Local atheist: Contested [pledge] phrase is a hate crime

Minneapolis Star Tribune ^ | March 25, 2004 | Kevin Diaz

[Schatze]

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Marie Alena Castle, a Minneapolis atheist, contends that the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance is a hate crime.

Not one to stand idly by in the face of perceived injustice, the 77-year-old former Catholic has written a long brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in support of California atheist Michael Newdow, who urged the justices Wednesday to drop "under God" from the pledge.

Castle's brief is one of more than 50 that have been submitted in the case, which tests the constitutional prohibition on the official establishment of religion.

But Castle's is the only one that sets forth the thesis that Congress put "under God" into the pledge out of hostility toward atheists.

Supporters of the current pledge -- backed by the Bush administration -- argue that it merely reflects the role that religion has played in the nation's history and that it is more of a civic ritual than a religious one.

A retired business and technical writer with no background in law, Castle rests her argument on congressional records dating to 1954, at the height of the Cold War, when Congress inserted "under God" into the pledge.

She cites a speech by Congressman Louis Rabaut, the Michigan Democrat who sponsored the addition of the two-word phrase. He said: "You may argue from dawn to dusk about differing political, economic and social systems, but the fundamental issue which is the unbridgeable gap between America and Communist Russia is a belief in Almighty God . . ."

Given the level of hostility at the time, Castle said, "it is not an overstatement to call it a hate crime."

Castle's is the only atheist brief from Minnesota, the headquarters of a 300-member national group that she calls Atheists for Human Rights. She said the history of the pledge underscores how atheists have often been villified and attacked as "an unpopular group."

[Modernman]

Atheists are traitors, and should be jailed.

Well, I'm not an atheist, but anyone who tried to oppress me because of my religious beliefs would find themselves on the receiving end of a large shotgun shell.

[Schatze]

defacing currency which is a crime.

Actually, defacing currency is only a crime if the intent is to alter the bill to gain a benefit (example: trying to change a $5 bill into a $20 bill). That's considered a forgery; forgery of United States currency in this manner is called counterfeiting and carries stiff penalties.

Not that I'm defending the defacing of currency ... to me it's as bad as graffiti.

[Dimensio]

Surely an atheist is not ignorant of his own belief system? Anyone without a belief system believes nothing. Are you telling us you believe nothing?

No, I'm asking what "belief system" is defined by "atheism".

I believe a lot of things. For example, I believe that the animated film Akira is highly overrated. That belief, however, has nothing to do with the fact that I'm an atheist.

Atheism is a belief system because it believes something that cannot be proved.

And this is?

Therefore it is nothing more than a personal preference, a whim, a convenient device for justification of behaviors; an excuse.

So my lack of belief in gods is nothing more than an excuse? Or are you totally ignorant of what atheism is, so you're arguing from a strawman definition?

It is, as William F. Buckley often mused, the only world view that has defined itself by what it is not, and finds it impossible to do so without mentioning God.

You bring up this "God" concept again. What is this "God" of which you speak?

Also, I'm still waiting for a citation of the statute regarding defacing US currency.

[Schatze]

I don't assert such a thing, and I'm an atheist.

From your posts, I get the impression you don't believe in anything. How sad for you.

[Modernman]

Atheism is a belief system because it believes something that cannot be proved

Huh? Atheists are not trying to prove anything, AKAIK. Logically speaking, the person who claims that something exists is the one with the burden of proof.

[Dataman]

18 USC 475
USC 3559 shows this is classified as an infraction, and 18 USC 3571 indicates a maximum fine of $5,000 for individuals and $10,000 for organizations.

[Schatze]

I'm still waiting for a citation of the statute regarding defacing US currency.

See post #122.

[Ignatz]

Dimensio, this country was founded within the context of a belief in a God. The Declaration makes it perfectly clear: "...endowed by our Creator...". The reference to "Under God" in the Pledge is only an acknowledgement of that principle. The First Amendment protects you from being forced by the Fedril Gubmint to worship that Christian God.
Plus, you are not required to say the Pledge if you don't want to.

What next?

ATHEISTS: "WHAAAAAAH! We want all references to God and Jesus removed form the Bible, 'cuz we're offended by them when we read it!

[Dataman]

Actually advertising or making political statements is included in defacing. Removing the motto is making a political statement.

[Dimensio]

From your posts, I get the impression you don't believe in anything.

I believe that Akira is an overrated film (I stated that already, I know).

I believe that Deus Ex: Invisible War is the result of a lot of bad gaming design decisions.

I believe that a lot of people here are mistaken as to what atheism is and is not.

[Dataman]

No, I'm asking what "belief system" is defined by "atheism".

You're an atheist and you don't know? How sad.

Also, I'm still waiting for a citation of the statute regarding defacing US currency.

As if it will make any difference to you. I answered your request. Go look up the statutes-- or do you need help with that too?

[Schatze]

We want all references to God and Jesus removed form the Bible, 'cuz we're offended by them when we read it!

I don't think atheists read the Bible. But your point is correct -- there's no reasoning with these people. They simply want their way, and they want it NOW!

[Dataman]

Logically speaking, the person who claims that something exists is the one with the burden of proof.

Bzzzt! Wrong. The burden of proof is on the new idea or the more elaborate explanation. Atheism is the new idea and certainly the more elaborate explanation.

[Ignatz]

I don't think atheists read the Bible.

I'm guessing the majority of them don't say the Pledge, either. Which is their right.

[Schatze]

I believe that Akira is an overrated film (I stated that already, I know). I believe that Deus Ex: Invisible War is the result of a lot of bad gaming design decisions.

Gee, that's profound.

I believe that a lot of people here are mistaken as to what atheism is and is not.

Then enlighten us.

[antiRepublicrat]

but anyone who tried to oppress me because of my religious beliefs would find themselves on the receiving end of a large shotgun shell.

Speaking of that, I don't have a gun anymore because of my time overseas, but there's a big gun sale going on this weekend. Time to exercise that 2nd Amendment right, already got my permit duckies all in a row...

[Dimensio]

18 USC 475

I have not stated any intention to produce counterfeit tokens in the likeness of US currency.

USC 3559

This actually does address defacing US currency, but only if it is done "with intent to render such bank bill, draft, note, or other evidence of debt unfit to be reissued". Marking out the IGWT phrase does not render the bill unfit for reissue. A small swipe of a Sharpie (just one or two is required) does not reduce the life expectancy of the bill, nor does it make it any less obvious the denomination of the bill.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Not one to stand idly by in the face of perceived injustice, the 77-year-old former Catholic has written a long brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in support of California atheist Michael Newdow, who urged the justices Wednesday to drop "under God" from the pledge.

And people like her are supposed to be the ones passing down wisdom to the younger generation. Sheesh!

[Dimensio]

You're an atheist and you don't know? How sad.

No, I do know. I'm trying to find out if anyone else knows by asking the question.

I answered your request.

Yes, you did, AFTER I made the posting to which you are responding.

[Dimensio]

ATHEISTS: "WHAAAAAAH! We want all references to God and Jesus removed form the Bible, 'cuz we're offended by them when we read it!

The Bible is not a federal document. I know of no atheist who would make such a demand.