Judge Brilliantly Defends Keeping 'Under God' in Pledge

Truth Revolt ^ | May 15, 2015 | Trey Sanchez

[Twotone]

New Jersey Judge David F. Bauman recently dismissed a case orchestrated by a student, his parents, and the American Humanist Association and ruled that hearing the words "under God" during the Pledge of Allegiance does not violate the constitutional rights of atheist students. In his decision released Monday, Bauman brilliantly laid to rest the notion that the phrase can, or should, be erased from America's history.

[Arthur McGowan]

A great statement—except that not a word of it is true.

The purpose of government schools, from the very beginning, was churning out little cogs for the godless, totalitarian machine of the Unitarian/Quaker progs.

[trebb]

ersonally, I have a problem with the ‘under God’ phrase in the Pledge of Allegiance. When I learned the Pledge in kindergarten it hadn’t been added yet, so sometimes I stumble there! Aside from that minor issue, I want ‘under God’ kept there to remind us where we came from and help keep the next generations on track. I figure every little bit helps.

Some changes are actually improvements...

I started kindergarten in '56 and it was already there, but starting in a Catholic school, I doubt I would have had trouble assimilating it (the Nuns would have broken my young fingers with the pointers...).

[Arthur McGowan]

It’s a shame that Unitarians and Quakers were not deported early on in U.S. history. They were and are proto-Commies.

[E.G.C.]

BTTT

[M Kehoe]

Bttt.

5.56mm

[DiogenesLamp]

It’s a shame that Unitarians and Quakers were not deported early on in U.S. history. They were and are proto-Commies.

I've read that it was the Puritans of Massachusetts who were extreme in their Worship of God. Since they became Godless, they are now extreme in their worship of what has replaced God; Government.

But yes, the Unitarians have always been a problem.

[Twotone]

“When is the Right going to stop their fetishization of the Pledge of Allegiance? It wasn’t written by Jefferson and Madison!”

This article wasn’t about the pledge per se. That may have been what the court case was about. What the article was about was the attempt to remove ‘God’ from our culture, & the judge’s response was a pretty good one. Saying ‘God’ doesn’t mean one faith or another, nor does it establish one. The vast majority believe in God in some form. Religious ideals were built into our form of government & you can’t extricate them, however much the left wants to.

[Arthur McGowan]

Don’t get me wrong. If people are going to say the Pledge, it should include “under God.”

But the Pledge as a whole is objectionable.

[EternalVigilance]

Bump.