9TH CIRCUIT COURT: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL

Fox News ^

[Jzen]

Maybe a Dictionary will define it a little better for ya. This is a webster moment.
atheism
n 1: the doctrine or belief that there is no God [syn: godlessness] [ant: theism] 2: a lack of belief in the existence of God or gods Source: WordNet ® 1.6, © 1997 Princeton University
A doctrine.
doctrine
\Doc"trine\, n. [F. doctrine, L. doctrina, fr. doctor. See Doctor.] 1. Teaching; instruction.
He taught them many things by parables, and said unto them in his doctrine, Hearken. -- Mark iv. 2.
2. That which is taught; what is held, put forth as true, and supported by a teacher, a school, or a sect; a principle or position, or the body of principles, in any branch of knowledge; any tenet or dogma; a principle of faith; as, the doctrine of atoms; the doctrine of chances. ``The doctrine of gravitation.'' --I. Watts.
Articles of faith and doctrine. -- Hooker.

[Dimensio]

Not necessarily. I lack belief in extra-terrestrial life, but that does not mean that I believe that none exists -- I simply don't have belief regarding it because I've not seen any evidence.

[Dimensio]

I don't care for a dictionary definition of "the doctrine or belief that there is no God" because it is inherently begging the question of which "God" is being referenced. From that defintion, if an offering is given for what is meant by "God" then anyone who follows a religion that believes in a different concept of a "God" would be an atheist. I much prefer to analyze the word at its roots. Theism is the belief in the existence of a god or gods. A is a prefix that means "without". A-theism would mean "without" theism or "without belief in the existence of a god or gods".

[Jzen]

You just contradicted yourself. That is like saying i'm 6'0" but i'm really 5'6".

[hinj]

The pledge as a whole is not unconstitutional...the problem is that the current version does not represent all Americans equally. There are many who are not monotheistic, many who believe in a female deity, and many who believe in no diety at all. Those two little words in the pledge are unwarranted.

Say those two little words are removed....Those of you who believe in one God can still say the pledge with all your religious fervor in your heart. Those of you who don't believe in one God can finally say the pledge without being oppressed or pushed into a religious leaning.

Say those two little words are not removed....Those of you who believe in one God and that democracy is always a good thing can feel justified and that once again, you are right (whether that is true remains at issue). Those of you who don't believe in one God should be able to recite the pledge, leave out the offending words, and not be persecuted for it.

The best solution, however, is to restore the pledge to its Pre-Eisenhower condition, when it represented ALL Americans (with liberty and justice) regardless of race, creed, gender, etc.

That being said, as a good libertarian who truly believes all taxation is theft, no tax dollars should be spent on this controversy one way or the other. The pledge as a whole should not be mandatory recitation (freedom of speech (or silence in this case), anyone?), and especially the two words in question must not be required.

I am an American. I'm proud to be so. I say the pledge gladly, almost in its entirety. But I tend to resent the thing as a whole for those two little words added in religious fervor to a God who doesn't exist for me. Those two little words make the pledge contradict itself ... if it doesn't represent all Americans, it can hardly promote liberty and justice for all.

-- Angela
Black Forest, Colorado

* restore the pledge to its pre-Eisenhower state of representing ALL Americans *

I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

[Age of Reason]

In 1892, a socialist named Francis Bellamy created the Pledge of Allegiance

The originator of the Pledge was a socialist?

No wonder he left God out of it.

Good thing we fixed that.

[Dimensio]

No, it's saying that lack of belief is not the same as belief in lack. I cannot honestly claim to be absolutely certain that no gods exist and as such I do not make such a claim, however I do not acknowledge the existence of any gods because I also cannot claim to know with any degree of certainty that one does exist.

[Jzen]

Still, "without belief in the existence of a god or gods", is something that is now being imposed upon us, now isn't it.

[Dimensio]

Actually, it's more like that a belief in deities is not being imposed (which is significantly different than imposing the belief that there are no deities -- despite some of the claims that I've heard to the contrary). It's hard to "impose" the abscence of a belief.

[hinj]

What next?.....Will they strike all reference to the CREATOR on the Declaration of Independence?

The difference is that all of us can agree we have a creator, though our opinions may differ on what/who that is. Not all of us have a God to be under (especially not under). That's why those two words should be struck. Not the patriotic sentiment, just the religious sentiment.

You can still recite the pledge with all the religious fervor in your heart as you can muster...it will just mean that those of us who don't have that mono-theistic male God can now say the pledge freely without oppression.

[Age of Reason]

I cannot honestly claim to be absolutely certain that no gods exist and as such I do not make such a claim, however I do not acknowledge the existence of any gods because I also cannot claim to know with any degree of certainty that one does exist.

When somebody can define God for me, then I might be able to decide if he/she/it exists.

However even if God does not exist, it's a good thing for the mass of people to believe he does exist.

The creep who made a court case of the Pledge, probably wanted attention by spitting in the soup and ruining things for everybody else.

[hinj]

...which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them...

I am really amazed that you people can't see the difference. Jefferson is speaking about Nature's God, not any individual human's God. Nature is allowed freedom of religion, too. The Doug Fir in my yard may very well worship a different God than you or I. I see no comparison between this snippet of the Declaration of Independence and the post-Eisenhower pledge.

Restore the pledge to its pre-Eisenhower status representing ALL Americans!

[Jzen]

It's hard to "impose" the abscence of a belief?
So what do you think they just did? Remove the words that so many of our kids grew up with. What is that imposing? That God doesn't exist, Hello Mcfly. What are they going to do next, remove the swearing to tell the truth in courts?
Spare me, the agenda is clear.

[hinj]

Pathetic. Put the granola down and get a f***ing life, intolerant scum...

If you don't like intolerant scum, I suggest you avoid mirrors.

* Restore the pledge to its pre-Eisenhower condition representing ALL Americans! *

[Dimensio]

Ah, so are you one of those people who thinks that not mentioning a god is equivalant to saying outright that said god does not exist? Which "God" is having its existence denied by its mere lack of mention?

I'm not sure what you mean by swearing to tell the truth in courtrooms. Stating "I affirm under penalty of perjury that my testimony is true" (or something to that effect) hardly invokes any deities.

[hinj]

Hear hear!

[hellinahandcart]

* restore the pledge to its pre-Eisenhower state of representing ALL Americans *

The people are free to do that if they wish, but by means other than declaring the words "under God" in the pledge to be unconstitutional--because THEY ARE NOT, no matter who utters them or where.

[hinj]

It's court cases like this that push even more parents to home school their children. It's court cases like this that have caused private schools to thrive.

This reads like that's a bad thing...

Get government out of the education business NOW!

[Jzen]

Nice avoidance. Taking away the words "under God" isn't imposing your ideals. Barf alert.

[Dimensio]

No, it isn't imposing my ideals. Imposing my ideals would be adding in words to the effect of "there exists no evidence for the existence of any gods".

And someone scoffed at me when I suggested that there were those who could not comprehend the difference between being silent on matters of deities and outright stating that none exist...