Replies

Whew! Now that we've got God back in the Pledge, God will be pleased and protect us, and we no longer have to fear those atheist Muslim terrorists who ironically call us Infidels. I'm glad our politicians are doing something meaningful. Of course, Muslim terrorists may say that they trust in God too, but since we don't like that their "trust" results in mass murder, I suppose they must really be atheists in disguise.

But then: maybe radical Muslims are right in trusting God, since He certainly seemed to be doing their bidding last week when all those people were killed in the tornadoes -- as well as those poor schoolchildren in Italy buried after the quake. Saved them a lot of bother with getting explosives, manpower, etc. As I've said before, if terrorists were responsible for those deaths, any decent person would be outraged and sickened. But since they occurred because of "an act of God" we're supposed to "trust" and praise God instead and bask in His eternal love for us. Well, if terrorists kill a whole bunch of people, how do we know this wasn't part of "God's plan," that we cannot, as human beings, rationally fathom? Shouldn't we just trust and praise the terrorists when they commit mass murder for doing God's bidding? Can we be so presumptuous as to know what God's plan really is?

It's ironic that the motivation during the Cold War for removing the secular Pledge and secular National Motto and replacing them both with religious ones, was to draw a distinction between the "religious" U.S. and the "atheistic" Soviet Union. But now that the threat is from RELIGIOUS tyrants, who use religion to justify mass murder, our politicians find it important to affirm our own religiosity. Go figure.

Based on your other posts here, it appears you're on a crusade against "religionists". Might I suggest you read some of our founding documents, especially the D of I.

It's all well and good that you have the freedom to advocate atheism (or advocate against religion). However, as a belief system on which to build a constitutional republic, atheism, and its inherent relativism, certainly falls short. Our system of government is based on the belief that human rights are inalienable and endowed by a Creator. The D of I and the Constitution fall apart without this foundation. The very rights you exert by speaking with such contempt against those who would promote the slightest recognition of God in our national dialog can only be secured by the absolutism that comes from tracing those rights to a creator.

You may choose not to believe it, but its certainly appropriate that Congress reaffirm the most basic belief of our system of government. If anything, from a practical standpoint, it certainly has resulted in more freedom for non-believers than any other society yet created. IMHO, its a small price to pay for you to have the freedom to insult "religionists", whatever that means. It's not like anyone is forcing you to say the words.

Furthermore, if you read the writings of the founders, you will certainly see that the society they envisioned was certainly not one in which religion did not have a place in public life. Church services were routinely held in public facilities at that time, and God's name was invoked routinely, and as a matter of course. There is little doubt that this country was designed to be a Christian nation. I'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable, but, alas, the right not to be offended doesn't seem to have been worth mentioning along with life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.