now that's funny ****.

 

awh CRAP I MENT TO VOTE NO!!

edgar,

 

So every morning, we lead our children in the recitation of a loyalty oath directed towards the national emblem.

...and we're arguing about the WORDING...


Under God, over God, behind God's back, next to God's knees... who cares. I'm against loyalty oaths.


Long Live the Free Republic,
Mike

 

i applied your logic to reality, maybe you didnt know this but the native americans where here before us. Your logic is basicly stating that who ever was here first should have their way (saying christians and catholics). So since your logic is so flawed i applied it in a manner which proves how stupid it is.

 

"Under God" should stay! Whether you like it or not, this nation was founded under the belief in a God. The problem now adays, is everything has to be so PC. We are so worried about offending someone. Like stated in the above posts, "Under God" doesn't specify one God. I'm so tired of the far left and the far right. Make up your own mind and decide!

 

answer me this, if everyone is so pc now, how is it that the pledge never had "under god" in it until the 50's, when the religious right pressured (err lobbied) congress to ammend hte pledge?

HMMMMMM???

answer me that one... And last i checked this country was founded with the sole purpose of allowing freedom of religions and thoughts. OUtside of the control of goverment. (that was the whole reason our founding fathers got kicked the **** out of england)

 

i find it very interesting that when a subject involves GOD people get extremely sensitive or "riled up". i had someone who(said he was an atheist) admit that he doesn't believe in God because he did not want to be accountable to anyone but himself.

i am a Christian and i believe in God. however i will not force what i believe upon others. the origin of the pledge can be debated strongly on both ends. i prefer not to debate on a topic like that when the real underlying theme is the real issue.
and the question can be this- "why is it that saying the pledge that includes the phrase under God so bothersome?" if we remove that from the pledge... whats next? new currency?

i can't lie on how i feel... i am a little disturbed by the thought. but its not like i am surprised. when you have a nation that is headed in a "believe in whatever you think is right" kind of attitude- can u imagine that? millions of people in one country with multi religious(or none) beliefs- that in my opinion can only mean one thing- a recipe for disaster.

das jus me.


aloha from the summit of Mauna Kea

 

1. no but i should make my customers say it(with a revsion) so that way they don't call me later complaining about a "problem" when they haven't taken the time to read the owners manual... (i sell subarus)

2. i was born in 1975 i said the allegiance. i loved my country then. and i understood how important it was to say it. like saying "i love you". to some its just some phrase...and to some it means something special.

aloha from the summit of Mauna Kea

 

question for all of you history buffs...

it is a fact that the "under God" phrase was included in the 50s

but when did this idea of church and state come about, and where is it on our national doctrines? i am thinking that it was brought up in the Federalist papers but only come into play much later through legal precedents (long after the birth of our nation)

**************

btw, anybody attend the post 9-11 peace rally at UC Davis (in Oct of 2001)? it pissed me off that people were talking so much smack about our flag. i am not in the Cult of Mao, and I will not plaster our flag everywhere as if I were some hardcore patriot (read: nationalistic dupe). however, to me the flag represents endless possibilities for endless people. granted, we have done plenty of wrong. but let's not discount all of the good.

anyways, at that rally, after hearing grips of hardcore leftists rail against the flag, i got up and spoke about the message of Christ. and admittedly, many many Christians misrepresent what Christ was all about. Christ was a man of peace, and broke down rigid boundaries between legalistic religious paradigms (Pharisees) and common people, breached the normative gender lines (the woman at the well; the prostitute who was saved from being stoned when Christ called out all those who were ready to kill this woman), and the list goes on and on. he was a true socialist, not a Republican, not a capitalist, and not George W.

my .02 and I'm out

btw, it is awesome that we live in a country where we can debate these issues without fear of recrimination.

 

aww pooi i voted wrong, lol i read the questions wrong. i meant to say no

 

what makes me mad is the fact that it wasnt in the pledge for years and years, but during the 50's it was added. It doesnt need to be there, it should be removed for that reason alone. And majority of the religious people in this country dont even know that, they think it was there from the get go.

 

^ dre, were you at UCD in the fall of 01?

 

Seriously? I think that's what makes this country so great - having the right to have a difference of opinion as to what you think is right. Not one naroow view of what is right and what is wrong. Freedom of religion is a good thing, mmmkay?

 

dub i didnt go to ucd i just lived there...



and gdogg

whats it to you if someone doesnt think god exists? or if they think god is a fat asian man with a bald head?

Morals have no connection to religion (or at least they dont have to is what i am getting at).

If anything religion is the great polluter of logic and morality, its the great opiate of the masses.

 

so what your saying is that you dont support our actions in iraq?