Skip to comments.
9TH CIRCUIT COURT: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
Fox News ^
Posted on 06/26/2002 11:25:21 AM PDT by Recovering_Democrat
UNBELIEVABLE. BREAKING ON FOX: SF APPEALS COURT SAYS PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ENDORSES RELIGION, AND IS THEREBY UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
TOPICS: Announcements; Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Alaska; US: Arizona; US: California; US: Hawaii; US: Idaho; US: Montana; US: Nevada; US: Oregon; US: Washington
KEYWORDS: 9thcircuitcourt; michaeldobbs; pledgeofallegiance; unconstitutional
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 821-840, 841-860, 861-880 ... 1,461-1,477 next last
To: Constitution Day
Sigh...Time to start pushing for school choice again. Be damned if I allow my daughters to get educated in a education system that doesn't teach them to love their country...
My bet? Put school choice into effect and you'll see an exodus of parents pulling their kids out of any school that goes full speed ahead with this ruling.
To: PhiKapMom
That's all well and good that that Bush and Daschle are apparently against this ruling, but they don't matter a whit. Can we say Supreme Court? Hello?
To: Pharmboy
OK, but if atheists are going to cross out "In God We Trust" on paper currency, then they'll understand if I write/stamp "I love Jesus" on it.
To: Babsig
Just tuned in to the Senate on C-SPAN. Who's speaking? I appears to be saying that Daschle is introducing something that disapproves of what the 9th Circuit just did. Unless it's a constitutional amendment, I don't see that it would have legal force.
To: tpaine
You may urinate by yourself. I am not the least bit interested in a competition.
And even though such a contest doesn't measure it, I am sure you will have copious amounts of bodily waste.
To: Mo1; PhiKapMom
I'm glad they got their view out FIRST, before the apologists come on the news.
846
posted on
06/26/2002 1:49:37 PM PDT
by
Howlin
Comment #847 Removed by Moderator
To: NeoCrusade
Can we say Supreme Court? Hello? No - It was remanded. This is a recording.......
848
posted on
06/26/2002 1:50:01 PM PDT
by
gdani
To: Babsig
Thank you for the update! My TV is downstairs and I'm not able to watch it and FR at the same time. :(
849
posted on
06/26/2002 1:50:02 PM PDT
by
Helix
To: Viva Le Dissention
And freedom of religion is a right specifically mentioned in our Constitution, a right "incorporated" by the US Supreme Court, and not in any way unalienable, as seen throughout history, as even seen in our country.You are refuted by your own words.
Freedom of religion.
Not freedom from religion.
To: Constitution Day
I'm having a hard time find the Toll Free Number for Congress .. you have it???
851
posted on
06/26/2002 1:50:21 PM PDT
by
Mo1
To: aristeides
Sen. Byrd now up, referring to Declaration of Independence.
To: NeoCrusade
I happen to agree, but it never really bothered me whether or not the words "under God" were included or not.
I can remember when Dwight Eisenhower added those words- - -and you thought I was a Spring chicken!
At any rate, we Americans all have so many things to worry about - - that is the least of them. I'll pledge allegiance if I have to do it in Italian!
853
posted on
06/26/2002 1:50:32 PM PDT
by
stanz
To: mhking
What ever way was respectable and would satisfy the minority.
To: Kevin Curry
This is exactly what happened in Russia in 1917, only a lot quicker. Start by destroying your history, culture and self-worth; infiltrate schools, workplaces, the Army in an attempt to demoralize and ruin institutions that are the backbone of the country. Make up lies about historical figures and replace the religious establishment with phonies, whores of the Bolsheviks. It took 70 years, but the Russians are finally regaining what was stolen from them by rebuilding churches, repossessing museums, restoring Peter the Great and other Russian heroes to their appropriate place and rendering Bolshevism where it belongs: to the ashheap of history (no one but tourists and a few old folks visit the tomb of the murderous embalmed pig Lenin in Red Square and the "museum of the revolution" now has truthful explanations below the communist exhibits). How unfortunate that Bolshevism (and its true expression in the trashy decade called "the Sixties") now appears to have roosted here in our own judicial system.
855
posted on
06/26/2002 1:51:26 PM PDT
by
laconic
To: Sabertooth
An unalienable right cannot be taken away by government.
Freedom of religion CAN be taken away by government. Therefore it is NOT an unalienable right.
Life, liberty, pursuit of happiness--despite the actions of government, the individual is always the determinant of his destiny and course of action, even in prison.
That just isn't true with freedom of religion. It's specific, not a broad philosophical concept like "life, et al."
To: mhking
I find that a perfectly acceptable modification to the existing Pledge of Allegiance. I'm sure that no one will take offense, except for Jehova's Witnesses because they aren't supposed to make pledges to any "graven images" regardless of the wording used (and in that case it's clearly a matter of their religion prohibiting the act rather than the act being an implicit endorsement of a religion).
Perhaps we should propose it to Congress?
Now to get on with the currency. How about "In at least one god some of us trust, and sorry if we weren't supposed to say that."
To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet; Howlin; Mo1
Finally! Bush does something kinda conservative!
I, for one, am overjoyed he did!
To: aristeides
I appears to be saying that Daschle is introducing something that disapproves of what the 9th Circuit just did. Unless it's a constitutional amendment, I don't see that it would have legal force. Correct. Most likely it's just a resolution. No legal force whatsoever.
859
posted on
06/26/2002 1:51:35 PM PDT
by
gdani
To: rudypoot
Can Congress impeach federal judges? They sure need to take look at a few. Oh, now Sen Bird is on - Saying that the Fed Judge should read the Dec of Ind. Guess all even the wacko libs can't agree with this one. He says the judge should not be a judge.
860
posted on
06/26/2002 1:52:09 PM PDT
by
Babsig
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 821-840, 841-860, 861-880 ... 1,461-1,477 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson