Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

freepers and the pledge of allegiance ruling

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
pepperbear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 03:45 PM
Original message
freepers and the pledge of allegiance ruling
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1484472/posts

but check out a couple of the more ****OMG**** reasonable responses! Any DU guys going over there and pinch hitting? ;)



"I agree that we should return the pledge to the pre 1954 version. Not all citizens of this great nation are religious. Others are. Our pledge should be one which can be spoken by all citizens without hypocracy. I cannot say "under God" in the pledge, since I have no belief in any deities. So I don't.

Something I've noticed from time to time while reciting the pledge is that many, since the original Newdow ruling, emphasise the "under God" phrase, often making it sound even a bit like a curse. Not the best thing.

The worst thing I ever saw, though, with regard to the Pledge was at a Memorial Day function I attended at a local cemetary while I was living in California.

An elderly couple attended the function with some local residents. When it came time to salute the flag, they stood mute and didn't recite the Pledge. After the ceremony, this guy in a WWII Marine Dress uniform, with a VFW cap on his head, started yelling at this older couple, accusing them of a lack of patriotism, calling them traitors and worse. He went on for a while until someone pointed out to him that the couple were British, visiting friends in the town. Apparently they had come to the ceremony to pay their respects to those who lost their lives defending England.

A little thought is required, I think, with regard to all of this."

AND

"It's not the pledge that's unconstitutional, it's the reference to "under God"... which means that the pledge I remember from my own childhood would be fine. I don't think the ruling is unreasonable, although a simple reference to "God" without any doctrine seems to me to be a long ways from establishing a state church. Still, slippery slopes and all that.
A better reason for getting rid of the phrase is that it's flaming hypocrisy; the state does not defer its secular power to any other force, making its claim to be 'under' God an empty piety."

Of course, check out the others for fun and entertainment.

:popcorn:



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC