What does the US "Pledge of Allegiance" mean to you?

[Key Of David]

Except that, in reality, Israel should be thanking the US (and England, I suppose) every day it's not overrun by its Islamic neighbors.

I wasn't talking about the nation which calls itself Israel. That is only two tribes of Israel, Judah and Levi.

 

[crazyfingers]

An article on how the Treaty of Tripoli is misunderstood.
http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detail.php?ResourceID=5

Wallbuilders? Sorry but David Barton is a liar and a fraud. Nothing from him has the slightest credibility.

 

[LiberalChristian]

Wallbuilders? Sorry but David Barton is a liar and a fraud. Nothing from him has the slightest credibility.

This is interesting, I thought he was misquoting at least one source. What do you know of him and this group?

 

[crazyfingers]

This is interesting, I thought he was misquoting at least one source. What do you know of him and this group?

The Barton Chronicles

Wallbuilders Shoddy Workmanship

David Barton's Distorted History

 

[Philosoft]

I hate to disagree, but if you read this whole thread you would see that someone is saying that listening to "Under God" is harmful to children who are atheists. The case going to the Supreme Court is going for this exact reason.

FYI, legal "harm," in a non-criminal sense, refers to violation of one's Constitutional rights, not necessarily physical or mental injury.

 

[buffybot]

This is very interesting,but i have to admit that i am not 100 percent sure what the "pledge of allegiance" is so it would be silly getting into this debate.
But i would like to know what it is,so someone educate me please!


buffybot

 

[Jacob4Jesus]

FYI, legal "harm," in a non-criminal sense, refers to violation of one's Constitutional rights, not necessarily physical or mental injury.

FYI, I know that, thank you. That was totally not what was discussed earlier in the thread.

 

[Philosoft]

FYI, I know that, thank you. That was totally not what was discussed earlier in the thread.

Well, you singled out atheists when you mentioned harm. That's what made me think you were referring to some other kind of harm.

 

[Lotar]

This is very interesting,but i have to admit that i am not 100 percent sure what the "pledge of allegiance" is so it would be silly getting into this debate.
But i would like to know what it is,so someone educate me please!


buffybot

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.


It's quite silly really.

 

[ncunigan85]

I am all for the phrase "Under God" in our pledge. The whole notion of seperation of church & state was to keep the church out of ruling the country--not to become an atheistic state. If that is the case we are no less different than the Marxist's and Communists. If you don't want to say Under God, dont say it, dont change a sacred Pledge just for yourself. I am a Christian and I believe in one nation UNDER GOD. and will continue saying it till i die.

 

[Garry Denke]

What does the US "Pledge of Allegiance" mean to you?

G's (Government's) US, democracy defined.

Or simply, G's US.

Garry W. Denke
Geologist/Geophysicist

 

[buffybot]

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.


It's quite silly really.

Thanks for the info.But why silly

 

[Mechanical Bliss]

The whole notion of seperation of church & state was to keep the church out of ruling the country--not to become an atheistic state.

First of all, the church is effectively ruling the country if your religion's beliefs are used as a basis for legislation. That is what the notion of separation of church and state means. Furthermore, removing "under God" has nothing to do with becoming an atheist state. Replacing it with "under no God" would be a good example. The government is to remain agnostic--that is to say, neutral with respect to religious beliefs.

If that is the case we are no less different than the Marxist's and Communists.

Sorry, that's just ignorant. I think you need to revisit studying that part of history, and you'll see why a religiously neutral democratic republic is not equivalent to communism.

Of course that was Eisenhower's intention: to add the phrase "under God" to the pledge to distance our country from "godless communism." The entire intention was to have the government endorse religion.

If you don't want to say Under God, dont say it, dont change a sacred Pledge just for yourself.

Teachers lead students in claiming that it is a nation "under God." As agents of the state, they are teaching their students that the Judeo-Christian god exists. That is not constitutional and neither was the law that changed the pledge. That's right, the original pledge did not have the words "under God" in it, so it was a religious motivation to change a sacred pledge in the 1950s from its original form.

I am a Christian and I believe in one nation UNDER GOD. and will continue saying it till i die.

It's your right to say it. It's not the government's right to make such an endorsement, however.

Had you read previous replies in the thread, you would understand why your reasoning is poor.

 

[nadroj1985]

I must agree with mechanical bliss. I am a Christian, but I still think that using the words "Under God" in the pledge of allegiance is a violation of the separation of church and state. If the pledge contained a phrase that was sympathetic to another religion besides Christianity, then Christians (myself included) would be trying to change it. The state should always be neutral in matters pertaining to religion--no exceptions.

 

[Key Of David]

I must agree with mechanical bliss. I am a Christian, but I still think that using the words "Under God" in the pledge of allegiance is a violation of the separation of church and state. If the pledge contained a phrase that was sympathetic to another religion besides Christianity, then Christians (myself included) would be trying to change it. The state should always be neutral in matters pertaining to religion--no exceptions.

God is not a religion...if you don't like God, get out from amongst His people.

 

[crazyfingers]

God is not a religion...if you don't like God, get out from amongst His people.

To believe in a god is a religious belief. It's monotheism. It's a religious point of view that excludes polytheists and nontheists. The constitution prohibits the government from favoring one religious point of view over another.

Furthermore, when the teacher leads the kids in the pledge the teacher is teaching that a monotheist god exists. This is the government teaching a monotheistic point of view above all others.

Would you like to read the original Newdow decision. It explains all this.

Here

 

[Key Of David]

To believe in a god is a religious belief. It's monotheism. It's a religious point of view that excludes polytheists and nontheists. The constitution prohibits the government from favoring one religious point of view over another.

Furthermore, when the teacher leads the kids in the pledge the teacher is teaching that a monotheist god exists. This is the government teaching a monotheistic point of view above all others.

Would you like to read the original Newdow decision. It explains all this.

Here

To believe in God is to believe in reality. God is not a religion.

 

[crazyfingers]

To believe in God is to believe in reality. God is not a religion.

Belief in god is a religious point of view. You have no evidence that a god exists. What you have is faith. Please learn to tell the difference.

 

[nadroj1985]

To believe in God is to believe in reality. God is not a religion.

No, God in himself is not a religion. That is not at all what I am saying. I am merely saying that God is directly related to matters of religion, and that the words "Under God" are therefore related to religion. And you're statement that I should "get out from amongst his people" is the antithesis of what God stands for. God is inclusive, not exclusive. Please, if you have your opinions that is fine, but do not make the dangerous statement that someone should go away if they disagree with something another Christian says.

 

[Key Of David]

Belief in god is a religious point of view. You have no evidence that a god exists. What you have is faith. Please learn to tell the difference.

God is not faith, He is reality. The evidence is in everything around you that exists. He is especially evident in His people. Like I said before...He is not going anywhere because a few freakish notions of silliness. Any Christian who dares utter a word about God (and we have every right to do so), is evidence of God.

Matthew 5:16 - Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glority your Father which is in heaven.

It isn't too late my Christian brothers and sisters....we conquered this country before....and we don't even have to conquer it again.....it is still ours...all we have to do is stand up to silliness....I say VOTE VOTE VOTE!