Posted on 06/26/2002 2:52:30 PM PDT by mrobison
The U. S. Senate has condemned the Ninth Circuit Court's ruling on the Pledge of Allegience by a 99-0 margin.
I proposed tar and feathering hours ago.
We really need to FReep these morons. We should be outside the courthouse right now with sacks of feathers and vats of tar, "One Nation, Under God" signs, and the loudest protest chants they've ever encountered.
Their rationale is fallacious, of course. Proclaiming that the pledge "establishes religion" is absurd. First, it doesn't identify who or what this "God" is -- the pledge makes no definitive proclamation on the nature or identity of God. For the little 3rd grader who happens to be a secular humanist, "god" could be "We the People." For the Christian, it is "Christ." For the Jew, it is "Jehovah," and so forth. I suppose the only ones who should have a problem with the phrase "under God" are the godless atheists (sorry...superfluous redundancy), who apparently make up the majority of the 9th District Court of Appeals. The other problem with this is that the "establishment clause" of the 1st Amendment had to do with prohibiting Congress (not individual states, I might add) from establishing "The Church of the United States," much like there is a "Church of England," which would constitute the official religion or church of the US. The pledge of allegiance does not establish a particular sect or denomination or church. These judges are fools.
I'll guarantee you this: If federal law is enacted to delete "under God" from the pledge consistent with this court ruling, millions upon millions of people will continue to include it whenever they recite it, much to the shagrin of the athetists.
The main question is this: Are the judges more upset with the term "under God" in the pledge, or are they upset with the notion of anyone pledging allegiance to the United States?
Anyone know the owner of a roofing company? It might be nice to park a few of those roofing tar trucks upwind of the court, just to give them a wiff of how we feel...
These rats (and rinos) are not going to change their spots. The way to get rid of them is to retire them, but the pork and entitlements just keep rolling.
As a Country we are in deep clinton.
Sorry, I'm a bit cynical today (but still right.)
You are correct. This vote has none of the weight of a vote to convict after an impeachment by the House.
LOL.They wish.
Another possible future headline:
June 26, 2002: God is dead!.....9th Circus Court of Appeals
June 27, 2002: 9th Circus Court of Appeals is dead!.....God
Precisely! Which is why we need to keep hammering this home--watch what they DO, not what they SAY.
W's been given a 20-pound railroad sledgehammer with this issue. If he doesn't take it upside Leahy's head and use it to ram those judicial nominations through, then he's showing less political savvy (or cojones on domestic issues, take your pick) than his old man.
}:-)4
Judges just became a big time issue this fall. And the public is not going to be on the side of the Democrats on it.
And the religious right is going to come out in force.
Horrible ruling, but I think it is going to yield amazing benefits.
(Rollcall Vote No. 163 Leg. )
June 26, 2002 5:14PM
VOTE TITLE: S. Res. 292
BILL NO.: S.Res. 292
REQUIRED FOR MAJORITY: 1/2
RESULT: Resolution Agreed to
YEAS --- 99
Akaka Dorgan Lugar
Allard Durbin McCain
Allen Edwards McConnell
Baucus Ensign Mikulski
Bayh Enzi Miller
Bennett Feingold Murkowski
Biden Feinstein Murray
Bingaman Fitzgerald Nelson (FL)
Bond Frist Nelson (NE)
Boxer Graham Nickles
Breaux Gramm Reed
Brownback Grassley Reid
Bunning Gregg Roberts
Burns Hagel Rockefeller
Byrd Harkin Santorum
Campbell Hatch Sarbanes
Cantwell Hollings Schumer
Carnahan Hutchinson Sessions
Carper Hutchison Shelby
Chafee Inhofe Smith (NH)
Cleland Inouye Smith (OR)
Clinton Jeffords Snowe
Cochran Johnson Specter
Collins Kennedy Stabenow
Conrad Kerry Stevens
Corzine Kohl Thomas
Craig Kyl Thompson
Crapo Landrieu Thurmond
Daschle Leahy Torricelli
Dayton Levin Voinovich
DeWine Lieberman Warner
Dodd Lincoln Wellstone
Domenici Lott Wyden
NOT VOTING --- 1
Helms
It is a sign of how much people have to fake it in this country, that atheists(of which I am not), need to be protected from being humiliated in class.
As has been pointed out before, Under God was added in 1955. It wasn't like Ben Franklin, James Madison, and George Washington got up each morning and said it for Pete's sake.
Secondly, I think it is kind of dumb to pledge allegiance to the flag. How about... oh, the constitutions.
Thirdly, I don't like having kids recite anything they don't understand. I was 8 or so until I realized indivisible wasn't "invisible". A 6 year old doesn't know what pledging allegiance, and indivisible, and republics are. It is asinine to make them say something they don't believe, as if the only way we can keep people loyal is through forced repetition, as opposed to living the american dream, and realizing this is the most blessed nation on earth.
To reiterate my first point... a nation where Tom Daschle, Hillary Clinton, Barbara Boxer, and Paul Wellstone feel compelled to fake that they love the Under God clause in the pledge, is a nation that is not exactly throwing Christians into the arena with lions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.