WOW. its now unconstitutional to recite the pledge in class

[bart_smastard]

Re: WOW. its now unconstitutional to recite the pledge in class

on the gay marriage thing sightless i agree that if a church ( congregation ) is against gay /lesbian marriage it should not have to defend itself against not allowing same sex unions within said church . it is that churches beliefs and the couple should look eleswhere until they find a parish that accepts them to perform the cermony .. this is the main hub of my argument there is a big difference between an outright ban and what suits the majority .if you are in a democratic society then you follow the will of the majority . national identity is something every country should have and we shouldn't let it be eroded through fear of upsetting a few campaigners who's actions only fuel resentment and hate within communities . we have to live together and accept eachover not dilute identities till the only voices heard are the extremists . if they can't live with us then they should look eleswhere to live . a foriegn national can practice his own beliefs but he shouldn't tell others they can't practice theirs . and if they don't like thier sons / daughters reciting the pledge part that inlcudes "god "they can always tell them to not utter those sentances when reciting . simple answers are the best ones

[picklemonkey]

link?



nevermind. found it

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9341286/

[superdave]

Re: WOW. its now unconstitutional to recite the pledge in class

This all comes from atheists which are a small minority in this country. They want to take out God from everything and create a world they feel comfortable in and don't care about the majority who don't mind God being recited in the pledge. They should acquiesce to the majority in this instance.

Next thing they'll attack all the currency because it says "In God We Trust". If they haven't already.

[runningman]

Re: WOW. its now unconstitutional to recite the pledge in class

^^^ your right it is the beginning of the end of mankind. It is said that when man turns his back on God, and destroys his Mother Earth it is the end. Anybody know anything about the Crystal Skulls?? Maybe they can save us.

[Yao]

Re: WOW. its now unconstitutional to recite the pledge in cl

Our country had in fact removed the 'god be with us' phrase from our currency when the Euro was introduced. (Each country could still give one side a face if it's onw, the other side is the same in every country in the euro-zone)

Religion is something personal, and ot not be pushed into other people's lives. It should be a thing of choice rather than intrusive. A kid should simply be given the choice to recite the pledge, or not if it chooses so. Simple...not?

[picklemonkey]

Religion is something personal, and ot not be pushed into other people's lives. It should be a thing of choice rather than intrusive. A kid should simply be given the choice to recite the pledge, or not if it chooses so. Simple...not?

They should acquiesce to the majority in this instance.

yeah, so should homosexuals, pro-life activisits, euthanasia protesters, those against the right to bear arms, republicans, and the disabled.

[thesightless]

Re: WOW. its now unconstitutional to recite the pledge in class

In america, its never simple. we have the right and the lawyers to sue over ANYTHING. AND I MEAN ANYTHING.

in the last 5 years i have seen...

ppl sue Mcdonalds over getting fat when they eat a minimum of 10 meals a week there.

ppl sue places for burning themselves with HOT coffee.

ppl sue thier towns for beach erosion on thier property.\

women sue a man at work for having aboner when then wear bikini tops to work

ppl sue for child rights 15 years after giving a shild up for adoption.

and much more.

[Yao]

Re: WOW. its now unconstitutional to recite the pledge in cl

Man.

People are just going crazy...they wanna live in a fucking computergame instead of 'real life'. If a woman can sue a guy that gets a boner over her wearing a bikini top....he can sue her over wearing that thing and giving him a boner. LOL. They should do just that...reply to every stupid case with a similarly stupid complaint.

• sue people for maltreating themselves by eating 10 meals a week @ McDo
  
  sue people for being stupid enough to ask a place to dimish the quality of it's coffee by reducing the temperature, or simply for being stupid enough to assume it's not hot.
  
  sue people for wasting tax-payer's money over things that are out of human's control.
  
  sue people for ruining a kid's life

Now, how about that? I's guess complaints like that should clarify the stupidity of the clainms to those people. If they don't get it, sue them for being plainly stupid and being a disgrace to mankind.

@runningman: those sharia practices were in fact already in place for a long time, it came in the news because it is now forbidden.

And...how come not believing in god makes your country go to shit? Am I a lesser person for not believing the same thing as you? It is so arbitrary...there's a lot of religious people that go to church every sunday and still fuck a little boy in his pooper, and there's a lot of people that don't believe, but just try to be a good person (and the other way around). Belief is not the determining factor IMO. You just have bad people and good people based on behaviour.

[bart_smastard]

Re: WOW. its now unconstitutional to recite the pledge in class

one of the worst cases i eva heard of was a woman sneaking through a window in the toilets to aviod paying to enter the club .. anyhows she knocked a toothout slipping onto the floor and sued the club for ?7k

[thesightless]

Re: WOW. its now unconstitutional to recite the pledge in class

one of the worst cases i eva heard of was a woman sneaking through a window in the toilets to aviod paying to enter the club .. anyhows she knocked a toothout slipping onto the floor and sued the club for ?7k

^

lmao.

""sorry we didnt leave the window open so you could commit theft and trespassing in order save a 10 spot. we apologize that we didnt fund your schools to teach you that you might get hurt doing something like this. sorry for not putting bars on the windows and posting a huge sign with ""YOU SHOULD NOT BREAK IN THROUGH THIS WINDOW"" next to said window.""---the managment

[gokada]

Re: WOW. its now unconstitutional to recite the pledge in class

Anyone with even a passing familiarity with the concept of separation of church and state should realize that "under God" would be a prohibited recognition of the establishment of religion, and that clause really ought to be excised from the pledge, if you're looking at it from a purely legal/constitutional standpoint.

I respectfully disagree with this point. "Under God" doesn't establish religion in our government or schools. If it did, it would read "under the Christian God", or "under a Buddhist God", etc...I don't practice a religion but I do believe in the existence of God... The First Amendment reads, " Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." Nowhere does it say that religion and the state will be separated...only that the government won't do what The Church of England did, and that is to establish a national religion. How does using "under God" in the pledge establish a national religion?

That being said, I do, however, agree that if kids don't want to say it, they shouldn't have to...but if they do, then they should be allowed to.

[RETOX NYC]

Re: WOW. its now unconstitutional to recite the pledge in class

WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH THIS COUNTRY.

im sorry, but this one falls on the lap of the far left. how in the fuck are they letting this judge make it unconstitutional to recite our pledge to our country just because some little shit's parents are agnostic? should we even be a country any more? tell the kid to simply keep his mouth shut when the rest say it. god, whats next?

i understand the the concept behind the 10 commandments, but this is retarded. its not about religion, its about loyalty and history.

George washington has gotta be pulling his hair out of his head.

Omit the "One nation under God" bit and all's good. Maybe we should amend the Pledge of Alliegence.

[Yao]

Re: WOW. its now unconstitutional to recite the pledge in class

I respectfully disagree with this point. "Under God" doesn't establish religion in our government or schools. If it did, it would read "under the Christian God", or "under a Buddhist God", etc...I don't practice a religion but I do believe in the existence of God... The First Amendment reads, " Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." Nowhere does it say that religion and the state will be separated...only that the government won't do what The Church of England did, and that is to establish a national religion. How does using "under God" in the pledge establish a national religion?

That being said, I do, however, agree that if kids don't want to say it, they shouldn't have to...but if they do, then they should be allowed to.

Still Glenn, this little sentence does imply to me that each and every citizen of the nation is responsible to a god, which in itself is a false assumption IMO. It still connects the nation to a deiety, which is denying the secularity of a state IMO. Thin line to thread on though, I won't be calling you wrong for walking on the other side of it...

To get more technical: the 'under god' implies a hierarchy, placing the state and the people under a god in rank, while in a secular state the is no higher authority in practise than the state itself. Iknow I know...nitpicking to the max...

[toasty]

Re: WOW. its now unconstitutional to recite the pledge in class

I respectfully disagree with this point. "Under God" doesn't establish religion in our government or schools. If it did, it would read "under the Christian God", or "under a Buddhist God", etc...I don't practice a religion but I do believe in the existence of God... The First Amendment reads, " Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." Nowhere does it say that religion and the state will be separated...only that the government won't do what The Church of England did, and that is to establish a national religion. How does using "under God" in the pledge establish a national religion?

Couple things:

First, I think there is a difference between "under God," which refers to a specific deity and "under a god," which implies the existence of a non-descript higher power of some sort. Put another way, "under God," implies that we are a nation that is not "under Allah," "under Buddha," "under Krishna," etc., you get the idea I'm sure. It may seem like hair-splitting, but that capital "G" makes a difference.

Second, and building upon that, since "God" refers to a specific deity, the inclusion of the term ipso facto constitutes a recognition of the religions that claim the big guy as their own to the exclusion of those that worship another higher power.

Also, what Yao said above ^^

Like I said, though, I've never really had fits about the inclusion of "under God" in the pledge, and have always said it along with everyone else. Doesn't bug me a bit.

[djstevendellis]

Re: WOW. its now unconstitutional to recite the pledge in class

these douchebags wont be happy until America is divided into two seperate countries. Just hope they get the shit end of the stick.