SynthiaRose said:

I would rather it said "one nation living together" or something like that...

The term "god" itself it specific to certain religions. Not everyone refers to it/she/he as "god". Using that term in something that is supposed to represent America blatantly shows favoritism and is wrong.

Good riddance. Piss off back to central Eurasia or whereever the fuck you came from Mr mighty Indo-European Sky God. I could be wrong, comparative religious anthropology is not my specialty (sorry Jehovah, I'm probably confusing you with that asshole Zeus; whatever).

Tom said:

It also shows our countries hypocracy...Expecially at a time when a lot of countries (expecially Middle Eastern) are calling our nation a bunch of hypocrates...

And im tired of all the people who are crapping on this debate just because of our current involvement in a fight against terror. We should be proud that we are free to engage in such discussions. Thats what makes this country great. If you feel disgusted by the debate then you arent a *true* American...

Eye think it's a bunch of BULLSHIT!

The crucial point is, as KS said, it's a pledge. The person is supposed to believe this stuff since he/she endorses it solemnly. It's not the same as singing God bless America.

Paisley said:

Expand. What is a bunch of bullshit? Removing God from the pledge or leaving it in.

Why post if you are not going to be clear? Also why use "eye" instead of I? I'm tired of the Princebonics

SummerRain said:

Are you planning on explaining how you feel that removing God denies freedom of worship?

In no way do I believe that you have a valid point...but still I would like to hear an explanation.

bonojr said:

Whatever ever religious beliefs you want to believe this country was founded on..the founding fathers were obviously smarter then the most people today. The realized that the government has no place in endorsing religion. Religion should be an individual concept. There is a BIG difference between someone invoking God in a speech or document that individual creates and kids of all races, creeds, religions, and colors being forced to invoke the name of god in what amounts to a prayer every morning.

The founding fathers were certainly a lot smarter than that bone head President Bush; who's only comment is that he will appoints judges who understand that freedom comes from god. Who's god? His god? My god? Your god?

perhaps one way to look at this is the fact that if there is a God, that God had to obviously exist prior to the existence of religion, thus religion is dependent upon God but God is not dependent upon religion.

therefore, including God in the pledge of allegiance does not infring upon the seperation of church and state. the church is the enforcement of religion, and since God is not dependent upon the church or religion, God itself is not an enforcement of religion or any religious beliefs. only the narrow minded would be offended by the inclusion of the word God.

Dumbass said

What about Pagans, who believe in a multiplicity of Gods? Should they have monotheism rammed down their throats?

narcotizedmind said:

if they believe in many Gods, would they be offended if only one is mentioned. God, when used away from religion, which is possible by the argument I have set forth above, is pretty much a generic term that has no offensive qualities. those offensive qualities are a product of religion, so Pagans would not be suffering a monotheic God in their throat, only a broad concept of the creator of life and the universe, which may or may not also include the other Gods the pagans believe in.

I hope that answers your inquiry.

Dumbass said:

Well, early Christians were extremely offended when asked to sacrifice to the Roman emperor as a deity (I'm not sure whether they had to sacrifice to the full pantheon - I don't have Willy Frend's books at hand). They did not seem prepared to make the equation 'emperor' = 'a god' = 'god plain and simple'. I don't know how offended Pagans would be in the reverse situation (I know a few witches - I'll make a point of asking them about this). They might think any hint of "one god" was incompatible with their beliefs. Should we not respect this? Could they not be allowed to say 'the gods'? Anyway, what about Atheists? What about Icenine and the 'Great and Mighty Penguin'?

"God, when used away from religion, which is possible by the argument I have set forth above, is pretty much a generic term that has no offensive qualities". This is ludicrous sophistry. "God, in the non-religious sense". Good one. Reminds me of Clinton (Bill).

KingSausage said:

Oh my, your just full of blatant assumptions aren't you?
The first paragraph you took out of context. I was responding that God has been one of the founding principles this country was founded upon to an earlier thread. This is to be expected, it's difficult not talking face to face.

As for the second paragraph, I'm laughing. Such an easy stereotype. Please, tell me, you don't fall for what you're force fed in the media. It's quite ignorant to assume just because I don't believe in others beliefs that I don't respect or communicate with them. Trust me, I do. I've touched more countries than you have counties I'm sure. Also, you need to seriously lose the language and grow up. It's disrespectful. Ahh but of course, that's above you. Take your little doilies off your weight bench and be a man. If you can't argue in respectful dialogue, I suggest YOU leave.

Nuff said.

AnotherLoverHoleinYoHead said:

Uhm, like...do you have a life? Comments from the peanut gallery go in one ear and out the other my dear.

ACCORDING TO THE DAILY NEWS SHOW ON THE COMMEDY CHANNEL, THE HOST SAID THAT PPL. LIKE THE ONE WHO COMPLAINED SHOULD JUST LEAVE IT ALONE. HE SAID IN "GOD WE TRUST" SHOULD BE REPLACED WITH "SUCK IT UP!".

A MAJORITY OF PPL. BELIEVE IN RELIGION. SO IF SOMEONE IS DOING IT IN RATIOS, THE ONES WHO PERFER "IN GOD WE TRUST" WOULD WIN.

Im going to need back up from NWPWRSOUL after this one.

LOOKING THROUGH A VIEW OF VIEWS
BLINDED BY THE FLAMES OF FRIENDLY FIRE.
UNTIL,THEY SAT THERE LIKE A DOPE,
AND CHOKED FROM ALL THAT SMOKE .
FROM BEHIND THE SMOKE SCREEN OF PATRIOTIC LIARS!

George Clinton

If you want to talk the talk .
WALK THE WALK.

PRAISE GOD !

I'll pledge alleigence to God, but I'm sure as heck not pledging allegience to nobody's damn flag! I don't need the goverment to tell me when and where and how to pray. We should all have a choice, regardless of what religion you profess, if any. No law should force a person to do what's not in their hearts. People sing 'God Bless America' and it doesn't mean a damn to them. People sing at the ballgames cuz' it the 'patriotic' thing to do. If this so-called goverment is sooo concerned about this issue, then why is Dubya and the gang so bent on destroying the whole entire world? Is that God-like? Boy, I'll say, those folks in DC are nothing but a bunch of hypercrites!:

narcotizedmind said:

this isn't ludicrous at all. if you think it is you merely fail to see the point that was made, so I shall make it again. If there is a God, then that God existed before religion, therefore religion is not neccessary for there to be a God, and God is God without any religion. with all due respect, please explain what part of this does not make sense so we may further discuss it. please do not hide logical discussion behind "ludicrous sophistry," which means nothing once it is disputed with the logic I have just presented.

of course, if there is no God, then religion came first, and the idea of God is dependent upon religion. in that case, any discussion of God is a waste of time since there would be no God, and any mention of it should be removed from the pledge as this country would have been founded under a lie.

lastly, we must all remember that this country, while it allows each person religious freedom, was founded under the idea that there is a God, and continues to operate under that belief, and mentioning this in the pledge of allegiance or any political document does not infringe upon anyone's right to practice any religion they choose. tolerance goes both ways, and those who don't believe, after all, are free to simply ignore the line.

lastly, we must all remember that this country, while it allows each person religious freedom, was founded under the idea that there is a God, and continues to operate under that belief, and mentioning this in the pledge of allegiance or any political document does not infringe upon anyone's right to practice any religion they choose. tolerance goes both ways, and those who don't believe, after all, are free to simply ignore the line.[/quote]


Thank you. You just made one of the key points through all this. I'm amazed at the number of people who are simply unaware of such basic U.S. history! That's a clear testimony to our pathetic public schooling.

THE PLEDGE IS OPTIONAL. But the atheists, who are in the minority, want to ram their belief system down the majority's throat, all the mean people that are disrespecting them with "God this" and "God that".


First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Check it out...where in here does it proclaim "separation of church and state"? It simply states in the first sentence the prohibition of a state religion. Where in here does it state censoring any mention of God?

Oh my, the plot thickens...

The reason this whole thing was started is because a man's daughter was ostracized for not reciting the pledge of allegiance because their family is Athiest. They say reciting the pledge is voluntary, but you just try to sit out one day if you go to school...watch what happens. I don't know about other states, but in MA your teacher will do everything short of physically harming you to get you to stand up.

Forcing someone to recite something they truly don't believe is definitely a civil rights infringement and I am in full agreement with 'under God'(note the capitalization, thus denoting the Judeo-Christian god) being removed from the pledge. The entire pledge would be removed if I had my way...it's like we're living in red China with that shit going on.

"Why won't Jimmy pledge allegiance?"

funny, a lot of the same people here who are defending the Pledge as it is are the same people who crap on Jehovah Witness...the same people who say that JW's are a cult.


yet, JW's refuse to say the Pledge...very interesting.

Now which religious group is trying to cram their beliefs down peoples throats?

and bonojr, the points you are making are very interesting...since I dont agree with your views I just read your post with disbelief but then I wonder if you do the same with mine...

gotta love difference of opinions...remember that and respect it..
[This message was edited Thu Jun 27 22:13:38 PDT 2002 by SkletonKee]

'under God'(note the capitalization, thus denoting the Judeo-Christian god)

This argument is null and void. Other religions capitalize the G, i.e. "Allah", which in Islam is God, Bahais title a God, Sikhs title a God, etc.

Research it online.

SkletonKee said:

Well it's certainly interesting dialogue

Jehovah Witnesses I really don't know much about. What I don't understand is, do they believe in Jesus? I'm told they don't. If that's the case, then why was Prince raving on the Rave live concert video about Jesus being the "one king"? That I don't understand. Any takers?

This is a very interesting topic--and as an atheist and a lawyer-to-be, I certainly have an opinion on it--but since it really has nothing to do with Prince, I'm going to close it. When General Discussion reopens, perhaps we can move the thread there and continue the discussion.