The Pledge of Allegiance outlawed again...

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jim Diver

Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2002
Messages
376
Location
San Jose, PRK
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/09/14/D8CK6FUG0.html

Judge Declares Pledge Unconstitutional
Sep 14 2:11 PM US/Eastern


By DAVID KRAVETS
Associated Press Writer


SAN FRANCISCO


The Pledge of Allegiance was ruled unconstitutional Wednesday by a federal judge who granted legal standing to two families represented by an atheist whose previous attempt to get the pledge out of public schools was rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court.
 
Yeah...we all know that if kids don't recite the pledge every morning, they'll turn into little godless commies... :rolleyes:
 
Contact for the judge who issued the ruling:

Judge Karlton, Lawrence K.

Hinkle, Tim Secretary 916-930-4130 Fax: 916-491-3905
Rivas, Ana CRD 916-930-4133 Fax: 916-491-3934
 
Actually

this is the rewrite of the Pledge we are talking about. The original is fine, guess what the non altered original doesn't say?
CT
 
Thanks for the contact information.

I'll be able to express my support.

Religion is a personal choice, and wasn't in the original pledge.

The judge is right.

Veterans died and served so we can make our own choices about such matters.

It pleases me to see that concept reinforced, and it removing those words would make it possible for me to say the pledge again, and remain faithful to my belief in the right to personal choice.

I love this country, and the fact that eventually, we usually get it right.

And this decision is right, and such decisions are the best defense against foolishness.
 
this is the rewrite of the Pledge we are talking about. The original is fine, guess what the non altered original doesn't say?
Correct sir, the original never had the phrase "under God" in it.... that was added later.

When I was in school in the 60's, saying the "optional" version was up to the student.... some did, some didn't. So at that point, the clear and uniform audio coming from the class would go to "bzzrtt mumble bazuph" as some said one thing and the rest said the other.

Nobody made a big deal about it, but then way back in those days the religous right had not yet started to make those two words (under God) a national litmus test and rallying cry to try to reform the government.

It never was a big deal until they turned it into one.

For the record, I am a Christian but I do my praying on my own time and don't expect the public schools to program kids into religion.
 
The trouble is, we DON'T impeach 'em. We'd better start.

Why? Seems like he did the right thing to me. We wouldn't be having this problem at all if the pledge hadn't been tampered with in the first place.
 
Yeah...we all know that if kids don't recite the pledge every morning, they'll turn into little godless commies... :rolleyes:
That's like saying that the NRA wants to require every man, woman and child to be armed. :rolleyes: It's not about requiring. It's about allowing. The suit was not about children required to recite the pledge; it's about whether children are allowed to say it in school. :banghead: The 1A does not protect freedom from religion. :fire:

Edit: Should have said "The 1A does not guarantee freedom from religion."
 
God was added into the pledge so that the little kiddies wouldnt be commies. Those damn soviets were godless and therefore we needed the kids to turn out to be good god fearing american.
 
EDIT: You know what? This is a religious subject and shouldn't even be discussed here.

How on earth is the first amendment a religious subject?

This is the legal and political.

The first amendment is part of the constitution.

The constitution is law.

The law is exactly on topic in a forum titled "LEGAL and Polititcal".
 
The original purpose of religious freedom laws was to free people from the sort of thing that had been going on in Virginia. A search on Mr. Jefferson's original Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom will clear up the intent - and it wasn't to do away with the public mention of God.

"In Virginia, the American Revolution led to the disestablishment of the Anglican Church, which had been tied closely to the royal government. Then the question arose as to whether the new state should continue to impose taxes to be used for the support of all recognized churches. The proposal had a number of supporters who, even if they no longer accepted an established church, still believed that religion should be supported by the public purse.

For some Virginians, however, imposing religion on people smacked of tyranny. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, both of whom would later be president of the United States, argued that religious beliefs should be solely matters of individual conscience and completely immune from any interference by the state. Moreover, religious activity of any sort should be wholly voluntary. Not only did they oppose taxing people to support an established church, but they also objected to forcing people to pay taxes even for their own church. To Jefferson, a high wall of separation should always keep church and state apart.

Jefferson drafted the following measure, but it was Madison who skillfully secured its adoption by the Virginia legislature in 1786. It is still part of modern Virginia's constitution, and it has not only been copied by other states but was also the basis for the Religion Clauses in the Constitution's Bill of Rights."
 
How on earth is the first amendment a religious subject?

This is the legal and political.

The first amendment is part of the constitution.

The constitution is law.

The law is exactly on topic in a forum titled "LEGAL and Polititcal".

Because the point of this isn't the 1st Amendment in general, it specifically addresses the 1st in relation to RELIGION, and any sophistry on your part does not occlude that fact.

...

Henry: Yes, I realize that. I thought it a bit of an amusing dichotomy. However, I also realized it would be needlessly contentious, which is why I edited it.
 
Daniel, it doesn't matter which right it is.

It doesn't matter if it's about religion, guns, or the right to remain silent.

The description of this forum is:

"Get informed on issues affecting the right to keep and bear arms and other civil rights. Coordinate activism, debate with allies and opponents. Discuss laws concerning firearm ownership, concealed carry and self-defense."

There is no question that the first amendment is a civil right.

It fits, and it fits perfectly.
 
The "original" pledge was much different from the one adopted by Congress. If Congress had the power to adopt the "earlier" one, it had the power to adopt an amended version 50 years ago.
 
That's like saying that the NRA wants to require every man, woman and child to be armed. It's not about requiring. It's about allowing. The suit was not about children required to recite the pledge; it's about whether children are allowed to say it in school. The 1A does not protect freedom from religion.

All the little kiddies that want to say the pledge can still get together before class and say it. The same with a prayer group. Our school has a prayer group that meets every morning before class starts because we have freedom of and from religion. It is not the same if a teacher leads it in class.
 
Scansion

I always thought that the addition of "under God" spoiled the meter of the original.
The other interesting point is that most of the people in congress who psaa laws, later found to be unconstitutional are, themselves, lawyers. didn't they learn anything?
 
It doesn't matter if it's about religion, guns, or the right to remain silent.

Maybe or maybe not. It isn't my place to decide if this thread will remain or not, and I'm not going to bother a mod about it. I do know that one of the subjects listed above has been declared verboten on this board, with good reason: too many heated arguements with no purpose or resolution. I will admit to being guilty of such in the past as much as anyone, so I am bowing out of this one.
 
Yeah...we all know that if kids don't recite the pledge every morning, they'll turn into little godless commies...

You sound like you have a problem with our glorious youth indoctrination camps. There is "No escape from the mass mind rape." Now, conform!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top