'UNDER GOD'

The Boston Globe ^ | 7/4/02 | Jeff Jacoby

[Kip Lange]

Michael Newdow, the atheist who went to court to get the Pledge of Allegiance declared unconstitutional, spent his 15 minutes of fame last week asserting that the Founding Fathers would have cheered his campaign against the words "under God."

"He is confident," The Washington Post reported, "that the framers of the Constitution would have supported his view, noting that they did not mention God in the nation's founding document." He had earlier made the same claim on television, telling Katie Couric, "There is no reference to God in the Constitution. It's striking . . . that it is missing."

[Kip Lange]

A really great column from Jeff (and, as I keep urging, let's *hammer* the Democrats with the Pledge/PC issue!).

[First_Salute]

Bump.

[nimc]

This one was born right here on FR.

[dheretic]

The current pledge is nationalistic bull$hit. Something similar to the spirit of this would have been better:

"I pledge my allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America and to the Republic on which it is based. Upon my life and sacred honor I pledge to uphold the ideals enshrined in it and to defend it against any who would stand against them."

[CubicleGuy]

If the Framers were as determined as Newdow seems to think they were that the political system they were crafting be sanitized of any hint of God, surely they would have found a different way to date their document.

How? Using the Chinese year instead? Are we going to make the case that anyone who has ever put an "A.D." after a reference to a year must be a Bible-believing Christian?

[Roscoe]

The current pledge is nationalistic bull$hit.

The advocates of a borderless one world system hate our nationalism.

[Kaslin]

[Blue_Ridge_Mtn_Geek]

If the Framers were as determined as Newdow seems to think they were that the political system they were crafting be sanitized of any hint of God, surely they would have found a different way to date their document.

How? Using the Chinese year instead? Are we going to make the case that anyone who has ever put an "A.D." after a reference to a year must be a Bible-believing Christian?

The French revolutionists, in addition to slaughtering priests and emptying monasteries, attempted to change the calendar by renaming the months and defining the year of the revolution as "Year 1". The catastrophes that followed prevented this particular innovation from surviving - - but they definitely attempted to do it.

http://webexhibits.org/calendars/calendar-french.html

"The year was not divided into weeks, instead each month was divided into three décades of 10 days, of which the final day was a day of rest. This was an attempt to de-Christianize the calendar, but it was an unpopular move, because now there were 9 work days between each day of rest, whereas the Gregorian Calendar had only 6 work days between each Sunday. "

[G.Mason]

"The current pledge is nationalistic bull$hit."

"nationalistic bull$hit"??

And just who's definition of "nationalism" do you adhere to?

(From) Mirriam-Webster:
Main Entry: na·tion·al·ism
Pronunciation: 'nash-n&-"li-z&m, 'na-sh&-n&l-"i-z&m
Function: noun
Date: 1844

: loyalty and devotion to a nation; especially : a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups

[f.Christian]

Upon my life and sacred honor I pledge to uphold the ideals enshrined in it and to defend it against any who would stand against them."

sacred honor...

ideals---

defend them...

dheretic values...what might that be?

enshrined?

[f.Christian]

Creation/God...Christianity---secular-govt.-humanism...private religion!

Originally the word liberal meant social conservatives(no govt religion--none) who advocated growth and progress---mostly technological(knowledge being absolute/unchanging)based on law--reality... UNDER GOD---the nature of GOD/man/govt. does not change. These were the Classical liberals...founding fathers-PRINCIPLES---stable/SANE scientific reality/society---industrial progress...moral/social character-values GROWTH!

Evolution...Atheism-dehumanism---TYRANNY/govt. RELIGION---bigotry/intolerance---HYPOCRISY...

Age of the taliban/pharisees

Then came the post-modern age of switch-flip-spin-DEFORMITY-cancer...Atheist secular materialists through ATHEISM/evolution CHANGED-REMOVED the foundations...demolished the wall(separation of state/religion)--trampled the TRUTH-GOD...built a satanic temple/SWAMP-MALARIA/RELIGION(cult of darwin-marx-satan) over them---made these absolutes subordinate--relative and calling all the residuals---technology/science === evolution to substantiate/justify their efforts--claims...social engineering--PC--atheism...anti-God/Truth RELIGION--crusade/WAR--INTOLERANCE/TYRANNY...against God--man--society!!

[Kip Lange]

rubs hands with glee

I was hoping someone would 1) Ask CubicleGuy's question and someone else would 2) Bring up the French revolutionary "calendar". ;-)

Although, CG, your argument is specious...the point is that, despite Mr. Newdow's insistence to the contrary, the Constitution does contain religious references. And if the Framers wanted God *out*, I think they probably could have gotten around it.

Let's also not forget that the same first Congress which drafted the Constitution also opened its session with prayer and voted to apportion funds for Christian missions in Indian territories.

In addition, I find this "fear of God" (pun intended) rather amusing, since I myself am a non-denominational deist at best and waffle between that and agnosticism. What, exactly, are you so afraid of? Is it impossible to respect the beliefs of the majority of the nation? Will we not be happy until no individual or fringe group, anywhere, is offended by anything? What a bland world you wish to live in.

We managed to survive with "under God" in the Pledge since 1954 without a "Church of America" being established...or witch-burnings...and personally, even if I do waffle on religion, what is so awful about the teachings of Christianity? What? Should I hate my neighbor and feel no moral pangs about murders? I'm extremely sorry for you that the country was founded on Judeo-Christian values, but it was; get over it. I would hasten to add that there are plenty of places on the globe you can move to that weren't. I, myself, would prefer to stay in America...and I would also prefer it if America didn't slouch towards a Huxleyish _Brave New World_.

Furthermore...the Establishment Clause didn't even ban the individual states from designating an established religion -- I believe Maryland's lasted into the 1820s. So there really is absolutely no Constitutional ground for removing "under God", except...a horribly twisted, liberal-judge interpreted Establishment Cause, which merely argues for the Rep. Congressional leadership to get its collective head out of the sand and hold up Democratic legislation until Bush's nominees are appointed.

[Kip Lange]

I'm astounded that anyone would even bother to reply to such a patently absurd comment by dheretic. Is there really any question that this is political correctness run amok like some Frankenstinian liberal creation? Let me get this straight...you pledge to the ideals of the Constitution, which are...JUDEO-CHRISTIAN IDEALS. Your argument is circular, dheretic (and has become tiresome -- you may not touch my monkey *grin*).

[dheretic]

And just who's definition of "nationalism" do you adhere to?

Nationalism to me, and many others, is the sentiment espoused by Hitler, not the patriotism that was the rallying point during the WoI. Nationalism puts the nation above the individual, it has no room for a bill of rights that has any true legal weight. It is the philosophy of those that are obsessed with the glory of the republic rather than seeing the republic for what it is, both good and bad. A nationalist sees no evil in his country, a patriot does. A patriot has no problems saying "my country is run by dumb f@#$s that I would waste if I had the chance. They are doing totally immoral things to our people and the people of other nations and thus I cannot at all support what my country is doing."

a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups

That is not patriotism, especially not American patriotism. That is the kind of mindset that denounces a constitutionalist as a traitor calling for a small, well-equipped military and a swiss-like foreign policy.

[Khepera]

bump this July 5th in the year of our Lord 2002.

[dheretic]

Let me get this straight...you pledge to the ideals of the Constitution, which are...JUDEO-CHRISTIAN IDEALS. Your argument is circular, dheretic (and has become tiresome -- you may not touch my monkey *grin*)

Oh and just what judao-christian ideals are those? Being able to legally blaspheme the "holy texts" all day and have a sidearm to shoot any Jew or Christian that tries to use any violence to force you to stop? Have no state religion so that in the eyes of the law a satanist or atheist's views have as much right to legal protection as a Christians? Yep that means that a member of the CoS can go around preaching La Vay's cause all day and you can't do a damn thing to stop him legally.

How about a 1st amendment that lets you create graven images all day long? How about a 10th amendment that gives the national government no power to restrict non-employee morality? The 4th amendment which gives the state no power to enter your home without first making a strong case for believing you have committed a crime?

According to the Bible, you have no right to rebel against your government. You are to meakly take it up the a$$ whenever Big Brother tells you to do anything other than violate "God's law." If it decides to sieze all of your property, you cannot sit there with your trusty 30.06 and put a few rounds through the government agents sent to enforce the order without putting your soul "at risk." The values in the bill of rights are quite secular. Give up, you cannot reconcile them with any religion. The US Constitution is no more of a Christian Constitution than Japan's.

[Wm Bach]

Nationalism to me, and many others...Dan Rather, Alec Balwin, Hillary Clinton, Brian Williams, Barbara Boxer, Henry Waxman...that's some company you keep!

If you can't discern a pledge to a flag and the REPUBLIC for which it stands (i.e. a Constitutional Republic) from loyalty pledges to Hitler's personality cult, then it is a wonder you can navigate a staircase, being so beffudled by the concept of "up" and "down".

[G.Mason]

"Nationalism to me, and many others, is the sentiment espoused by Hitler......"

I suggest you and "others" are wrong.

".... exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups".

You and "others" may paint the definition of "nationalism" with any brush you desire, however, until a more reliable source than Mirriam-Webster is touted I will rely on this definition.

You see, I am a patriot and a nationalist and I "promote" America above all "other nations and supranational groups".

BTW.... Hitler be damned!

[G.Mason]

"I'm astounded that anyone would even bother to reply to such a patently absurd comment by dheretic."

I know......It's aparently a flaw in my character as I've done it again!

[Roscoe]

1. The current pledge is nationalistic bull$hit.

2. Nationalism to me, and many others, is the sentiment espoused by Hitler...

As surely as a dog returns to its vomit, those who hate our nation will attempt to draw that false moral equivalency with Hitler.