The Pledge Protection Act:

[Freedom_from_Chains]

The Pledge Protection Act:
The Lunacy of Letting Only State Courts Interpret the First Amendment
By MARCI HAMILTON
[e-mail]
----
Thursday, Sep. 23, 2004

Last week, the House Judiciary Committee voted to send the Pledge Protection Act to the full House, which is likely to take it up today. The Act -- a bill that has many cosponsors -- would deprive all federal courts, even the Supreme Court, of jurisdiction to hear constitutional challenges to the "under God" Pledge of Allegiance. This is only the latest attempt by Congress to force a pluralist society into a one-size-fits-all set of beliefs.

This is a remarkable violation of the separation of powers and the Establishment Clause. If the Act were to become law - and if it were, itself, to be upheld as constitutional - only state courts would be able to hear constitutional challenges to the Pledge.

We would therefore have a 50-state collection of views as to what the Free Exercise Clause, and the Establishment Clause, mean in this context. And that would be constitutional lunacy. Moreover, we would have Congress making its actions that involve compelled speech and religious viewpoint unreviewable!

(cont) http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20040923.html

[sakabatou]

1. One step closer to a complete Orwellian Society

[Freedom_from_Chains]

2. No kidding, this is going to have to come to a head somewhere

And using history as a reference, that doesn't look pretty.

[jojo54]

3. How nice of them,

given the fact that it was a bill, through the same process, that allowed the "under god" to be inserted into the pledge back in '54.

[Freedom_from_Chains]

4. And that has always been the problem

We've always let the christians get away with tring to impose their religion on others, mainly because no one wanted to make a big deal out of it, so that now they are claiming this as proof that America is a christian nation. The founders never suggested marking our money up with religious phrases.

Unfortunatly, the only way to deal with these people is to slap them down at every turn.

[Tux]

5. I contacted my Senators and Rep

I can only hope it can do some good.


I read of the Pledge Protection Act and I disagree with it. Like you're surprised anymore. Anyways, I think the idea smacks of intolerance. If someone wants to have "under God" removed from American currentcy, they have the right to petition Congress to remove it. While sueing over it is weird, people do have the right to declare it wrong for themselves. Just because a person disagrees with something doesn't mean their against you. Take us for example. We disagree on everything from gay marriage to pizza toppings but I respect you for answering my emails and proividing information about issues I am concerned about.

Some evangelical and fundamentalist Christians think that removing "under God" is removing God from our nation. However, let me ask you this: how can God, an infinite being, be removed from anything even if some people don't believe in God? How can the belief in God be removed from people that claim to hae been touched by God? (I never was but I still believe, no, know God exists. Look at pictures from Hubble and tell me God doesn't exist.)

Republicians have set up several issues as religious crusades against those that don't believe in evangelical/fundamentalist Christianity. They claim it's the secular left vs. the religious right. Both sides are religious but different views, religions, or the lack there of. This kind of divide isn't healthy for a nation. By dividing people into evangelicals and secularists, many are left out, insulted, and it's overly simple. We have to tell it as it is, it's paritisian politics at work. It's how our government checks and balances itself. If they are angry over some laws that were passed, have them join the club. I'm against gun control in extremes, ban on gay marriage, and tax breaks for companies that outsource jobs. I'm not declaring a culture war on anyone, I just want to let my opinion be heard by you and be done with it. As should they but using a church for political gain? I can only say this: Was Jesus happy about moneylenders in the Temple?

[Freedom_from_Chains]

6. Really

"However, let me ask you this: how can God, an infinite being, be removed from anything even if some people don't believe in God?"

It does sometimes seem like they think their all powerfull god can't take care of himself real well.

[Tux]

7. They project themselves onto God

They need to be handheld by ministers (or oil princes) so they assume God needs that too.

[funflower]

8. The Supreme Court will chew this one up and spit it out

before you can "indivisible with liberty and justice for all."

[Shallah Kali]

9. Freedom Fries

another piece of stupid legislation that wastes time, does not do a single human being a bit of good and in fact only exists to create political capitol with the RW fundies. Like God can be removed from schools just because the school does force the students to pray a certain way. They must not have much faith in the omnipotence of their deity or they would not be in such a state of frenzy over this.