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.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (52840)	7/12/2002 12:14:54 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Solon, the issue at hand isn't amending the constitution to "acknowledge the existence and supremacy of God". It also is not "is science and technology beneficial? It isn't "Should we have a theocracy?" Nor is it should the government be able to force people to say a pledge that contains the words "one nation under God". If there was a serious push to amend the constitution to make the country into a theocracy or even to establish a religion I would be with you in opposing it. The issue is whether or not allowing a pledge that contains the words "one nation under god..." to be recited by classes or assemblies in schools amounts to the establishment of a religion. I don't think it does, but I can see how people can reasonably disagree with me on this issue. Its a borderline case. Its not a extreme or obvious case of an unconstitutional establishment of religion. Its not even close to a case of making the US in to a theocracy. Tim