|
Post by writer on Mar 15, 2008 0:43:54 GMT -5
Thats my response to that.
BTW you invoke God's name all the time when you shout. "Goddamnit!" or "God!" or "God bless you" Everyone evokes God's name.
|
|
|
Post by psylum on Mar 15, 2008 1:05:20 GMT -5
I know I just got done saying I wasn't going to make a big deal, but being misquoted gets my attention.
I mentioned that it was an invocation, and it doesn't matter why under God was added, but it's still wrong. The end or intent does not justify the action.
Also, I am aware that people invoke god when they say those things, it's neither here nor there though. Saying "God Bless you!" "Goddamnit!" or any other invocaton is a choice made by people who believe in the existence of God to invoke his name in the hope that he will bless or dang something. They are not forced to invoke him in order to show loyalty to their country.
|
|
|
Post by writer on Mar 15, 2008 11:44:06 GMT -5
Again were not force to do anything what teachers do students is illegal but we are not force to say the pledge.
Honesty I think we should veto the whole pledge we have no need for it now. It was just a way for the Carthy reigme to have control
I am just pointing out the hypocracy of you saying "it's wrong to invoke gods name in a pledge" but perfectly ok for everyone else to invoke Gods name every where else. Just not a in a pledge.
|
|
|
Post by psylum on Mar 15, 2008 17:10:07 GMT -5
There's no hypocracy in saying that it's ok to invoke God's name by choice but that it's wrong to be mandated by the state to invoke his name, Which is what the pledge does in it's current form.
It would have also been nice knowing that saying the pledge was a choice when it actually mattered for me, when I was being required to say it.
|
|
|
Post by darkblood_alchemist on Mar 15, 2008 23:26:56 GMT -5
Like GUG was saying, there will always be a group of people that will be not be pleased. Drama always occur in any select group. Unless one is going to gain a serious benefit over that being removed from the pledge, I just dont feel it's worth breaking your neck over something so miniscule as this. People will always make public references to God, there is no stopping that. If it bothers those that simply don't believe in God, move on, its as simple as that. The issue is not that "God" is being said in public, but that it is being said in a way that directly relates it to the government/state. It is true that people will always make public references to God, and that's perfectly fine; in fact it's covered by the Constitution (Freedom of Speech, First Amendment). However, the government's reference to God is a different matter; it is a violation of the Constitution and the moral rights of the citizens/people of America. The government cannot support or hinder a religion, but by mentioning God's name it is supporting the monotheistic faiths. Removing it would not hinder religion, people can still practice however they wish, but would make it neutral to all faiths. I am just pointing out the hypocracy of you saying "it's wrong to invoke gods name in a pledge" but perfectly ok for everyone else to invoke Gods name every where else. Just not a in a pledge. It is not hypocrisy: a pledge to one's nation is very different from speaking in public. A pledge is created by the government and should not be partial to a particular group of people. In public, people are free to say whatever they like since it is their opinion and their beliefs.
|
|
|
Post by writer on Mar 16, 2008 2:21:25 GMT -5
Again did anyone miss my post on the reason the pledge was made?
agian it kinda hypocrital to be all anal over something so minor as "Under god" if thats the case why are not going all apes*hit over "In god we trust" on our currency.
Nopebody seems to be bothered with that?
|
|
|
Post by Grimmjow of the Funk on Mar 16, 2008 8:34:39 GMT -5
Thats my response to that. BTW you invoke God's name all the time when you shout. "Goddamnit!" or "God!" or "God bless you" Everyone evokes God's name. yeah but commmunism isn't that big of a deal anymore so why is it still there. besides saying phrases like oh my god or goddamit is mandatory like the pledge is in many schools.
|
|
|
Post by writer on Mar 16, 2008 13:18:06 GMT -5
I'm pretty much agnostic-boadering atheistic. The only reason I am not an atheist is because I have been in so much spiritual mumbo-jumbo it's not funny. It's not a fad like most of the athiest here who are rebeling against mom and dad. I have private reasons which I am not going to deal out to a fourm (a very ignorant forum)
Moving on. So for real atheists, does saying "under god" burn like garlic? Do you burst into flames and die if you say those words? Serious whats so hedious about saying "God"? After all, if you can curse with his name and don't die why not just say it and get it over it. Without the butthurt.
"Wahh I'm a atheist...don't want to say non-existian god's name wahhh" thats all I am hearing. I don't know whats the huge big deal because it's sentence in archiac all pledge. If you are still butthurting, why just stand up and just mouth the words or blend into the crowd and don't say anything. Honestly the only time I ever say the pledge was when I was proud of my country. But after high school I just stood up and had my hand over my heart and said nothing. Honestly atheists and people that are whining over something as completly mundane, don't you have bigger fish to fry?
Also you guys have it easy. In St James you have to say the hail mary. I honesty want to go to the statue of mary and say "F-you." All she is nothing more that a cheap-arse Gaia-figure. Something for the monks to jack off to. She has no place at all, she's a goddess figure maqurade as Christian figure.
Thats BS. [/lament]
|
|
|
Post by bagpipe turtle on Mar 16, 2008 15:10:12 GMT -5
^I'm agnostic also, nearly athiest, but I'm not doing it to rebel from my parents (they're that way, too...)
The reason I don't think the under God part should be in it is not because I don't want to say God's name (I say it all the time), but because it is promoting one religion when it shouldn't. I don't know about other people, but I'm not "butthurting" over saying "one nation under God". I've said this before: Under God shouldn't be in the Pledge because it's unconstitutional, but our country has bigger problems than this.
(And I don't see what the Mary has to do with this...)
|
|
|
Post by darkblood_alchemist on Mar 16, 2008 16:23:03 GMT -5
Bard Child -- There's no need to use such an offensive tone. Just because the phrase doesn't offend you personally doesn't mean it doesn't offend others. If you think this topic is too inconsequential to argue, then you don't have to. And as for what you said about the phrase "in God we trust", that is also a controversial issue, but I saw no need to bring it up since it is a different debate for a different thread. @bagpipe turtle -- I completely agree with the point you just made, and also feel that there is a moral side to the issue in addition to the Constitutional/legal side which is a large basis for my point of view.
|
|
|
Post by psylum on Mar 16, 2008 16:33:42 GMT -5
Bard Child- "In God we trust" should not be on our currency, and for that matter "So help you God" should not be part of taking the witness stand in the judicial process(there are states that you can't even take the witness stand if you don't recignuise God, or at least you could not untill recentally. I need to double check), the ten commandments should not be displayed in any government body venue, and most importantly any form of faith-based creationism should not be tought side-by-side evolution. These however are not the subject of the debate.
There aren't more important things to be protesting because it's all part of the same problem, State mandated invocation of a faith-based deity, which is a violation of The First Amendment. "Under God" in the Pledge of Aligience is the subject of this debate however, so this is what we're talking about.
|
|
|
Post by writer on Mar 17, 2008 13:04:11 GMT -5
Bard Child- "In God we trust" should not be on our currency, and for that matter "So help you God" should not be part of taking the witness stand in the judicial process(there are states that you can't even take the witness stand if you don't recignuise God, or at least you could not untill recentally. I need to double check), the ten commandments should not be displayed in any government body venue, and most importantly any form of faith-based creationism should not be tought side-by-side evolution. These however are not the subject of the debate. There aren't more important things to be protesting because it's all part of the same problem, State mandated invocation of a faith-based deity, which is a violation of The First Amendment. "Under God" in the Pledge of Aligience is the subject of this debate however, so this is what we're talking about. But it's all the same. If your all crying over something so godarn mundane. You should whine over those words too (it's not abortion or racial percitcution it godarn word). It's premoting religion you say. You know what, guess what our nations founders where? Christants, guess also what. Christianty is our national religion. We're suppose to premote our nation's religion. (and let the whinging begin) Honestly who give a fart? It's been tradition for 200+ years. Nobody has been killed over something mundane nobody died. It's a word, and you butt hurting over something that in all reality has no hold on our lives. It's not life changing or socialital shattering. It's word. And it hold as much strength and power as saying "goddamit" thats it. You invoked gods name, we do it every day. Saying under an archicaich pledge, and not believing in god hurts no one. It honestly doesn't matter in the long run The point with bring up mary is. I got punished if I didin't say the rosery or Hail Mary. I hated the cathlioc hypocrasy, but I got in huge trouble for not saying. So I said it anyway and advoid trouble. In the long run it was eaiser for me to say the prayers and not caring then to make a big deal over it. Mary-rip-off-Gaia momma has no hold over me. Also I'll give anyone Karma if they can tell me what we use to swear on, Give you a hint, the word Testify comes from it.
|
|
|
Post by username on Mar 17, 2008 16:11:18 GMT -5
Sorry to dissapoint you, but we are not a Christian nation. Just because the majority of citizens are Christian, doesnt make the entire nation Christian. If we were a Christian nation, we wouldn't be having this debate. (Besides, many of the founding fathers were more Deist than Cristian anyway) And that's the problem with having "under God" in the pledge. It makes the assumption that we are a Christian nation. Satisfying some, while alienating others. That's all you get out of having the nation be considered a Christian nation. All that does is make it feel exclusive and alienating to non christians, a massive chunk of the population. Besides, I bet if it were "under Allah" you wouldn't be arguing for it to be in the pledge anyway.
|
|
|
Post by writer on Mar 17, 2008 17:05:44 GMT -5
Again I don't give two craps if under Odin is in it. Or Under big huge C*ock. Seriously being agnostic I wouldn't care.
any yes Christianty is our nation religion. No we are not "Christian nation" but under cenus Christianty is our national religion.
again. People are making a huge as*s deal over something so minor.
If you don't want to swear on a bible because your not christiant. Swear on your balls thats what the Romans did
|
|
|
Post by username on Mar 17, 2008 17:12:09 GMT -5
Didn't know your own religous affiliations, seeing as I'm too lazy to read over the whole thread
Just saying, the government throwing christianity all over the place doesnt really do anything other than alienate those who aren't christian. It's not the 50s anymore.
|
|