Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Take the Money and Run -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jorj X Mckie who wrote (6017)	6/26/2002 4:31:37 PM
From: gypsees	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17639

Why isn't it freedom of speech for the majority to have the word God in their pledge? It doesn't specify WHICH God.. just A God. And it doesn't move any funds anywhere to support any religion. I just don't get it.

To: Jorj X Mckie who wrote (6017)	6/26/2002 4:38:50 PM
From: X Y Zebra	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17639

I could not agree with you more I was merely pointing out that as usual, politicians, in their zeal to please the flavor of favor (at a given specific time, --like in this case the zealots of 1954), manage to paint themselves into a corner... and I really would like to know what they will do with the dollar bill, since the argument (correctly imo) that... I quote from the article: _________ The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a 1954 act of Congress inserting the phrase “under God” after the words “one nation” in the pledge. The court said the phrase violates the so-called Establishment Clause in the Constitution that requires a separation of church and state. “A profession that we are a nation `under God' is identical, for Establishment Clause purposes, to a profession that we are a nation `under Jesus,' a nation `under Vishnu,' a nation `under Zeus,' or a nation `under no god,' because none of these professions can be neutral with respect to religion,” Judge Alfred T. Goodwin wrote for the three-judge panel. ________________ end of quote. Therefore... if the above is to hold... under the same argument, Mr. [dollar] bill is unconstitutional since it gives the exact same representation to have "in god we trust" printed on it, as the words "under god" of the allegiance. That's all... I shall be sitting, watching and smiling how they get out of that one... -lol