PoLiX Posted October 15, 2003 Report Posted October 15, 2003 Personally, i beleive like many others, it should be removed. Even a few of my friends who are christian also agree with me. This country might of been founded by god believing people, but it is not a nation ran by the laws of god. If you have freedom of religion, what says your religion does not beleive in God, or some shiz like that, or your an atheist. Its why most people refuse to reside the pledge of allegiance, because they not only don't believe in what the US is doing, but also do not believe in the line "One Nation Under God". Whats your opinion?
Guest Decimator | Alpha Posted October 15, 2003 Report Posted October 15, 2003 Well that line sort of contradicts freedom of speech doesn't it? Either making you say something you don't believe or forcing you to keep quiet about your beliefs is unaccpetable.
PoLiX Posted October 15, 2003 Author Report Posted October 15, 2003 but if its removed, its not forcing you to not believe in god, its just making it no longer a factor in the pledge.
Guest Decimator | Alpha Posted October 15, 2003 Report Posted October 15, 2003 Some people would say that it is un-american to change the pledge. Beside it doesn't say which god you have to worship and most people would see aetheism as a lack of beliefs (religious) not a belief in it's self.
Aileron Posted October 15, 2003 Report Posted October 15, 2003 I think that this whole thing is overdone. It two f****** words!!!! The whole seperation between church and state origionated from the English forcing the Anglican church on everyone, which at the time held the King as leader. Basically, it would set up a religion in which if you opposed the king, you would go to -*BAD WORD*-. The two words in the pledge of allegience don't even compare to that. Also, those words also remind us that if there is a conflict between religion and country, religion should win. It is a reminder that a person serves their god before their country.
madhaha Posted October 15, 2003 Report Posted October 15, 2003 The state and the church are rightly seperated. I wouldn't want the church running the government... I don't give a -*BAD WORD*- about what the US does to its "citerzerns" so long as they don't impose it on us.
Aileron Posted October 16, 2003 Report Posted October 16, 2003 Actually, when they aren't, usually the reverse is the case - the government runs the church. The only exceptions I can think of were Spain where control was mutual, and the Ottoman Empire, where the laws which applied to a citizen was the laws of that citizen's religion. The former was due to a 99% Catholic Population, in which case to seperate church and state is impossible. The latter was due to weakness of central control and overappeasement to minority religions.
Guest Decimator | Alpha Posted October 16, 2003 Report Posted October 16, 2003 In most of the middle eastern countries the government IS religion.
Aileron Posted October 16, 2003 Report Posted October 16, 2003 Overall, I just don't think that "under God" compares to having government thugs going around arresting and torturing those who are not of the national religion. Yes, it does in some extent endorse the Christian beliefs. However, the scope of the endorsement is so small that it simply isn't worth correcting. If somebody has that big of a beef with it, can't they put "under Budha" or "under Allah" in their own little modified version of it? It would be a whole lot easier than having the ENTIRE country change for the minority. I mean, we have other wars to fight with poverty, unemployment, terrorists, etc. We are spending time away from important issues to spend time on two little words of a recited passage that you really don't have to recite anyway.
2pac Posted October 16, 2003 Report Posted October 16, 2003 My teachers force me to pleage allegiance is dont really like it at all but I still do it sometimes I ignoring doing pleage of allegiance. I dont really care if the government changes it. They have to change the quote on back of the dollar and the bottom of a cent - the quote says "IN GOD WE TRUST" <-- I find that we have to trust in god I do but some other religions dont. Just think about my post Polix, Aileron. P . S (I want them to change the quote "under god" in my word god means to me Allah is my religon I do care about that but for other people in the us dont want to.)
Yupa Posted October 16, 2003 Report Posted October 16, 2003 technically "under God" has no place in a public ins!@#$%^&*ution supported by the government and that is the only way to look at it, technically we have thousands of laws and the like so that there will be little room for interpretation
Live-Wire Posted October 16, 2003 Report Posted October 16, 2003 no matter how many laws are made, it never replaces cons!@#$%^&*utional interpretation, unless you amend the cons!@#$%^&*ution itself my problem isn't with the god part of the pledge. my problem is that im PLEDGING TO A FLAG. uh... no? "I pledge allegiance?" I'm required to pledge my allegiance to america? What if I don't want to? Unless I'm planning the violent overthrow of the government, which I'm not, I don't have to pledge my -*BAD WORD*- allegiance. I pledge allegiance to myself. Tell your teacher that the next time she forces you to say the pledge.
PoLiX Posted October 16, 2003 Author Report Posted October 16, 2003 Well, when i was still in HS, in our district, you didn't even have to stand if you didn't want to, and alot of teachers -*BAD WORD*-ed and wrote referals if you didn't, but they normally were thrown out. So yea, its not required in some places.
Confess Posted October 16, 2003 Report Posted October 16, 2003 I see were you all come from..How it should be removed and all....But this Country (American)My country was founded on Christianity....We are a christian Country to be true...But although we say we are a Christian Country the people in it sure act like a bunch of -*BAD WORD*-es..If ya know what i mean... Please ignore all i have said...I have no clue what i just said...
2pac Posted October 16, 2003 Report Posted October 16, 2003 the native americans did THIS LAND (us) BELONGS TO THEM -*BAD WORD*- england people have to come here.
shazbot Posted October 16, 2003 Report Posted October 16, 2003 2pacZ, your whining about english people immigrating, and you have "proud to be paki" in your avatar, if english people have no buisness here what makes you think a pakistani does?
Bacchus Posted October 16, 2003 Report Posted October 16, 2003 I don't like being coerced into submission. I'd feel like an hyppocrit if i were pledging to god, or any other divinity. Although it's part of an heritage and as such should not be forgotten, i'd say that religion shouldn't be a part of a public eduction system in a country supposedly democratic.
2pac Posted October 16, 2003 Report Posted October 16, 2003 Jc your off topic "son" stay were you are before you get hit by me in your face. PS - go make me some sucky gfx for me thanks.
Darkflare Posted October 16, 2003 Report Posted October 16, 2003 spac, you arent exactly on topic yourself with that post it is against johovah's witness's religion to pledge to anything so they do not have to. they do not have to take the oath in court either. i dont see how if you dont believe the a god you would have to either. just dont if you dont want to.
MonteZuma Posted October 17, 2003 Report Posted October 17, 2003 Nowadays most of us think that politics and religion should be separate. Your forefathers thought differently. In practice, politics and religion pretty much ARE separate...so this is just an emotional (to some) or academic (to others) debate. The real conflict here is tradition vs modernism. People often argue about that sort of trivial stuff. Its like people in wartime who argue that they aren't fighting for a 'flag'. Of course people don't fight for flags...they fight for what the flag represents - and in most cases that is 'a people' or 'a belief system'. Wars aren't waged by individuals - but by 'peoples' because of their 'beliefs'. So yeah....we can argue all we want about whether we should mention the word 'God' or 'flag' or whatever. But in the end it just doesn't matter. These outmoded phrases will be changed in the fullness of time. There is no need to upset a lot of emotional traditionalists for no good reason....So young ones...next time your'e asked - stand up when you hear the anthem, raise the flag, give a minutes silence....say that oath or pledge or prayer....and think about what the message is behind that archaic symbolism. You might find that it is worth swollwing that pride and just frickin conform for once in your sad, generation Y lives. Think about bigger issues, like why you have to pay so much to fund your retirement, while your baby boomer grandparents (who are currently sitting on their fat !@#$%^&*es ac-*BAD WORD*-ulating long service leave en!@#$%^&*lements) live it up at your expense. Now that IS a reason to get shirty with 'the establishment'. Monte.
Darkflare Posted October 17, 2003 Report Posted October 17, 2003 and if it is "an army of one"? then it is by an individual
MonteZuma Posted October 17, 2003 Report Posted October 17, 2003 and if it is "an army of one"? then it is by an individual Army: n A large body of people organized and trained for land warfare. War: n A state of open, armed, often prolonged conflict carried on between nations, states, or parties. One person doesn't make an army and can't wage a war. Granted though - individuals can join a war for whatever reason they choose - but usually only one reason is sanctioned by the State. Most people don't fight in wars for strictly personal reasons. Monte.
Yupa Posted October 17, 2003 Report Posted October 17, 2003 and from a real dictionary... army:1 a : a large organized body of armed personnel trained for war especially on land b : a unit capable of independent action and consisting usually of a headquarters, two or more corps, and auxiliary troops c often capitalized : the complete military organization of a nation for land warfare2 : a great mul!@#$%^&*ude 3 : a body of persons organized to advance a cause war:1 a (1) : a state of usually open and declared armed hostile conflict between states or nations (2) : a period of such armed conflict (3) : STATE OF WAR b : the art or science of warfare c (1) obsolete : weapons and equipment for war (2) archaic : soldiers armed and equipped for war2 a : a state of hostility, conflict, or antagonism b : a struggle or compe!@#$%^&*ion between opposing forces or for a particular end c : VARIANCE, ODDS 3 I have no more comments on this matter, just like dictionaries sometimes
Live-Wire Posted October 17, 2003 Report Posted October 17, 2003 those are some of the dumbest comments i've ever heard. who said this country was founded on christianity? There is a difference between what the country was "founded" on, and what the religion of the first europeans off the boat was. Unlike nearly every government preceding it, the government of the united states was created with the fundamental purpose of having logic, rather than faith, dictate what people did. The government of the US does not require that you be a good or moral person, but that you simply refrain from breaking some simple laws. Our forefathers did NOT think differently. The first amendment, which was ratified by the first congress which consisted of, among others, Madison, Jefferson, and Hamilton, expressly states the position on religion of the United States. Trust me when I say none of the three afformentioned players were highly religious, and they were by and large the 3 most important players in the creation of the US as we know it. End Rant.
Yupa Posted October 17, 2003 Report Posted October 17, 2003 Madison, Jefferson, and Hamilton...they were by and large the 3 most important players in the creation of the US as we know it. Not sure if I'd say that, but the rest is pretty good.
Recommended Posts