Atheists sue N.J. school over ‘under God’ in Pledge of Allegiance

[Retro Rob]

I genuinely don't get why NOT allowing someone to impose their standards on people is then in turn imposing your standards on them.

Exactly how is saying "under God" imposing standards? The pledge lasts what... 90 seconds? Are they required to read the Bible? Go to a Church, or pray?

This is the same sort of logic that Christian conservatives use when they say they are being persecuted because they aren't being allowed to persecute gay people.

Well, that's them. I'm not a part of that at all.

 

[fskimospy]

Exactly how is saying "under God" imposing standards? The pledge lasts what... 90 seconds? Are they required to read the Bible? Go to a Church, or pray?

It's an act where schools lead students in a pledge that serves in part to assert the existence of god and his dominion over us. To me that pretty clearly shows a state endorsement of religion.

I don't think religious people have a right to have the school do that any more than I think atheists would have a right to have the school list all the reasons why god probably doesn't exist to start each day. I don't see why anyone needs either one in their school.

 

[Retro Rob]

It's an act where schools lead students in a pledge that serves in part to assert the existence of god and his dominion over us. To me that pretty clearly shows a state endorsement of religion.

That's why those who don't believe God exists don't have to acknowledge/recite the pledge at all. To me, giving an exemption for non-believers is fair to those who may want to say it, while allowing those who do the ability.

Not wanting to "hear" it though is teetering on the right to not be offended.

That right doesn't, and will never, exists.

I don't think religious people have a right to have the school do that any more than I think atheists would have a right to have the school list all the reasons why god probably doesn't exist to start each day. I don't see why anyone needs either one in their school.

Why would you want to start a day mentioning something you don't believe in?

Then it becomes a faith.

 

[fskimospy]

That's why those who don't believe God exists don't have to acknowledge/recite the pledge at all. To me, giving an exemption for non-believers is fair to those who may want to say it, while allowing those who do the ability.

Not wanting to "hear" it though is teetering on the right to not be offended.

That right doesn't, and will never, exists.

No one is saying they can't hear it, just that a government run educational facility should not be explicitly endorsing it by attempting to lead all students in such a daily affirmation.

Why would you want to start a day mentioning something you don't believe in?

Then it becomes a faith.

I don't want to, and I don't want anyone else to have to voice my beliefs if they disagree with them.

 

[Retro Rob]

No one is saying they can't hear it, just that a government run educational facility should not be explicitly endorsing it by attempting to lead all students in such a daily affirmation.

Look, I hear what you're saying, but you're (them) not being force to, though. Like the JW case mentioned earlier, their kids were suspended from school before they won the case for not saying the Pledge, but I don't see any children of atheist parents being suspended.

What they're really doing is turning an issue of not wanting to hear God mentioned into a phantom case of discrimination. How is that discrimination if your kids are allowed to not participate and can still get the same education as children of religious parents?

 

[fskimospy]

Look, I hear what you're saying, but you're (them) not being force to, though. Like the JW case mentioned earlier, their kids were suspended from school before they won the case for not saying the Pledge, but I don't see any children of atheist parents being suspended.

What they're really doing is turning an issue of not wanting to hear God mentioned into a phantom case of discrimination. How is that discrimination if your kids are allowed to not participate and can still get the same education as children of religious parents?

By the way, I really do mean that I find these sorts of lawsuits to be kind of a waste of everyone's time and money. I don't view this as a major enough violation to be worth worrying about. In a strictly legal sense though I think they have a point. Compelling student participation is not the only way in which schools can unconstitutionally endorse religion, the school is leading students in a pledge that affirms god and his dominion over us. That's not what our schools are for.

 

[thraashman]

Look, I hear what you're saying, but you're (them) not being force to, though. Like the JW case mentioned earlier, their kids were suspended from school before they won the case for not saying the Pledge, but I don't see any children of atheist parents being suspended.

What they're really doing is turning an issue of not wanting to hear God mentioned into a phantom case of discrimination. How is that discrimination if your kids are allowed to not participate and can still get the same education as children of religious parents?

I know that in high school I was kicked out of a class for refusing to stand for the pledge on religious grounds. The teacher tried to enact more punishment even. I used to just quietly ignore it and sit still until that day when my freedom was attacked. It should be noted that neither of my parents are or ever have been atheist. Most people I know who are atheist come to that understanding in their early teens, myself included.

 

[alzan]

I do find it quite telling how these atheist organizations aren't suing to improve the quality of the education here in the US, but they'd spend all kinds of money making sure a 3-letter word cannot ever find its way into a classroom...while kids would still graduate behind other developed countries despite getting "god" removed.

If its that important, then its that important...I guess.

Poor attempt at diversion. Not that improving the quality of education in our schools isn't an important topic but it's not the topic of this particular thread.

 

[Retro Rob]

I know that in high school I was kicked out of a class for refusing to stand for the pledge on religious grounds. The teacher tried to enact more punishment even. I used to just quietly ignore it and sit still until that day when my freedom was attacked. It should be noted that neither of my parents are or ever have been atheist. Most people I know who are atheist come to that understanding in their early teens, myself included.

How old are you? I'm pretty sure you did back then, as was I (though I wasn't forced, but just laughed at for not saying it), but those days are over.

 

[Retro Rob]

Poor attempt at diversion. Not that improving the quality of education in our schools isn't an important topic but it's not the topic of this particular thread.

Just giving progressives a taste of their own "we have bigger things to worry about than gay marriage" medicine.

I'd say complaining about three letters that obviously mean little to nothing to atheists and agnostic is a much, much more smaller issue than Christians opposing gay marriage.

 

[brandonb]

I'd refuse to say the pledge too. But not because of the "Under God" but because I don't pledge my allegiance to anybody, because nobody is looking out for my best interest.

 

[Vic]

The pledge doesn't pledge allegiance to the federal government. It also has nothing to do with the size of government and certainly nothing about it is enslaving anyone. And of course there's your usual flailing around a terms you don't actually understand with your attempt to define statism as anything other than flat out anarchy.

But leave it to you to also double down on stupid.

How many times did your parents drop you on your head when you were a baby?

 

[Matt1970]

I know that in high school I was kicked out of a class for refusing to stand for the pledge on religious grounds. The teacher tried to enact more punishment even. I used to just quietly ignore it and sit still until that day when my freedom was attacked. It should be noted that neither of my parents are or ever have been atheist. Most people I know who are atheist come to that understanding in their early teens, myself included.

How old are you? I'm pretty sure you did back then, as was I (though I wasn't forced, but just laughed at for not saying it), but those days are over.

Depends on his age. It's been illegal to force anyone to say it in public school since 1943.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

If the nation is "indivisible," why do we have 50 states? That always bugged me. Clearly the nation is "divisible" into smaller units and saying otherwise is a blatant lie. Maybe they should sue for that next.

 

[thraashman]

Depends on his age. It's been illegal to force anyone to say it in public school since 1943.

The teacher didn't try to force me to say it but force me to stand during it. I said that I considered the "under god" part to be an insult to me because I'm atheist (which is true) and therefore would not stand during in it for religious reasons. He yelled at me to stand and when I wouldn't he yelled at me to get out. I left the second the pledge was over so that I wasn't standing during it. This would have been either 1997 or 1998.

 

[kage69]

I genuinely don't get why NOT allowing someone to impose their standards on people is then in turn imposing your standards on them. This is the same sort of logic that Christian conservatives use when they say they are being persecuted because they aren't being allowed to persecute gay people.

The victim complex always gets a laugh out of me,even if I know they really can't help themselves.

Atheists wanting our government to operate more in line with it's tenants are just a bunch of morons, obsessed with imposing their views on poor, poor church goers and they probably hate America too.

Now, Google not singling out jesus with his own avatar for Easter on their search page though, that's a big deal! Why does google hate jesus and murica? Commence the boycott! Call Fox!!

Too funny.

 

[alzan]

Just giving progressives a taste of their own "we have bigger things to worry about than gay marriage" medicine.

I'd say complaining about three letters that obviously mean little to nothing to atheists and agnostic is a much, much more smaller issue than Christians opposing gay marriage.

Two wrongs make a right, eh? Cool philosophy, bro.

Whether a particular issue is small or great is a matter of perspective; looked at with cultural/political/religious/et al blinders removed gives one a better understanding of their import.

Like I said earlier the fact that "under G-d" was made part of the pledge with nary a cry of un-Constitutional is a blinding example of just how much influence Christian culture has on our nation. Also you're leaving out the millions of non-Christian citizens of this country.

Off topic but: presented with a group of people who seek equal rights and protections for all citizens vs. a group who seeks to deny equal rights and protections to a particular group of citizens; which group is acting according to the ideals of our country and is inline with the Constitution?

 

[brandonb]

The teacher didn't try to force me to say it but force me to stand during it. I said that I considered the "under god" part to be an insult to me because I'm atheist (which is true) and therefore would not stand during in it for religious reasons. He yelled at me to stand and when I wouldn't he yelled at me to get out. I left the second the pledge was over so that I wasn't standing during it. This would have been either 1997 or 1998.

Oh look at all your conviction! Standing up against the oppressor.

 

[IronWing]

Oh look at all your conviction! Standing up against the oppressor.

Does the opressor determine what is oppression?

 

[Zaap]

LOL! First there was facing down tanks in Tiananmen Square....

.... now there's refusing to say a word you supposedly don't even believe in, yet quake in fear of and act like a deranged zealot psychopath at the very mention of.

 

[alzan]

LOL! First there was facing down tanks in Tiananmen Square....

.... now there's refusing to say a word you supposedly don't even believe in, yet quake in fear of and act like a deranged zealot psychopath at the very mention of.

The problem, as I stated above, is not necessarily the words themselves but the way in which the change was enacted and that none of the branches of government, most of all the judicial, saw the unconstitutionality of it; either then or now.

Yeah, nobody is doing that. Your point, if any, is moot.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

I went to school in Jerry Falwell's neck of the woods and I don't remember anyone having to stand or recite the pledge of allegiance in high school if they chose not to do so (1972-1976).

 

[CitizenKain]

LOL! First there was facing down tanks in Tiananmen Square....

.... now there's refusing to say a word you supposedly don't even believe in, yet quake in fear of and act like a deranged zealot psychopath at the very mention of.

Are you smart enough at all to follow what people are saying? Even for a righty you seem to have issues.

 

[soulcougher73]

LOL! First there was facing down tanks in Tiananmen Square....

.... now there's refusing to say a word you supposedly don't even believe in, yet quake in fear of and act like a deranged zealot psychopath at the very mention of.

Lets do a little thought experiment for the mentally inept. So maybe get some water and take a seat for this as to not hurt yourself.

Lets pretend instead of "under god" we said "under Allah" (yup right here in 'Murica). Would you rather you just shut up and take it, but not have to recite it, orr would you rather the "seperation of church and state" be enforced to remove any religious connotation from the pledge? You know..as our founding fathers and principles dictate.

 

[thraashman]

Oh look at all your conviction! Standing up against the oppressor.

This was 16 years ago and I was 17. How many 17 year olds even have considered their religion past just accepting the same thing as their parents? The only reason it never became a bigger deal is that for some reason the pledge was done in a different class that day, so it was a different teacher than I would normally have during the pledge. Had it persisted past that one day, I don't know what would have happened. But it was STILL an attack on my rights.