US Pledge of Allegiance Ruled Unconstitutional

elSicomoro · 06-26-2002, 08:28 PM

Story here.

The responses I've seen so far have mostly been harsh, from common folk to House Leader Dick Armey to Jerry Falwell...it seems outrageous to most people...it's our heritage, those judges should be impeached, etc.

The chances of this being overturned in the US Supreme Court appear pretty good...the vote in San Francisco was 2-1 against the pledge. But I am glad they made the decision and understand the panel's rationale for doing so. I believe the phrase "under God" should go.

Most of what happened today is based purely on interpretation. Sure, there are some facts involved, like previous rulings in this arena...but it all boils down to how a judge "reads" things.

While the majority of this country believes in "God" and "practices" Christianity, we have a growing number of people who don't believe in God, doubt God, or do not subscribe to Christian beliefs. While certainly open to many interpretations, this is my own interpretation of the phrase "one nation under God":

The United States is subservient to God. God being the name used in Christianity for the being considered the creator of all in the world. Being subservient to someone can be a form of respect, and we may tend to agree with that person's beliefs in order to be more like them. Christianity is based on the teachings of Jesus Christ, considered by many to be the son of God, both human and divine. Therefore, I conclude that our nation respects the establishment of a religion. In this case, Christianity.

(That took a while to flesh out. But it's only my interpretation and my opinion...you may have your own.)

In the end, God is subjective, unprovable. You may be a pure scientist; you may have two or three or ten Gods of your own. And the outrage expressed by some over the panel's decision makes me sick...I personally believe in God, believe in most of the tenets of Christianity, but damnit! Quit pushing your fucking religion on people. People like Falwell are the real freaks and outcasts of our society.

And what's wrong with "one nation indivisible?" That sounds kick-ass.

(LATE EDIT: My earlier editing was poor. Added or corrected words are in bold, except for "subjective," which was already bolded.)

06-26-2002, 08:41 PM

I voted "Yes", because I don't think it should be there. For my stint at South Carroll High School, I stood in respect for my country, but I neither put my hand over my heart nor recited the words. My reason was, of course, because I don't believe in God. Yeah, I'm a dork.

elSicomoro · 06-26-2002, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dhamsaic
I voted "Yes", because I don't think it should be there. For my stint at South Carroll High School, I stood in respect for my country, but I neither put my hand over my heart nor recited the words. My reason was, of course, because I don't believe in God. Yeah, I'm a dork.

Yes, you ARE a dork, but not b/c of your lack of belief in God.

vsp · 06-26-2002, 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sycamore
Story here.

And what's wrong with "one nation indivisible?" That sounds kick-ass.

It makes it ironic that many of the hardcore fundie Christians who are ready and willing to kill the plaintiff and the judge are Southern Baptists positive that THE SOUTH SHALL RISE AGAIN!

Ahem.

Removing this phrase from the Pledge IN NO WAY prevents students from reciting it themselves, before, during or after the Pledge.

Keeping organized prayer (of all denominations) out of public schools IN NO WAY prevents students from taking a moment at any time during their school day to silently reflect and pray to the deity of their choice.

Refusing to allow organized prayer into graduation ceremonies, football locker rooms and such IN NO WAY prevents the associated students from organizing themselves and engaging in a group prayer.

But if _you're_ the one who doesn't want to pray to the Christian God or take part in organized prayer or activities involving Christianity, you're a DANGEROUS ANTI-AMERICAN COMMUNIST TRAITOR who should be shot on sight. Or so say many who are going ballistic over this particular ruling.

This case should have been a slam-dunk for the plaintiff, based on common sense and the First Amendment. The dissenting judge replied "What's next, currency?" Not a problem for me -- religious affirmations don't belong THERE, either.

And what's the aftermath of this Constitutionally-correct decision? A Senate resolution blasting it, with the vote going NINETY-NINE LIMP-WRISTED SHITHEADS TO ZERO. Predictable Republican bleating about "liberals" and "stupidity" and "common sense" was joined by DEMOCRATIC bleating about "stupidity" and "common sense." Not ONE elected official had sufficient fortitude to say a single word about "the Rule of Law", the Bill of Rights or freedom of religion in our nation. Not ONE elected official had the nerve to stand up for a decision that might be viewed as "anti-Christian." Might affect the reelection campaign and halt the gravy train of money flowing in, y'know.

The words were inserted at a point in American history when Christianity and patriotism were tightly linked, to fight GODLESS ANTI-CHRISTIAN COMMUNISM[tm]. The battle is long-dead, but the soldiers march on. And on. And on. And those elected to uphold the law cave in to them every single time. Have we no sense of decency, sirs? At long last, have we left no sense of decency?

Pardon me, I'm going to throw up and go to bed.

Nic Name · 06-26-2002, 10:47 PM

Should "freedom of religion" and "freedom of speech" in the USA guarantee that American children of Muslim faith ought to be able to say aloud in schools "one nation under Allah indivisble, with liberty and justice for all." without being labelled terrorists, or unpatriotic, or anti-American?

How would the bible thumping patriots feel about that expression of patriotism by their fellow Americans of a different faith?

http://www.allah.com/

elSicomoro · 06-26-2002, 10:53 PM

Jerry Falwell and attorney Gloria Allred were going at it on Hardball tonight. Falwell said something to the effect of..."They want to take everything involving God out of our society. They want to make us a secular nation, like Cuba, like China, like Russia..."

Like I said...freak.

Who didn't vote in that resolution? Jesse Helms. IIRC, he's been ill for some time. And I thought Strom was too...last I heard, he was staying at Walter Reed Hospital. Boy, I bet when he heard about this, he hauled ass down Georgia Ave. to vote. (Though, can't another Senator cast a vote for you? My knowledge of procedure is rusty.)

Yelof · 06-27-2002, 04:35 AM

I'm not an American so it is not my call really and I didn't vote in the poll above, but I support all moves to further the separation of Church and State. America is further along this path then most countries, mostly by historical accident it seems to me, as I think the founding fathers may have wanted no Established Church like England had but they certainly didn't want an gnostically neutral State, like the current interruption is heading.

I had to go to a Jesuit school growing up, I didn't like it there, amongst my beefs was having to say the "Hail Mary" before each class and also having to go to Mass during school hours once a week. It is amazing what obscenities you can get away with saying aloud when your voice is being drowned out by the sound of 29 other people praying

But that experience has left me wary of any attempt to impose a cultural idea upon children at school that goes beyond say respect for human rights..that makes the Pledge of Allegiance, even without God seems suspect to me, the sight of US kids reciting it seems odd.

jaguar · 06-27-2002, 05:47 AM

I almost spat my coffee when i heard this - absolutely amazing, particualry post S11. I"m with vsp, although it doesn't have the slightest effect on me. I'm already boycotting part of our national anthum ('for those who come across the seas we've boundless plains to spare' ') as it is.

Griff · 06-27-2002, 06:08 AM

I was a pledge resister in high school. Bringing God into it is probably a violation of some students rights but my main beef was with the ugliness of flag worship and enforced nationalism. To me, it just looks like something more appropriate to an unfree society, where the maintenance of the state is the most important value. The fun part of this whole thing is watching the politicians posturing, its a beautiful thing.

russotto · 06-27-2002, 01:08 PM

The requirement to <strike>take the loyalty oath</strike>recite the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional enough without the "under God". That just makes it even more blatantly so.

06-27-2002, 01:30 PM

One doesn't <b>have</b> to say the pledge of allegiance. Like I said, I got away all through high school without saying it once. I love my country, but I haven't said the pledge for almost seven years. I'll tell my kids that they don't have to either, if they don't want to. And if they have any shit about it in school, I'll be on the phone. Freedom of speech also entails the freedom to not speak, and one cannot force them to say something that they don't want to.

juju · 06-27-2002, 02:21 PM

It seems blatantly obvious to me that this is a good thing. Yet 99% of everyone interviewed on tv is pissed, including all the politicians! What kind of world do I live in? Am I some sort of alien?

juju · 06-27-2002, 02:35 PM

I think i'll just be reciting the Pledge of Defiance along with Jello Biafra. :)

http://comp.uark.edu/~dmorton/images...Allegiance.mp3

SteveDallas · 06-27-2002, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by russotto
The requirement to <strike>take the loyalty oath</strike>recite the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional enough without the "under God". That just makes it even more blatantly so.

I agree with this, which is why I voted for "no opinion"... I don't know how much difference it makes.

Mind you, I consider myself very patriotic, and when I think about Things That Made This Country Great(tm), coerced reverence for symbols of the country (symbols, even, not the substance) is not on the list.

I also consider myself a Christian, and I dislike anything that smacks of state involvement in religion. Not only is the espousal of Christian and quasi-Christian ideas by the state an infringment of the rights of those who hold non-majority religious beliefs, I also believe it ultimately insults and trivializes Christian teachings(among which, found in the Bible, are that you should render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's, and that religious observance should be private and humble, not public and extravagant).

Martin Luther said it better than I can. I invite you to read his Large Catechism, specifically the commentary on the First Commandment, and then consider if what he describes as idolatry doesn't sound an awful lot like some of the pro-flag rhetoric we've heard in the last day or so.

vsp · 06-27-2002, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dhamsaic
One doesn't <b>have</b> to say the pledge of allegiance. Like I said, I got away all through high school without saying it once. I love my country, but I haven't said the pledge for almost seven years. I'll tell my kids that they don't have to either, if they don't want to. And if they have any shit about it in school, I'll be on the phone. Freedom of speech also entails the freedom to not speak, and one cannot force them to say something that they don't want to.

This is true. But imagine what the fundies would do if they were suddenly transported to Bizarro World, where the relevant section of the Pledge went like this:

"one nation, under NO gods, indivisible..."

or

"one nation, under Allah, indivisible..."

or

"one nation, under Odin, indivisible..."

...and their kids were surrounded by sheep^H^H^H^H^Hclassmates dutifully reciting the oath word-for-word, because that's what they'd been taught to do from their earliest school days.

They'd go BALLISTIC at the notion. How DARE they subject good Christian children to affirmations of someone ELSE'S religious beliefs (or lack thereof)! How DARE they create an environment where their kids are stared at by their classmates, because they're weirdos who won't chant along with the rest of the group!

And, yet, the average American Bible-thumper can't grasp the irony that that's _exactly_ how many atheists and non-Judeo-Christians feel about God being plastered all over American culture, government and currency.

Blah.

View Poll Results: Take "under God" out of the pledge?
Yes	17	60.71%
No	9	32.14%
No opinion	2	7.14%
Voters: 28. You may not vote on this poll

06-26-2002, 08:28 PM	#1
elSicomoro Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 12,486	US Pledge of Allegiance Ruled Unconstitutional Story here. The responses I've seen so far have mostly been harsh, from common folk to House Leader Dick Armey to Jerry Falwell...it seems outrageous to most people...it's our heritage, those judges should be impeached, etc. The chances of this being overturned in the US Supreme Court appear pretty good...the vote in San Francisco was 2-1 against the pledge. But I am glad they made the decision and understand the panel's rationale for doing so. I believe the phrase "under God" should go. Most of what happened today is based purely on interpretation. Sure, there are some facts involved, like previous rulings in this arena...but it all boils down to how a judge "reads" things. While the majority of this country believes in "God" and "practices" Christianity, we have a growing number of people who don't believe in God, doubt God, or do not subscribe to Christian beliefs. While certainly open to many interpretations, this is my own interpretation of the phrase "one nation under God": The United States is subservient to God. God being the name used in Christianity for the being considered the creator of all in the world. Being subservient to someone can be a form of respect, and we may tend to agree with that person's beliefs in order to be more like them. Christianity is based on the teachings of Jesus Christ, considered by many to be the son of God, both human and divine. Therefore, I conclude that our nation respects the establishment of a religion. In this case, Christianity. (That took a while to flesh out. But it's only my interpretation and my opinion...you may have your own.) In the end, God is subjective, unprovable. You may be a pure scientist; you may have two or three or ten Gods of your own. And the outrage expressed by some over the panel's decision makes me sick...I personally believe in God, believe in most of the tenets of Christianity, but damnit! Quit pushing your fucking religion on people. People like Falwell are the real freaks and outcasts of our society. And what's wrong with "one nation indivisible?" That sounds kick-ass. (LATE EDIT: My earlier editing was poor. Added or corrected words are in bold, except for "subjective," which was already bolded.) Last edited by elSicomoro; 06-26-2002 at 11:05 PM.

06-26-2002, 10:47 PM	#5
Nic Name retired Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,930	Should "freedom of religion" and "freedom of speech" in the USA guarantee that American children of Muslim faith ought to be able to say aloud in schools "one nation under Allah indivisble, with liberty and justice for all." without being labelled terrorists, or unpatriotic, or anti-American? How would the bible thumping patriots feel about that expression of patriotism by their fellow Americans of a different faith? http://www.allah.com/ Last edited by Nic Name; 06-26-2002 at 10:49 PM.

06-27-2002, 05:47 AM	#8
jaguar whig Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 5,075	I almost spat my coffee when i heard this - absolutely amazing, particualry post S11. I"m with vsp, although it doesn't have the slightest effect on me. I'm already boycotting part of our national anthum ('for those who come across the seas we've boundless plains to spare' ') as it is. __________________ Good friends, good books and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life. - Twain

06-27-2002, 06:08 AM	#9
Griff still says videotape Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 26,813	I was a pledge resister in high school. Bringing God into it is probably a violation of some students rights but my main beef was with the ugliness of flag worship and enforced nationalism. To me, it just looks like something more appropriate to an unfree society, where the maintenance of the state is the most important value. The fun part of this whole thing is watching the politicians posturing, its a beautiful thing. __________________ If you would only recognize that life is hard, things would be so much easier for you. - Louis D. Brandeis

06-26-2002, 08:41 PM	#2
dave Guest Posts: n/a	I voted "Yes", because I don't think it should be there. For my stint at South Carroll High School, I stood in respect for my country, but I neither put my hand over my heart nor recited the words. My reason was, of course, because I don't believe in God. Yeah, I'm a dork.

06-26-2002, 10:53 PM	#6
elSicomoro Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 12,486	Jerry Falwell and attorney Gloria Allred were going at it on Hardball tonight. Falwell said something to the effect of..."They want to take everything involving God out of our society. They want to make us a secular nation, like Cuba, like China, like Russia..." Like I said...freak. Who didn't vote in that resolution? Jesse Helms. IIRC, he's been ill for some time. And I thought Strom was too...last I heard, he was staying at Walter Reed Hospital. Boy, I bet when he heard about this, he hauled ass down Georgia Ave. to vote. (Though, can't another Senator cast a vote for you? My knowledge of procedure is rusty.)

06-27-2002, 04:35 AM	#7
Yelof neither here nor there Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 179	I'm not an American so it is not my call really and I didn't vote in the poll above, but I support all moves to further the separation of Church and State. America is further along this path then most countries, mostly by historical accident it seems to me, as I think the founding fathers may have wanted no Established Church like England had but they certainly didn't want an gnostically neutral State, like the current interruption is heading. I had to go to a Jesuit school growing up, I didn't like it there, amongst my beefs was having to say the "Hail Mary" before each class and also having to go to Mass during school hours once a week. It is amazing what obscenities you can get away with saying aloud when your voice is being drowned out by the sound of 29 other people praying But that experience has left me wary of any attempt to impose a cultural idea upon children at school that goes beyond say respect for human rights..that makes the Pledge of Allegiance, even without God seems suspect to me, the sight of US kids reciting it seems odd.

06-27-2002, 01:08 PM	#10
russotto Professor Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 1,788	The requirement to <strike>take the loyalty oath</strike>recite the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional enough without the "under God". That just makes it even more blatantly so.

06-27-2002, 01:30 PM	#11
dave Guest Posts: n/a	One doesn't <b>have</b> to say the pledge of allegiance. Like I said, I got away all through high school without saying it once. I love my country, but I haven't said the pledge for almost seven years. I'll tell my kids that they don't have to either, if they don't want to. And if they have any shit about it in school, I'll be on the phone. Freedom of speech also entails the freedom to not speak, and one cannot force them to say something that they don't want to.

06-27-2002, 02:21 PM	#12
juju no one of consequence Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Arkansas Posts: 2,839	It seems blatantly obvious to me that this is a good thing. Yet 99% of everyone interviewed on tv is pissed, including all the politicians! What kind of world do I live in? Am I some sort of alien?

06-27-2002, 02:35 PM	#13
juju no one of consequence Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Arkansas Posts: 2,839	I think i'll just be reciting the Pledge of Defiance along with Jello Biafra. :) http://comp.uark.edu/~dmorton/images...Allegiance.mp3 Last edited by juju; 06-27-2002 at 02:38 PM.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)