"under god"

[shadow7663]

I saw on the news today where a california athiest is suing over our nations pledge of aligiance.

It is over the words "under god"...... he claims that it violates the rights of children when they recite the pledge at school and that our pledge needs to be changed.......... WHAT THE HELL IS THIS!!!!!!!!!:mad:

What about the rest of america what our rights!!!!! If he doesnt want his kid to say it then the kid doesnt have to, so because of this my kids may not be able to recite the pledge they way it wrote and intended be heard!!!!!!!!

I am just sick and tired of hearing the rest of the country has to change because what a person feels is right and its right for all the rest of the country:mad:

[WILDCATWICK]

agreed. If they don't want to don't. If they rather inject another "god" such as buddah, allah, or any other I think that is all good too. Freedom of religion not the absence of it.

[Dick Graves]

Scary thought that the Supreme Court would even hear this, but I think the 9th Circut, the wackos from California, may have already banned "under God" from public schools.

Read more here http://story.news.yahoo.com/fc?cid=34&tmpl=fc&in=US&cat=Church___State_Issues

:( :mad: :eek:

Read somewhere that " In God we trust" is embedded in the granite walls and ceiling of The Supreme Court Building. Plus they start every day with a prayer, as does Congress. Hypocrites:eek:

[shadow7663]

next we will have to reface our money because it says in god we trust.

[Dawg]

If it's the same guy he tried it a couple of years ago. Just likes getting his grill in the camera and God knows the media will give him a pulpit.

[niner93]

I heard this story also. Background on it is that his ex-wife has custody of his kid and she is raising the child Catholic. He is mad about this so he is trying to get his mug out in the public.

My biggest beef is why does the majority always have to cater to the few?

Personally I think he's just trying to irritate his ex;) :D

[AceMcbanon]

Wish people would fight this hard for real issues that actually affect us instead of PC bull

[shadow7663]

Originally posted by AceMcbanon
Wish people would fight this hard for real issues that actually affect us instead of PC bull


This isnt a issue? or did I just misunderstand your post?

[Buddy Lee]

The words "under God" weren't officially inserted into the Pledge of Allegiance until 1954 or so...it was a cold war show of defiance to the Communists. So for the majority of our nation's history it hasn't been in the pledge.

But with that said...the court should rule to leave "under God" in the pledge. Don't fix something that isn't broken.

[Dick Graves]

Personally I think he's just trying to irritate his ex


niner93
This guy must have a ton of loot, plus the Supreme Court is probably the wrong venue to argue with your ex., and he plans on argueing his position himself in front of the Supremes. Hope he gets his behind ripped real good.;)

[AceMcbanon]

I meant people pursuing this type of stuff through the court system when there is much more important things to fix that actually matter

[Dick Graves]

Short update on this subject:eek:


http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/3/24/163444.shtml

[Hunter333]

Thanks for the link Dave.... I just read that one of the persons invlived said ""Teachers should stay out of it, and stick to reading, writing, and arithmetic," he said. Well guess what? This teacher does not stay out of things that involve me personally!! Nor do I SIMPLY teach reading, writing, and arithmetic!! I hope this gets tossed out ASAP!!

[Shakespeare]

I'm a teacher as well. I'm certaintly glad that people bring cases like this one before the supreme court. First, it offers wonderful real life lessons about the workings of government. Second, it gives me faith that in this country one has the freedom to take case like this to the supreme court without fear of retribution from the government. Hey you may not agree with this guy's position, but be damn glad he can have one!

[Dawg]

I'm glad he has the constitutional right, but I'm not at all glad he's wasting the tax payers money to serve his personal agenda. If he feels damaged by words he has larger problems.

Our courts have plenty of working examples without frivololity.

[snakebit67]

I may be wrong, but I thought I heard that the Supreme Court refused to hear it.


If so, chalk one up for the good guys.:D