THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Lane3 who wrote (15757)	6/27/2002 12:46:53 PM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (1) of 21057

Had the judges stepped back from their law books and legal precedents and looked at the society in which this case appeared, they would have recognized that including the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance poses no danger to the First Amendment. Isn't that dangerous judicial action, interpreting laws instead of rote homage to the original authors of the pledge? What would Scalia do? TP

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next