Court Allows 'Under God' on Technicality

[Fenixgoon]

the yahoo article link explains why "one nation under god" was put into the pledge-- to "separate the US from the godless communists"

 

[DWW]

Being that the majority in the USA is Christian (and the founding fathers who built the country), why should a minority (atheist) win out?

Slowly over time the world is going to the crapper because the minorities always get the "right" above anyone else.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: ElFenix
the question may be better resolved through the political branches anyway.

and DA is correct, the court is supposed to always look for an easy way out if they can avoid a constitutional question. unfortunately members of the court often forget this basic tenet whenever it suits their politics.

I am not sure that this is a political question, and I'm not sure how the political process could adequately - or even constitutionally address - this issue. The issue is somewhat related to prayer in schools, since God is involved. You can ban prayer, but you can't mandate it either. As such, I am not sure if there is a way Congress can address it.

article 5, the only textual method for modifying the constitution.

Then the Constitution - in its present form - can not support political action presently No problem - we can go ahead and tack it on to the end of the gay marriage amendment.

Shudders.

 

[MAME]

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon

Originally posted by: MAME
blah, just redo the case with someone else and see what happens. I don't think it should be written. If someone wants to add it when they speak, go ahead. But I don't want my children to be influenced by something they may not believe in.

honestly mame, how much do you think the pledge of allegiance affects people when they say the word "god". it doesnt. people repeat it because they're supposed to, it doesnt necessarily reflect any belief that they may hold.

Well of course it's not going to be much. But why would it be there in the first place? That's all I'm saying.

Read the Federalist Papers.

Clif notes?

I'm sure you can buy them somewhere. None will be provided here. Read about the foundation of your country. It'll do you good.

It was founded by a bunch of religius radicals. Of course, they also thought there were witches and killed them even though the people were most likely sick from using toxic plates.

If we went by the founding fathers of the country then we'd still have slaves.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally posted by: DWW
Being that the majority in the USA is Christian (and the founding fathers who built the country), why should a minority (atheist) win out?

Slowly over time the world is going to the crapper because the minorities always get the "right" above anyone else.

The beauty of our system is that the minority does have rights. That is why America is the bastion of liberty that it is.

 

[Analog]

Originally posted by: JackBurton
Well all you religious nuts can rest easy, your reference to the invisible magic man gets to stay in the pledge.

Court Allows 'Under God' on Technicality

The bad news for you is that it was knocked down due to a technicality. It looks like the Supreme Court wanted to dodge this one, and not address the real issue. That's ok, it is just a matter of time before it is removed.

not likely. Look at our money. Also, the supreme court WILL uphold it based on the justices that are currently there and their opinions on it.

 

[boyRacer]

waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah

 

[glenn1]

Being that the majority in the USA is Christian (and the founding fathers who built the country), why should a minority (atheist) win out?

Slowly over time the world is going to the crapper because the minorities always get the "right" above anyone else.

Because the purpose of our Constitution is justice, not simply to codify that the majority gets what it wants, consequences be damned. That's the reason why a minority (blacks) aren't still slaves even though the majority at one time probably either supported the idea or at least didn't intellectually oppose it.

 

[MAME]

Originally posted by: glenn1

Being that the majority in the USA is Christian (and the founding fathers who built the country), why should a minority (atheist) win out?

Slowly over time the world is going to the crapper because the minorities always get the "right" above anyone else.

Because the purpose of our Constitution is justice, not simply to codify that the majority gets what it wants, consequences be damned. That's the reason why a minority (blacks) aren't still slaves even though the majority at one time probably either supported the idea or at least didn't intellectually oppose it.

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: DWW
Being that the majority in the USA is Christian (and the founding fathers who built the country), why should a minority (atheist) win out?

Slowly over time the world is going to the crapper because the minorities always get the "right" above anyone else.

WTF? What the hell do you think freedom of speech is about? To protect the majority? With that type of thinking, I'm going to assume you are a Christian (or believe in that God at least). Am I right?

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Then the Constitution - in its present form - can not support political action presently No problem - we can go ahead and tack it on to the end of the gay marriage amendment.

Shudders.

i would consider the amendment process as a political function.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon

Originally posted by: MAME
blah, just redo the case with someone else and see what happens. I don't think it should be written. If someone wants to add it when they speak, go ahead. But I don't want my children to be influenced by something they may not believe in.

honestly mame, how much do you think the pledge of allegiance affects people when they say the word "god". it doesnt. people repeat it because they're supposed to, it doesnt necessarily reflect any belief that they may hold.

Well of course it's not going to be much. But why would it be there in the first place? That's all I'm saying.

Read the Federalist Papers.

Clif notes?

I'm sure you can buy them somewhere. None will be provided here. Read about the foundation of your country. It'll do you good.

It was founded by a bunch of religius radicals. Of course, they also thought there were witches and killed them even though the people were most likely sick from using toxic plates.

If we went by the founding fathers of the country then we'd still have slaves.

Untrue. They were not radicals. Many of the founding fathers (not to be confused with Pilgrims) were men of faith. Others were not. Both sides were represented in the great debates.

Believe it or not, slavery was also hotly debated. I suppose we should scrap the whole document because slavery was once legal. :roll:

The founding fathers realized that the document was imperfect, and allowed for amendments. This makes the Constitution a living document which can be altered when need be.

 

[MAME]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Then the Constitution - in its present form - can not support political action presently No problem - we can go ahead and tack it on to the end of the gay marriage amendment.

Shudders.

i would consider the amendment process as a political function.

I agree

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Then the Constitution - in its present form - can not support political action presently No problem - we can go ahead and tack it on to the end of the gay marriage amendment.

Shudders.

i would consider the amendment process as a political function.

True. But Congress and the States would have to amend, and only then could they address through legislation.

 

[DWW]

Originally posted by: JackBurton

Originally posted by: DWW
Being that the majority in the USA is Christian (and the founding fathers who built the country), why should a minority (atheist) win out?

Slowly over time the world is going to the crapper because the minorities always get the "right" above anyone else.

WTF? What the hell do you think freedom of speech is about? To protect the majority? With that type of thinking, I'm going to assume you are a Christian (or believe in that God at least). Am I right?

No I am not a Christian nor do I believe in "that God".

 

[MAME]

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon

Originally posted by: MAME
blah, just redo the case with someone else and see what happens. I don't think it should be written. If someone wants to add it when they speak, go ahead. But I don't want my children to be influenced by something they may not believe in.

honestly mame, how much do you think the pledge of allegiance affects people when they say the word "god". it doesnt. people repeat it because they're supposed to, it doesnt necessarily reflect any belief that they may hold.

Well of course it's not going to be much. But why would it be there in the first place? That's all I'm saying.

Read the Federalist Papers.

Clif notes?

I'm sure you can buy them somewhere. None will be provided here. Read about the foundation of your country. It'll do you good.

It was founded by a bunch of religius radicals. Of course, they also thought there were witches and killed them even though the people were most likely sick from using toxic plates.

If we went by the founding fathers of the country then we'd still have slaves.

Untrue. They were not radicals. Many of the founding fathers (not to be confused with Pilgrims) were men of faith. Others were not. Both sides were represented in the great debates.

Believe it or not, slavery was also hotly debated. I suppose we should scrap the whole document because slavery was once legal. :roll:

The founding fathers realized that the document was imperfect, and allowed for amendments. This makes the Constitution a living document which can be altered when need be.

The original settlers were indeed radicals.

I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, but I'd like to discuss this further. I'm not sure what your last reply had to do with "under god" in our pledge though.

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: DWW

Originally posted by: JackBurton

Originally posted by: DWW
Being that the majority in the USA is Christian (and the founding fathers who built the country), why should a minority (atheist) win out?

Slowly over time the world is going to the crapper because the minorities always get the "right" above anyone else.

WTF? What the hell do you think freedom of speech is about? To protect the majority? With that type of thinking, I'm going to assume you are a Christian (or believe in that God at least). Am I right?

No I am not a Christian nor do I believe in "that God".

Well, where else do you get your jacked up thought process? And how exactly is the world "going to the crapper?"

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon

Originally posted by: MAME
blah, just redo the case with someone else and see what happens. I don't think it should be written. If someone wants to add it when they speak, go ahead. But I don't want my children to be influenced by something they may not believe in.

honestly mame, how much do you think the pledge of allegiance affects people when they say the word "god". it doesnt. people repeat it because they're supposed to, it doesnt necessarily reflect any belief that they may hold.

Well of course it's not going to be much. But why would it be there in the first place? That's all I'm saying.

Read the Federalist Papers.

Clif notes?

I'm sure you can buy them somewhere. None will be provided here. Read about the foundation of your country. It'll do you good.

It was founded by a bunch of religius radicals. Of course, they also thought there were witches and killed them even though the people were most likely sick from using toxic plates.

If we went by the founding fathers of the country then we'd still have slaves.

Untrue. They were not radicals. Many of the founding fathers (not to be confused with Pilgrims) were men of faith. Others were not. Both sides were represented in the great debates.

Believe it or not, slavery was also hotly debated. I suppose we should scrap the whole document because slavery was once legal. :roll:

The founding fathers realized that the document was imperfect, and allowed for amendments. This makes the Constitution a living document which can be altered when need be.

The original settlers were indeed radicals.

I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, but I'd like to discuss this further. I'm not sure what your last reply had to do with "under god" in our pledge though.

It really does not. Generally speaking, many jurists ask "What would the founding fathers do?"

The idea is to try to change things as little as possible from what the founding fathers envisioned.

 

[MAME]

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon

Originally posted by: MAME
blah, just redo the case with someone else and see what happens. I don't think it should be written. If someone wants to add it when they speak, go ahead. But I don't want my children to be influenced by something they may not believe in.

honestly mame, how much do you think the pledge of allegiance affects people when they say the word "god". it doesnt. people repeat it because they're supposed to, it doesnt necessarily reflect any belief that they may hold.

Well of course it's not going to be much. But why would it be there in the first place? That's all I'm saying.

Read the Federalist Papers.

Clif notes?

I'm sure you can buy them somewhere. None will be provided here. Read about the foundation of your country. It'll do you good.

It was founded by a bunch of religius radicals. Of course, they also thought there were witches and killed them even though the people were most likely sick from using toxic plates.

If we went by the founding fathers of the country then we'd still have slaves.

Untrue. They were not radicals. Many of the founding fathers (not to be confused with Pilgrims) were men of faith. Others were not. Both sides were represented in the great debates.

Believe it or not, slavery was also hotly debated. I suppose we should scrap the whole document because slavery was once legal. :roll:

The founding fathers realized that the document was imperfect, and allowed for amendments. This makes the Constitution a living document which can be altered when need be.

The original settlers were indeed radicals.

I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, but I'd like to discuss this further. I'm not sure what your last reply had to do with "under god" in our pledge though.

It really does not. Generally speaking, many jurists ask "What would the founding fathers do?"

The idea is to try to change things as little as possible from what the founding fathers envisioned.

I see. And I agree. But times change and with literally 1,000 religions out there, it'd be nice to allow everyone to pick freely with as little government influence as possible.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

The question is whether the word God - taken by itself - actually establishes a religion.

God is such a general word that its presence could only really offend atheists.

 

[Childs]

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
The question is whether the word God - taken by itself - actually establishes a religion.

God is such a general word that its presence could only really offend atheists.

With the uppercase G it has a definite meaning.

 

[dc]

Originally posted by: Xiety

Originally posted by: dc
"Well all you religious nuts can rest easy, your reference to the invisible magic man gets to stay in the pledge."

go trolling in P&N

i agree, you are a troll dc Go away

i don't have anything against religious folks unless they troll like dc And I agree with one of the posts above... its a waste of taxpayers' money... also, what the hell was this dumbass thinking? If you don't have the custody of the child, you have the right to shut the fvck up.

me confused

 

[BadNewsBears]

OH nooooo had to say GOD. THINK OF TEH CHILDREENNENE

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally posted by: Childs

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
The question is whether the word God - taken by itself - actually establishes a religion.

God is such a general word that its presence could only really offend atheists.

With the uppercase G it has a definite meaning.

So the entire argument turns on whether god is capitalized?

 

[Childs]

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: Childs

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
The question is whether the word God - taken by itself - actually establishes a religion.

God is such a general word that its presence could only really offend atheists.

With the uppercase G it has a definite meaning.

So the entire argument turns on whether god is capitalized?

Call me a stickler but yes. It could not only offend atheists, but people of other religions as well. Normally I wouldn't think too much of this but when we have a President in office who uses God to justify his actions, its an issue. There should be a clear seperation of religion and state. There was no reason to have it in the pledge aside from sticking it to commies, and that time is over.

I don't like the idea of putting your hand on the bible either, or putting In God We Trust on currency. I realize its ceremony and has become tradition, but its also subversively putting one faith above all others. You should be able to believe in the USA, and not believe in Christianity. Right now the pledge kinda forces you to chose them both or not say the pledge at all.