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: Lazarus_Long who wrote (16243)	7/1/2002 12:09:17 AM
From: one_less	Read Replies (2) of 21057

"I don't consider saying that removing pro-God rhetoric from the Pledge of a nation that has the 1st Amendment as part of its fundamental law as anti-God." Nor do I. In fact I consider it pro-God, since I believe the slightest coercive treatment of faith is anti-belief. "Doesn't "one nation indivisible" do that? Only if you assume the context, which had previously been stated. "Frankly, my preferred resolution would be for the full 9th to review and reverse the decision of the 3-judge bench. And leave those two words in." I'd be ok with starting from scratch. Lets start by asking the simple question, "What are we pledging our allegiance to?" I pledge allegiance to...(make a list). Anything that succinctly qualifies sticks. Anything that is subject to more than one interpretation goes.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next