just a basic disconnect in the way you and I view arms. You're completely entitled to your opinion, I just sleep well at night knowing that you will never have your way.
That human ingenuity will find a way, laws to the contrary are mere impediments. Dollar for dollar, the OK City bombing killed more.
Click to expand...

Dollar for dollar? Wanna explain that?

The ownership of PROPERTY is the cornerstone of American society. Erosion of that protection is the worst thing that can happen to this country.
Click to expand...

I don't think a limited, 5-4 decision that has yet to be put into practice and has a chance of being overturned shortly is the "end of american society..."
 
RightatNYU said:
So, in these two paragraphs, you're both in favor of making it almost impossible to amend the Constitution, and also amending it to place term limits on federal judges, something that almost everyone would agree is a non-issue?

Good to see you're consistent...
Click to expand...

I recently proposed elsewhere an amendment that would require all females under the age of 30 and under 130 pounds to go topless. That would gain a lot of popular support but still not get ratified. Pity.

It's "difficult" to amend the Constitution, not impossible. It's apparently impossible to impeach presidents...er to get the Senate to convict on the impeachment, I mean.

So there's no popular support for the idea of term limiting judges. Doesn't mean it's not a good idea.


RightatNYU said:
There's just a basic disconnect in the way you and I view arms. You're completely entitled to your opinion, I just sleep well at night knowing that you will never have your way.
Click to expand...

Why would you sleep well? As it stands, your neighbor could have an illegal cache of arms and you'd never know it. People like Osama WILL get a nuke, that's as sure as the sun rising on the devastated city. I've got better things to do that worry about impossible limits on gun ownership.

RightatNYU said:
Dollar for dollar? Wanna explain that?
Click to expand...

The Hiroshima bomb cost $2,000,000,000, killed 180,000 people. That's $11,000 a head.

Those good ole boys in Oklahoma spent less than $10,000 and killed 165 people. That's $60 a head.

RightatNYU said:
I don't think a limited, 5-4 decision that has yet to be put into practice and has a chance of being overturned shortly is the "end of american society..."
Click to expand...

http://washtimes.com/national/20051003-122623-2136r.htm

Riviera Beach, Floriduh, considers eminent domain in wake of Kelo vs New London to displace 8000 lower income residents to make room for high-end marina and yacht basin.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Oh. So elections in this country AREN'T decided by the majority is what you're saying.

Not that it matters. The Bill of Rights was written specifically to prevent the majority from crafting laws that imposed on the minority. And the first Amendment forbade laws regulating or establishing religions. Which is what the camel's nose of "under God" does in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Click to expand...

No matter how hard you people on the left try you will never get God out of this country......God is everywhere, on our money....The 10 commandments are in the chambers of the SCOTUS.......The Congress has a Chaplain who leads them member in prayer prior to every session.....There are many other examples........

You need to get use to it or move to a Communist country where there is no God........You would fit right in.........
 
shuamort said:
Wrong.
They're on the frieze.
Click to expand...

If that is so I stand corrected but they still are posted on government property in the area of the Supreme Court..........
 
Navy Pride said:
If that is so I stand corrected but they still are posted on government property in the area of the Supreme Court..........
Click to expand...
They're on the east pediment frieze along with Confucious, Solon, and the bastions of justice, the tortoise and the hare.

Here're the story and pics from the horse's mouth.
 
shuamort said:
They're on the east pediment frieze along with Confucious, Solon, and the bastions of justice, the tortoise and the hare.

Here're the story and pics from the horse's mouth.
Click to expand...

There's no getting around it. The 10 commandments cannot be put up by themselves, there must be other religious/secular items/documents alongside it. Theocrats love to cite the 10 commandments being in the Supreme Court, until someone points out that's not the only thing there.
 
Navy Pride said:
No matter how hard you people on the left try you will never get God out of this country......God is everywhere, on our money....The 10 commandments are in the chambers of the SCOTUS.......The Congress has a Chaplain who leads them member in prayer prior to every session.....There are many other examples........

You need to get use to it or move to a Communist country where there is no God........You would fit right in.........
Click to expand...

That's a pretty good refutation of what I said. :roll:
 
But that's an interesting point.

What's the Ten Suggestions got to do with American law?
 
Navy Pride said:
No matter how hard you people on the left try you will never get God out of this country......God is everywhere, on our money....The 10 commandments are in the chambers of the SCOTUS.......The Congress has a Chaplain who leads them member in prayer prior to every session.....There are many other examples........

You need to get use to it or move to a Communist country where there is no God........You would fit right in.........
Click to expand...

Why are you doing this again?
If you don't have anything intelligent to bring to the debate, and must go to blaming problems on "the left" and using attempted insults to get a weak point across, I ask you to stop posting in the thread.
The only place you belong is the basement, your style of debate fits in down there kid.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom