Judge: School Pledge Is Unconstitutional

[Surfrider]

We have two posts that have conflicting quotes.

But, the argument was that this nation was founded on Christianity. Even with your quotes, (which I'd like to see a link and read more please) there is nowhere that indicates that the people who framed this country's Constitution did so on the basis of Christianity. Hardly anything in the Constitution references Christian thought and morality;it is merely wishful thinking.

I thought you would say that.? Your argument seemed a little broader since you wrote:

Our founding fathers were not "mostly Christian" that believed "our freedoms were granted by God."

The first part of the sentence is correct; the second part is not.? What quote specifically are you referring to that contradict, perhaps I can try and explain the contradiction.
.

Then maybe focused too much on the first part, ie Christianity.



Do you not have a link GNRNIGHTRAIN??

Sorry, Duffman

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/04slipopinion.html

click on McCreary a few cases down

[SLCPUNK]

We have two posts that have conflicting quotes.

But, the argument was that this nation was founded on Christianity. Even with your quotes, (which I'd like to see a link and read more please) there is nowhere that indicates that the people who framed this country's Constitution did so on the basis of Christianity. Hardly anything in the Constitution references Christian thought and morality;it is merely wishful thinking.

I thought you would say that.  Your argument seemed a little broader since you wrote:

Our founding fathers were not "mostly Christian" that believed "our freedoms were granted by God."

The first part of the sentence is correct; the second part is not.  What quote specifically are you referring to that contradict, perhaps I can try and explain the contradiction.
.

Then maybe focused too much on the first part, ie Christianity.



Do you not have a link GNRNIGHTRAIN? 

Sorry, Duffman

whatever dude..give it up!

[SLCPUNK]

We have two posts that have conflicting quotes.

But, the argument was that this nation was founded on Christianity. Even with your quotes, (which I'd like to see a link and read more please) there is nowhere that indicates that the people who framed this country's Constitution did so on the basis of Christianity. Hardly anything in the Constitution references Christian thought and morality;it is merely wishful thinking.

I thought you would say that.  Your argument seemed a little broader since you wrote:

Our founding fathers were not "mostly Christian" that believed "our freedoms were granted by God."

The first part of the sentence is correct; the second part is not.  What quote specifically are you referring to that contradict, perhaps I can try and explain the contradiction.

My quote were all from the recent McCreary decision, taken from Justice Scalia's dissent.  He cites all of these things in case you want to look for them in historical text.  I would suggest that you read the entire opinion, it is quite a good read.  Especially Scalia's dissent.  He actually addresses some of the conflicting quotes that Justice Stevens uses in his opinion.

Here is my favorite quote from that read:

"With respect to public acknowledgment of religious belief, it is entirely clear from our Nation?s historical practices that the Establishment Clause permits this disregard of polytheists and believers in unconcerned deities just as it permits the disregard of devout atheists?"

 

Don't you think that is a little fucked up?

[Pazzuzu]

I have no objection to pledging to a flag and the country, but I do have a problem with saying this is "one nation under god."? This is an endorsement of a religion-- while not a specific religion in regards to a specific sect or denomination, it is a denunciation of atheists and agnostics.

I think the fact that you, as well as your fellow atheist who is making such a big stink about the pledge, are so bothered by the words "one nation under God" demonstrates an underlying reservation you have about your own beliefs; or lack thereof.

I don't think a real atheist who truly believes there is no God would care if the pledge cited God or not.? No God to pledge to after all right?? Therefore the words are meaningless.

Besides, nobody is being forced to say anything.? You said yourself you don't recite the pledge.? And it isn't an endorsement of religion.? Amendment I reads:? Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

In other words, the United States government cannot establish a state religion or promote a specific faith.? Besides being generic as words can be, the words"one nation under God" in the pledge does neither.

[2NaFish]

i find it incredible that you can say an atheist is lacking belief. It is a belief that there is nothing which is an incredibly strong assertion. I can explain and assert why i don't believe in a God in the same way that any follower of any other religion could do they opposite so why should i not be afforded the respect that others are?

[Pazzuzu]

i find it incredible that you can say an atheist is lacking belief. It is a belief that there is nothing which is an incredibly strong assertion. I can explain and assert why i don't believe in a God in the same way that any follower of any other religion could do they opposite so why should i not be afforded the respect that others are?

Realizing this board has more than a few, I'm not trying to offend any atheists or agnostics here.

Whether atheists hold there is nothing to believe in or believe there is nothing, I prefer not to get into semantics.

My point is, the words "one nation under God" in the plege, on currency, etc. really isn't negative or harmful per se.? At most, it's an acknowledgement of something positive by those who recite it.

This reminds me of the negative reaction some had to The Passion of the Christ last year.? Whether it's mentioning God in the pledge of allegience or a film about Jesus, some people's response to anything religious is akin to a vampire when it sees a cross.

[2NaFish]

it's not simply a case of semantics, the fact is that an atheist believes there is nothing. Not the other way around, as it is not the same thing and is very rude to say so.

when i said afforded respect i wasn't talking in terms of the pledge (of which i don't really care). I was talking about the derisory way in which you hold and continue describe my beliefs. If it was the other way around and i was describing christianity in such loose and lowly ways i'm sure i'd have had an apology demanded.

[Pazzuzu]

when i said afforded respect i wasn't talking in terms of the pledge (of which i don't really care). I was talking about the derisory way in which you hold and continue describe my beliefs. If it was the other way around and i was describing christianity in such loose and lowly ways i'm sure i'd have had an apology demanded.

Believe me, I wouldn't expect any apology.? Christianity (and religion in general) is routinely derided around here and I've gotten used to it.

[SLCPUNK]

when i said afforded respect i wasn't talking in terms of the pledge (of which i don't really care). I was talking about the derisory way in which you hold and continue describe my beliefs. If it was the other way around and i was describing christianity in such loose and lowly ways i'm sure i'd have had an apology demanded.

Believe me, I wouldn't expect any apology.  Christianity (and religion in general) is routinely derided around here and I've gotten used to it.

It is too bad you can't understand why.

Most posters see you guys as hypocrites and it also sheds a bad light on Christians. You take the bible and use it as you wish. You use it to judge gays, yet discard it when the old testament is brought up. You use it as it suits your needs, yet totally ignore it for simple lessons about being honest, love thy neighbor, thou shall not kill, etc etc.

You condone violence and will not retract your war stance no matter how much evidence has come forward. Yet Jesus would not have lied, or condoned violence.

You lie, name call, and attack anybody who points it out. Yet Jesus would not have attacked others who spoke out against violence. Jesus would have spoken out against violence.

You express hatred towards anybody that holds any socialist type mentality or idea. You place blame on the poor calling them lazy and not worthy of an education. Yet Jesus preached to help his fellow men and not to judge others.

Then you guys turn around and say "You're attacking Christianity."

Well you don't have to worry about that because none of you guys are Christians by a long shot. NONE.

[Will]

I always found that weird. "One nation under God", nice for atheists. And the "In God We Trust" on money. Who's talking for me?