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.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (15892)	6/28/2002 7:55:41 PM
From: Dayuhan	Respond to of 21057

Its the government has to be anti-God rhetoric that does it. Nobody has asked that the Government indulge in anti-God rhetoric. Some of us would like to see it refrain from pro-God rhetoric.

To: one_less who wrote (15892)	6/28/2002 8:41:26 PM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

Jewel, would you show me any anti-God rhetoric indulged in by the government? It truly escapes me how refraining from including references to God in the pledge because it is a patriotic pledge taken by Americans of all faiths (including by agnostics and atheists who are, equally, Americans), is "anti-God." Is everything secular "anti-God"? Is the very principle of separation of church and state "anti-God"? This has undoubtedly been pointed out. (I'm hundreds of posts behind and am going out for a couple of hours so will remain behind), but just in case it hasn't: The pledge was written in 1892 by Francis Bellamy, and it was intended as a pledge of allegiance, not as a public prayer. It was only in 1954--after a campaign by the Knights of Columbus--that the Congress added the words "under God." "What follows is Bellamy's own account of some of the thoughts that went through his mind in August, 1892, as he picked the words of his Pledge: ...The true reason for allegiance to the Flag is the 'republic for which it stands.' ...And what does that vast thing, the Republic mean? It is the concise political word for the Nation - the One Nation which the Civil War was fought to prove. To make that One Nation idea clear, we must specify that it is indivisible, as Webster and Lincoln used to repeat in their great speeches." ifx.net From the same link, more bright ideas for additions, to add to the 1954 bright idea of the Knights of Columbus that is now dividing Americans: "If the Pledge's historical pattern repeats, its words will be modified during this decade. Below are two possible changes. Some prolife advocates recite the following slightly revised Pledge: 'I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all, born and unborn.' A few liberals recite a slightly revised version of Bellamy's original Pledge: 'I pledge allegiance to my Flag, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with equality, liberty and justice for all.'"

To: one_less who wrote (15892)	6/28/2002 10:04:29 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

The Pledge doesn't include the words "BUY GENERAL MOTORS AUTOMOBILES!" either. Does that mean it or the US is against GM? Just because something isn't mentioned in some text doesn't mean you're against it. And if the US gov't is to align itself with a god, which one shall it be? There certainly are a variety on the planet now to pick from, and more available through history. Look, I think the pledge decision was a mistake. Not because it was wrong - it wasn't - but because it has set off an unnecessary cultural war. Somrtimes the very best thing these courts can do is keep their mouths shut. ALSO: That decision does not ban reciting the pledge or including the words "under God" in private proceedings. The court does not have that power. It bans it only in schools and gov't-sponsored ceremonies.