James Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 [color=royalblue]I agree that it's a small issue. But I think, at the same time, that removing it (as it is technically unconstitutional anyway)...is kind of like fixing a mistake that was made in the past. As I said, if people want to add it when they say it, that's totally fine.[/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 Bluntly... I think relgion is an optional ruitine for everyone. If it is optional to go to church on sunday, than why people are fighting to make it optional to say "it" in the pledge of alegiance is quite understandable..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamvis Posted June 28, 2002 Author Share Posted June 28, 2002 James, until youre an american... keep outta this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Jamvis [/i] [B]James, until youre an american... keep outta this! [/B][/QUOTE] [color=royalblue]You say anything that rude to me again and I'll ban you pretty damn fast. I may not be American, but I can completely understand this issue. Do you really think that non-Americans can't understand the relevance and importance of what the subject is about? I think that's an insult to the intelligence of other members on these boards, including myself. I recommend that [i]you[/i] don't post in this thread again. You've made your point clear, now stay out.[/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kinetic Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 [color=darkblue] Yes, James may not be American, but he knows more about my country than I do. That comment was inappropirate...and just plain stupid. [/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Macaiodh Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 [color=darkblue]some people are really pissed about this whole pledge thing, though. i was being forced to listen to rush limbaugh at my mom's house today, & he had a HUGE fight with a buddhist woman about it. she said that it embarasses her kids to have to sit down or not say it when the other kids are (which is why that guy filed the suit in the first place). rush said that they could substitute "buddha" for god in their own mind, since the pledge never names a specific god... it could be talking about whoever god is to you. but she blew up at that, b/c buddha was not a god, only an enlightened human, & buddhism teaches that every human has the potential to be, in a sense, another buddha. the fight got really out of control, but i could see her point. i don't think the pledge should be disallowed in schools, but i did see what she was saying. either way, though, this thing is not going to fly, esp. not now, esp. when 75% of americans have been displaying the flag on their cars, houses, t-shirts, ect. there is a huge uproar over it, people see it as an outrage in this time of war (unpatriotic), & even both democrats & republicans agree that the 9th US circuit court crossed the line. with re-elections coming up, they are going to do whatever the majority wants about this. what some people don't realize is that this never should have been passed in the first place. this was a decision made by a panel of only 3 judges, with a 2-1 vote! & the outcry is so great that the judge who wrote the order (one of the three) has put a stay on the law until the appeal to a higher court goes through. he's basically washed his hands of the whole situation. smart political move there, but dumb to get himself into it in the first place. this isn't about whether the pledge should be said or not... it's about being "p.c." & the judges thought they were sticking up for a girl being made fun of by doing this. but it was a lose/lose situation, esp. in a time of war. if they hadn't done this, the press would have jumped all over it by saying the girl was being traumatized or something. those judges were probably beating their heads against the wall as soon as they were handed this case. sorry this is long, but people need to understand the politics behind it.[/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Transtic Nerve Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Jamvis [/i] [B]James, until youre an american... keep outta this! [/B][/QUOTE] If it makes you feel any better, I'll say everything James has to say and I AM an American.... what difference does it make? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amphion Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 Nevermind everything I said in this original post. EDIT I dont think its unconstitutional. Its a motto. Just about every religion on earth reconizes a greater being, a God. The only people that seem to have a problem with it is atheists. YOu can not claim it to be unconstitutional if you just hear it. It is if you are forced to say it but the School system where this started, you where not forced to say it. If its unconstitutional, then no one in the US can say the word God in public. Your not forcing your religion on everyone but there still hearing, so accordiong to these idiotic judges that would be unconstitutional. I agrea with Bush, we need more Common Sense judges. Like I said in no way was it forced on her, so how in the world could it be unconstitutional? I think every american should want to say it though. I dont know why you would not. If you dont pledge allegiance to the US then who do you pledge alligience too? (well for those of you who live in the US, does not apply to our canadian and aussie freinds) But if you dont like saying "Under God" dont. Why is this such a big deal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Amphion [/i] [B] No. ITs not unconstitutional. It would be if kids where forced to say it. The Super intendent of the school system said it himself that the children where not forced to say the PoA. It was optional. So there for it can in no way be unconstitutional[/B][/QUOTE] Back when I was in school, we were forced to at least stand for it, and depending on the teacher, say it. Those who refused were sent to the principal's office and punished by means of detention or a short suspension. I personally don't see the big deal over one word and agree that it would be just as easy for an individual to replace the name "God" with whatever they choose. [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/i] [B]I was gonna make this topic god dammit! [/B][/QUOTE] I should mention that I'm offended by that. The word "God" before "damnit" is against my beliefs. Please remove it and substitute "God" with "The Big Giant Head" (Third Rock from the Sun, rules). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amphion Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 Yeah I agrea with CWB, way to set an example Mr Moderator. I beleive use of that word is prohibited in the rules...hmm maybe we should read up. See my case in point. If just hearing, Under God is unconstitutional, then it would make my signature, and TN offensive comment and anything else with GOd in it unconstitutional as well. Because an Atheist would be offended by hearing the word God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Transtic Nerve Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Amphion [/i] [B] No. ITs not unconstitutional. It would be if kids where forced to say it. The Super intendent of the school system said it himself that the children where not forced to say the PoA. It was optional. So there for it can in no way be unconstitutional. If it was unconstitutional then it would have to be unconstitutional for anyone to say anything religous in public. Just hearing something can not be unconstitutional. forcing yes but hearing no. I hear people say prayers to allah, but they are not forcing their religion on me. So see, it is not unconstitutional unless someone is forced to say it. So it is only obvious that it is NOT. [/b][/quote] The point is that it is almost forced in many schools. In fact it's said in almost EVERY school every day.... the fact that it is said in school without having permission to hear it basically mean the child is being forced to listen to it, which does make it UNCONSTITUTIONAL.... when they told it in school for me, I couldn't go outside when it came on... I had to hear it, and thats the point you miss. Listen, if it weren't unconstitutional as you so claim it to be, then it's quite obvious, the judges wouldn't even have made the judgement they did.... [quote][b] And you can not claim it to be UC becuas eit embarress the kids when they sit down and dont say it or whatever. Thats just ridiculous. People really take the constitution too far. They try to pick every word apart to fix it to something they want. If its unconstitutional for someon to be embarressed then what are we supposed to do. Bann everything that might have a chance of embarresing you? [/B][/QUOTE] I can claim it to be whatever the hell I want it to be. ... and where did I say kids were embarrassed as a reason... that part mad eno sense to me.... Whoa.. aren't we supposed to follow the constitution?.... so wouldn't it be right that we make sure we understand the constitution to it's full extent.... and wouldn't that involve some type "picking words apart".... and that analogy on your part was just pathetic. You cannot compare the seperation of church and state to that of being embarrassed.... I'm getting confused just trying to compare the two in refrence to unconstitutionality, or lack there of. I fail to see your point.... and you fail to see why this was ruled the way it was. I don't think any Supreme Court Judge can honestly sit there and say that it's constitutional.... I can understand if they take it out of schools as a "group" thing.... thats the reason it was rules, because school, as a group, say or hear the PoA. Like I said, I dunno about you, but I wasn't allowed to leave when the PoA was said... were you? The fact I was forced to listen to it, maybe not say it (some are forced to say it) makes it unconstitutional... I don't sit you down and force you to listen words that say "God doesn't exist, your God is fake. Your real lord is Vishnu, etc etc etc"... no... so the fact that being forced to listen to "Under God" for an atheist would be in the least slightly offensive.... and in that, you are not abiding by the constitution, which makes it.... you guessed it... unconstitutional. PS: I've had the conversation with James long before and the understanding came to that Damn, Hell and Dammit were not against the rules... or they'd be censored.... also I believe we had an agreement on "God Dammit" as well.... however if it makes you feel any better I will take out God in my post.... BY THE WAY... you just gave a great example as to why this whole thing is unconstitutional... And I'm offended by God in the PoA.... way to set an example America! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amphion Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 Sorry TN the embareesment comment was referring to what was posted by Lady M. But the previous I did say. Andy es its forced in many schools and should not be. But see just like with games, where blaming the wrong source here. We should not be ruling that the pledge is unconstitutional, we should be ruling that forcing to say it is unconstitutional. And like I said its not a bad thing to pick the constituion apart, but there some people who are bending it all out of place far more then it should be. Your saying being forced to listen to it is Unconstitutional. Well thats dumb. And my analogy m,ade perfect sense. If a person is praying to allah beside me, I hear it. So that should be unconstitutional too. well according to your comments thats what your saying. So any thing a person is offended by, if they half to hear it it should be unconstitutional. That is just dumb. If you hear something you dont like get over. But this is clearly different from a religion being imposed on someone so therefore it can not be unconstitutional to just hear Under god. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Transtic Nerve Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Amphion [/i] [B]Your saying being forced to listen to it is Unconstitutional. Well thats dumb. And my analogy m,ade perfect sense. If a person is praying to allah beside me, I hear it. So that should be unconstitutional too. well according to your comments thats what your saying. So anny thing a person is offended by, if they half to hear it it should be unconstitutional. [/B][/QUOTE] No because you have the right to leave.... The POA is said in Classrooms loud enough to be heard by everyone and you can't leave... thats the point I'm making... Anyway, if you read my previous posts I have said that I didn't think it needed to be changed, but I think the whole idea of saying it in schools hould be abolished.... if you need to say the POA, you can say it before school or at home or in your sleep or whatever... you don't need to waste time in school saying it.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/i] [B]PS: I've had the conversation with James long before and the understanding came to that Damn, Hell and Dammit were not against the rules... or they'd be censored.... also I believe we had an agreement on "God Dammit" as well.... however if it makes you feel any better I will take out God in my post.... BY THE WAY... you just gave a great example as to why this whole thing is unconstitutional... And I'm offended by God in the PoA.... way to set an example America! [/B][/QUOTE] Yipes, if any of that was directed towards me, I was only joking. You know? Sarcasm towards the whole idea? lol, I could care less if anyone says "God Damnit." Anyway, the whole point of saying the Pledge is supposed to be an act of displaying Patriotism. That's being lost in this whole battle with religion. I don't think that the pledge should necessarily be done away with. The simple solution would be to remove those who are offended by it and situate them in another home room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amphion Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 Well, I still dont see how not being able to leave would make it unconstituional. We all hear things we dont like, so get over it. I guess James needs to change the rules then. Because it strictly says all language is forbidden. And it says the mods should up hold the rules as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Transtic Nerve Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Crazy White Boy [/i] [B] Yipes, if any of that was directed towards me, I was only joking. You know? Sarcasm towards the whole idea? lol, I could care less if anyone says "God Damnit." Anyway, the whole point of saying the Pledge is supposed to be an act of displaying Patriotism. That's being lost in this whole battle with religion. I don't think that the pledge should necessarily be done away with. The simple solution would be to remove those who are offended by it and situate them in another home room. [/B][/QUOTE] lol. I know you were joking, but the whole idea you brought up helped the issue at hand... which is why I jumped all over it.... like a true lawyer I am.... I know it's all about the pride thing... and patriotism.... but the Pledge sounds BETTER without the words I think.... it all goes back to the ideal that Americans are affraid of change... and thus rebel against it.... [quote][b] Well, I still dont see how not being able to leave would make it unconstituional. We all hear things we dont like, so get over it. [/b][/quote] Well, I think now that it's been brought to attention, something must be done.... either take out the God part or not saying it in public school... or giving people the option to say it or not or to leave or not or something... you just can't "let it be" anymore.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amphion Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 Well to be politically correct, thats a generalization. In fact I love change...:) But anyway... Yeah I dont think it would hurt to take it out. I think all the Religous people, or christians mainly, want it to stay. But its main purpose is patriatism and not religion. So I would not have a problem with taking it out. But I just think its stupid to say its unconstitutional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 [color=royalblue]Well technically, it [i]is[/i] unconstitutional, because you're including a religious statement in a [i]state[/i] text. So whether people like it or not, it is infact unconstitutional. The question is, do we change it for everybody, or do we leave it there so that it is only relevant to a percentage of the population? Oh and as far as language goes, whatever isn't censored can be said, pretty much. "Damn" is not really a very harsh word. You can say whatever you like for the most part -- as it will auto-censor. However, if you try to bypass the censor, that is a breach of rules. So rules need not be changed.[/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaiyanPrincessX Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 I think it should stay, there is no harm in it.. My parents say if some people don't like it, tough! Go back to your country! They shouldn't have let them into our country in the first place! No there not racist or anything they just believe that most Arabs and ect are the ones with the problem with our pledge, can't change what they believe. I half agree with them. Yes I think it should stay, but not going to the extreme as to not letting others into our country. As alot of you said think of god as the one you believe in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Macaiodh Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by James [/i] [B][color=royalblue]Well technically, it [i]is[/i] unconstitutional, because you're including a religious statement in a [i]state[/i] text. [/color] [/B][/QUOTE] [COLOR=darkblue]what exactly do you mean by "state" text? i'm thinking of something, but i want to be absolutely clear on the meaning before i say it. also, let me clarify what i mean in my last post. i wasn't saying an opinion about whether it is [i]right[/i] to say the pledge over the speakers... i was merely commenting on all the trouble it stirred up. right now is not the best time to change that sort of law. i guarantee that if we weren't in a time of war, people wouldn't be going this nuts.[/COLOR] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GotenksSSJ343 Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 I don't really mind saying the pledge since I follow god (in my religion (sp) in all with the ten commandments and the 1st commandment. "I'm your only god you shall never have any strange Gods before me". That one just made me think why they took under God out of the pledge it's only one verse to say and it's not going to kill you. But some people (and I agree with some of this) say that it's ok to say that you omit the line because it's freedom of speech. But I also think if it wasn't for god (or evolution if not god but I doubt that.) we wouldn't be alive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nebula Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 [COLOR=teal]I was listening to "The Oreily Factor" or something like that with my dad in the car today. Appareantly the guy wants "In god we trust" off the money too! Ok, he brought up a point though, would it offend you if everyone else was Islamic and saying "under allah"? It wouldn't bother me one bit. I am not even Christian, and I think this is totally stupid. I think if the child doesn't want to say it, due to religous belifes, he doesn't have to, simple as that. Or, he could just replace "God" with "Allah", I know I wouldn't care. Stupid Judge.[/COLOR] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaos Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by SaiyanPrincessX [/i] [B]I think it should stay, there is no harm in it.. My parents say if some people don't like it, tough! Go back to your country! They shouldn't have let them into our country in the first place! No there not racist or anything [/B][/QUOTE] Guess what? That is a racist slur. And honestly, if your parents aren't Native Americans, then they should shut the Hell up. I have Native American blood in me (as well as about everything else. :cross: ), so I know about that single comment. Started in the mid-1900s. Whites would protest the segregation. They told the blacks "Go home, [CENSORED]!!". (I belive so for the most part; it might have started around the 1800s after the Civil War, but I can't remember/trust my Civics teacher) So you know what? Your parents are racist. And if you're supporting them, then you too are also a racist. I'm an Amercian, and I oppose the Pledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Transtic Nerve Posted June 28, 2002 Share Posted June 28, 2002 [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by SaiyanPrincessX [/i] [B]I think it should stay, there is no harm in it.. My parents say if some people don't like it, tough! Go back to your country! They shouldn't have let them into our country in the first place! No there not racist or anything they just believe that most Arabs and ect are the ones with the problem with our pledge, can't change what they believe. I half agree with them. Yes I think it should stay, but not going to the extreme as to not letting others into our country. As alot of you said think of god as the one you believe in. [/B][/QUOTE] No offense, but your parents are comeplete idiots.... Muslims believe in God... they just call him Alah... just like Jehova or whatever other name you give God.... Your parents need to know the facts before they open their mouths, because thats the reason we have the stupid people in the world today. The guy who filed the suit against it is WHITE, is AMERICAN, and ISN'T Muslim... he was atheiest.... and you can tell your parents that means he doesn't believe in a God or any supreme power (again restating the fact, There is not God, no matter who it may be, to believe in thus the pledge is essentially taking away meaning of his religion)... it has nothing to do with anyone who came from another country, it deals with an American who is atheiest.... Alot of you seemed to miss the whole part about being atheiest and you keep going off on other religions.... In fact everyone who disagrees with this, even the president, seems to have not known this deals with atheism for the most part, and not Muslims or Hindus or Buddhists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saiya-jinro Posted June 29, 2002 Share Posted June 29, 2002 I think it should stay. If their parents don't want them saying it, then they should just not say it. But, don't ruin it for people who do. :flaming: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts