9TH CIRCUIT COURT: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL

Fox News ^

[Recovering_Democrat]

UNBELIEVABLE. BREAKING ON FOX: SF APPEALS COURT SAYS PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ENDORSES RELIGION, AND IS THEREBY UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

[Jzen]

I anticipate nothing but suffering to the human race while the present systems of paganism, deism and atheism prevail in the world.
Benjamin Rush, Signer of the Declaration of Independence,

From, Letters of Benjamin Rush, L.H. Butterfield, ed., (Princeton University Press, 1951) II:799, to Noah Webster on July 20, 1798.

Along with many others.

[Jzen]

"Liberal politicians may be sleazy but they are not stupid"

Yeah and they don't have the balls to stand for what they believe in. Scumbags

[Dimensio]

Uh, okay, so what does Benjamin Rush's opinion have to do with this? I could cite a number of signers of the DoI who had very different things to say on the subject.

Also, what is the relationship between expressing belief in deities and affirming that given testimony in court is true? You implied such a relationship earlier but never expanded on it when I inquired.

[Jzen]

Benjamin Rush was also called the "Father of Public Schools Under the Constituion". He wrote textbooks, formed curriculum plans, crafted educational policies, and helped establish universities and colleges.

And it was he who said,
"The only foundation for a useful education in a republic is to be laid in religion. Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty"

[Dimensio]

And Benjamin Rush's opinions regarding religion have relevance to the government's ability (or lack thereof) to entangle itself into religious affairs how?

Also, what is with that belief in deities and testifying in court relationship?

[Jzen]

Every atheist clings to Jeffersons letter he wrote concerning the fears that psycho religions would rule the government. Which is one of the few times that the words "seperation between church and state" appear. He was noting that the government wouldn't be ruled by psychos similar to those of England.

They saw the Judeo-Christian beliefs, which many of them held, to be far superior. Even the vague notion that the founding fathers wanted this nation to be ruled by atheism is absurd. THe idea that atheism is a lack of belief is absurd, it is considered a world view, a religion. It would simply take the place of religion, hence forcing the idea that no greater power exists other than themselves. The founding fathers knew there needed to be a morale basis. 1st part: They didn't write the amendment to have freedom from religion, but freedom of religion. 2nd part: They also didn't want the government ever to force a particular religion upon us. If you think the two words, "under God", is forcing a particular religion on people, then i feel sorry for you.

Maybe you should find a country that was founded by atheist, you might be happier there. End of discussion for me. Have a good day. And if you are one of those people who think that most of the founding fathers were atheists. You might want to research what the first act/order of congress was after the signing of the Decleration of Independance.
Bah I'll just save you the time. It was to say a prayer, a prayer to guide their thoughts and actions as to better serve the people that have given them the power to govern. SO much for those atheist.

[Dimensio]

THe idea that atheism is a lack of belief is absurd, it is considered a world view, a religion. It would simply take the place of religion, hence forcing the idea that no greater power exists other than themselves.

Atheism is a lack of belief, despite anyone shouting to the contrary. Anything apart from the abscence of belief in deities -- even if that belief might be a result of not having a deity belief -- is something seperate from "atheism". Believing that there is no "greater power" is not in itself atheism and it begs the question as to what you mean by "greater".

[RonF]

I have been sent this as a point of information. I didn't get the source. I thought people would be interested in it, as it appears to illuminate the reason of why the words were added. I also was wondering if anyone could find the source:

The resolution to change the Pledge was introduced into the House in 1954 by Rep. by Louis C. Rabaut. He proposed to add the words "under God" as "one nation, under God." Note the placement of the comma between "one nation" and "under God." As part of its deliberations, the House Judiciary Committee solicited an opinion for comma placement from the Library of Congress. Three proposals were considered:

one Nation, under God
one Nation under God
one Nation indivisible under God

The Library of Congress reported the following recommendation:

". . . Under the generally accepted rules of grammar, a modifier should normally be placed as close as possible to the word it modifies. In the present instance, this would indicate that the phrase 'under God,' being intended as a fundamental and basic characterization of our Nation, might well be put immediately following the word 'Nation.' Further, since the basic idea is a Nation founded on a belief in God, there would seem to be no reason for a comma after Nation; 'one Nation under God' thus becomes a single phrase, emphasizing precisely the idea desired by the authors . . ."

The idea that the U.S. was founded on a belief in God is a concept that has been much debated on FR. Apparently, that idea was the reason why the words were added.

[Torie]

John, the courts' work as just begun. I have to endure the pain of religious references on my currency. I have to pay with my taxes for chaplins in Congress and the military. It all needs to be cleansed so that we can have a true separation of church and state, and I can at last be a full citizen in this great land, and hold my head high, and not have to undergo the constant humiliation of the government sanctioning my marginalization in the public square.

Moving right along, this also highlights why we also need more liberals on SCOTUS in order to staunch the hideous birth of that hydra headed monster of government revenues going to religious schools via vouchers. I find that particuarly threatening. Before you know it, this nation might be turning out a glassey eyed product by the millions brainwashed by thoughts that are not subject to scientific proof or the power of reason or empirical data. As you know, that never happens in our public schools.

[Jzen]

great Pronunciation Key (grt)
adj. great·er, great·est
Very large in size.
Larger in size than others of the same kind.
Large in quantity or number: A great throng awaited us. See Synonyms at large.
Extensive in time or distance: a great delay.
Remarkable or outstanding in magnitude, degree, or extent: a great crisis.
Of outstanding significance or importance: a great work of art.
Chief or principal: the great house on the estate.
Superior in quality or character; noble: “For he was great, ere fortune made him so” (John Dryden).
Powerful; influential: one of the great nations of the West.
Eminent; distinguished: a great leader.
Grand;

[Dimensio]

I'm aware of the various definitions of "great", but I don't know to which one you refer when you speak of a "greater being" than humans. An elephant is larger in size than a human, so is an elephant a "greater being"?

Also, what's the relationship between telling the truth in court and belief in deities?

[DGallandro]

mlo wrote: Freedom of worship is the point. What if you worship Krishna? Or noone?

Seems to me that nowadays most people worship material objects and the root of all evil, Money.

And what's rather ironic is that people who worship the Almighty Dollar are not squealing about Freedom of Religion, in fact they're some of the ones cashing in on it, furthering their OWN religion.

At what point did Christianity become exempt from the whole Freedom of Religion thing?

[Jzen]

What is meant: Atheist believe that there is no higher power that they will eventually answer to. Yes, atheism is a world view, an understanding, hence a religion in itself. But this is a mute point, since this country wasn't founded on any one particualr religion, it chose to be tolerant of all religions. The basis for these principles came from the values of the Judeo-CHristian faith. We don't have religion police like other countries that go around execute those who don't conform. Without a morale populace, evil will grow unchecked. Like the CLinton impeachment, people still think he is the greatest president. Why? Why? Anyone who even entertains the latter idea, is the product of.

[LoneGreenEyeshade]

You're now MarriedGreenEyeshade.

Yeah, but you know Philman, still "lone" in the green eyeshade (i.e. accounting) ethics "business" ....

[philman_36]

Yeah, but you know Philman, still "lone" in the green eyeshade (i.e. accounting) ethics "business" ....
Ahhh, now I see. Not being in the accounting "business" I was unaware of the nick name for the trade. Thanks for teaching me this time.
I kept trying all of this time to figure out what your name referred to and now, finally, I know what it means. I kept picturing you in my mind going around with only one eye shaded green. Silly me.
I guess I should've figured it out, what with your previous posts and replies.
And if you're ethical in your affairs I bet you are very much a"lone".

[jwalsh07]

SCOTUS gets the ball rolling on vouchers. A good day for us and America amigo.

[listentothe15ygurl]

Can you people tell me what we are doing your taking the poeple who want to do the pledge , away from freedom of speech by forbiding it , the family's who are againts this had a choice to say it or not, if not they just had to stand ,but now no one has a choice so we went from having a choice to no choices . I am going to fight for this and i will not give up if it takes me to go on strike by not eating i will i am 15 years old I weigh 105 pounds and im 5'6 and i know what is right and what is wrong and this is not right. If anyone disagrees with me please email me at roxygurl999@msn.com I hope I can change some poeple's minds, because this is very important pretty soon we will have no laws, most of the laws are part of the ten commandments oh no that is religous isnt it, are we going to get rid of thoughs too? I sure hope not! thank you for reading what i have to say .