September 14, 2005

Under God

A federal judge declared the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools unconstitutional Wednesday in a case brought by the same atheist whose previous battle against the words "under God" was rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court on procedural grounds.

"Undoubtedly, the pledge contains a religious phrase, and it is demeaning to persons of any faith to assert that the words `under God' contain no religious significance," Judge Karen Williams wrote for the 4th Circuit. "The inclusion of those two words, however, does not alter the nature of the pledge as a patriotic activity." [...More...]

From
Drudge


I thought this crap was over but I should know better. As long as you have the far left extreme God hating nimrods out there this will never go away. What are these people afraid of anyway? And you know what else? When I hear the word God I don't think of Baptist, Church of Christ, Catholic, Methodist, Lutheran, or even Christian or anything religious. The word God to me is non-demoninational, He is all inclusive. He loves the athiests too, much to my chagrin.

The article also goes on to say that the judge ruling on this would go as far as to sign a restraining order preventing the recitation of the pledge. See what I mean about "extreme"?

So, why can't the athiest when reciting the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance just think about themselves? What's so difficult about that? I mean they think they are gods anyway, so why not get an ego boost out of thinking the Pledge is about them?

U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton ruled that the pledge's reference to one nation "under God" violates school children's right to be "free from a coercive requirement to affirm God."


Coercive requirement? Laughable.

Technorati Tags:

Rate this post: (data provided from NewsGator Online)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

2 Comments:

Blogger Ranger Tom said...

No what's even funnier? It's only the Christian God they want to erase...

The left is doing everything in thier power not to "offend" Allah...

9/14/2005 03:04:00 PM

 
Anonymous Coyote68 said...

I would think that you would want to uphold tradition and return to the Pledge as it was originnaly intended to be spoken.

The pledge was written by Francis Bellamy in 1892. The words "under God" were only added in the 50's.

Maybe we should be fair to all religions and substitute the name of each religions god in every day. Then we could get to the atheist's day and say "one nation that denies the existence of God". Would that be a fairer way of doing things.

Thomas Paine, the founding father and devout Quaker that fought for the seperation of church and state, felt that religion was the deepest personal choice for a human being and felt that one's beliefs should not be forced on another.

Would you be happy with "one nation under Allah"? Or "one nation under Buddha"? How about "one nation who follows Confuscionism"?

The traditional Pledge is just fine. Let us return to that and I think everyone could be happy. If you want atheists to quietly think of themselves when they are forced to say the words "under God" how about we take the words out and you can quietly say the words "under God" to yourself when you recite the Pledge.

9/16/2005 09:30:00 AM

 

Post a Comment

<< Home