[Civil Disobedience Now!] JUDGES WHO BANNED THE PLEDGE MUST BE REMOVED FROM THE BENCH

Catholic League ^ | 2-28-2003 | William Donohue

[rwfromkansas]

You won't even fight one bit about this; you don't give a crap when judges exceed their authority.

And that is telling.

[rwfromkansas]

Your point about the Constitution not including reference to God is not good logic. Yes, God is not mentioned. However, it is the document establishing the rules for the government. While I certainly agree that it is curious to not even have anything in the preamble of the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence is what explained our philosophy of government. That is why God is mentioned there, while the Costitutition, which dealt with the nuts and bolts of how things would run, did not.

[Servant of the Nine]

Then the proper course is to push it through the legislative branch.

You're right

It is sickening that you are willing to support the court's misinterpretation of the First Amendment for your personal agenda to get carried through.
That is very low.

It would be if I had done it.
I supported the phrases being removed from the money and the pledge. I did not support the courts decision or removing them by judicial loonieness. I don't think the 9th Circuit has ever made a ruling I did support.

They have some wonderful reading comprehension programs available on CD.

So9

[rwfromkansas]

BTW, we can spend all day looking at the statements of individual delegates and send jabs at eachother. That hardly establishes what the Constitution intended in regards to religion. For that, check out the "major" founders and folks in charge of the First Amendment. Statements by Madison when he introduced the First Amendment were quite interesting; check them out.

[rwfromkansas]

Looks like I will have to say this to you as well:

Then the proper course is to push it through the legislative branch.

It is sickening that you are willing to support the court's misinterpretation of the First Amendment for your personal agenda to get carried through.

That is very low.

[rwfromkansas]

You are only looking at ONE SIDE of history and law, so you are just the hypocrite you claim not to be.

[rwfromkansas]

Funny.....I believe it was "rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God" or something very close that was Jefferson's motto.

It seems that he did believe in obeying God, though of course his god is not the Christian God.

[rwfromkansas]

You can't force someone to say the words. That is the whole point!!!! Even beofre the 9th circuit, you could not force someone to say "under God." I sometimes chose to leave out "indivisible" myself.

The Scotus has made it clear for decades that you can't force someone to participate in the Pledge if it is against their beliefs.

[SealSeven]

"The Scotus has made it clear for decades that you can't force someone to participate in the Pledge if it is against their beliefs."

Kind of like biting the hand that feeds them.

[Dimensio]

No, just not thinking very well. Look at creation and you will see your creator's hand at

I've been told this before, but I still cannot bring myself to believe it. I cannot explain how the universe came to be, but I also realise that inventing some intelligent creator to explain it all even when I don't have all of the facts (ie, a completely working knowledge of all of the physical properties of everything in the universe) is a premature leap. Further, even if I did assume some intelligent creator, I still don't see how I would discern any intent, motive, disposition or any other attribute other than "ability to create universe" to attach to this creator.

[Dimensio]

Its quite simple. What kids have done for decades is now banned. The pledge has been censored.

You are implying that it is now illegal for any student to utter the Pledge with the "Under God" inclusion in public schools. This is not the case. This is much like people whining that students are no longer legally allowed to pray in public schools despite the fact that not a single court case has made such a ruling.

[friendly]

William Donohue is a true defender of Civil Rights.. for all of us.

[GretchenEE]

Didn't Ike get the words "under God" inserted into the Pledge of Allegiance ... shortly after we and our allies won World War Two?

[RJCogburn]

The comparison is beyond a stretch. We have a peaceful way to change leaders, judges, and the rest in this country. Not so in Iraq. The idiot author is over the top in trying to draw a comparison, even if only for effect.

[rwfromkansas]

You do have a point there.

[hoosierham]

There wasn't ANY Pledge until after Mr. Lincoln's war ; just the sensible requirement that officeholders of all levels swear to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, Just as the First Admendment only prohibited the establishment of a State Church, not forbad God in public life ; I am VERY WARY of those who constantly wave their religion to distract us from their agenda of control.

I wish to have leaders and citizens who acknowledge the existence of a higher power for good, and who act in the expectation that their acts will be judged by the people and a just and loving God. I do not need FORCED pledges , as they are worthless.

[WarSlut]

One Nation, under Capitalism, indivisable, With Liberty and Justice for Capitalists

God is the left's greatest adversary, not capitalism.

[nicmarlo]

dumb as a post....lol!

[MeekOneGOP]

bttt ...

[Notwithstanding]

Donohue always makes sweeping analogies for effect.
It gets people thinking - which is his goal.