Little-Acorn
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2006
- Messages
- 216
- Reaction score
- 5
- Location
- San Diego
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
You can and I'm sure you do. What's the problem?aps said:Why can't I pledge my allegiance without bringing religion into it?
aps said:I would love to see "under God" taken out of the Pledge. Sorry, but I don't believe in God and my love for this country is not remotely based on that. Why can't I pledge my allegiance without bringing religion into it?
Saboteur said:The words "under God" are not original to the pledge. They were added during McCarthy's post WWII 'Red Scare' era.
I'm not surpirsed that the 'fundies' have ignored that fact though.
I have an idea. When reciting the pledge, just don't say "under God."aps said:Oh, I am fully aware that they were added. Had they been there the entire time the pledge was in existence, I would want them kept there. Really. But the fact that they were NOT there originally is what makes me want them taken out. Sorry, but my allegiance to this country does not remotely rest on God (who doesn't exist).
You mean allow people to choose to say or not say whatever they want?? We can do that in this country??? What a concept!!! Based on the kidiots in the OP, I'd say that we weren't allowed to say anthing that might possibly offend someone. Wow, Freedom of Speech. We need something like that in this country instead of having people in authority telling us what we can and can't say.CurrentAffairs said:I have an idea. When reciting the pledge, just don't say "under God."
Problem solved.
CurrentAffairs said:I have an idea. When reciting the pledge, just don't say "under God."
Problem solved.
So if the words are stricken, do you think I'm going to stop saying them? It's moot.aps said:I know that sounds like an easy solution, but tell me why we should keep words in there that were not written with the pledge? Again, if they were part of the original pledge, I would want them kept there. The pledge was written in 1892. 62 years later, the words "under God" were added. "Under God" has been in the pledge for less years than it was without those words (52 years). Take them out.
Once they're out, you can add the words "under God."
http://history.vineyard.net/pledge.htm
CurrentAffairs said:So if the words are stricken, do you think I'm going to stop saying them? It's moot.
I understand they were added later. I was raised saying under God. Do you think I'll just cease if the words are ever stricken?aps said:Do you care to address my question about saying words that were not part of the pledge in the first place?
CurrentAffairs said:I understand they were added later. I was raised saying under God. Do you think I'll just cease if the words are ever stricken?
I use Master Card.Navy Pride said:So you people that are against "Under God" in the pledge going to quit spending american currency becasue it has "Under God" on it too........
Navy Pride said:So you people that are against "Under God" in the pledge going to quit spending american currency becasue it has "Under God" on it too........
saggyjones said:It shouldn't be required to say the pledge in schools or any public meetings, etc., but they should have it for people who want to say it. The under God part is completely unnecessary, not because it was added later, but because church and state are supposed to be separate. Defenders of this phrase have told me before that it can mean any god, but why is it capitalized (which means it's specific) and what about people who don't believe in a god? I know, you can simply not say "under God", but why should Christians get to have their own section in the pledge when this country was supposedly founded on equality for everyone?
Just to make it clear, I have no problem with the pledge, besides "under God", and I say it myself.
Why not just let them say it and you don't? Then they're the only ones pledging under God, not you. Taking it out altogether isn't a compromise because then there wouldn't be any time for them to say it between words. And the fact it wasn't origionally in there doesn't imply a necessity to change it back. Not like changing things back to the way the Constitution intended anyway. Tradition is what we have today, there's no reason to revert backwards unless it's a practical reason.aps said:Not at all. I have no problem if you include them.
Mr.Clover said:Aps, I can understand the "Under God" thing, but to completely ban the pledge? C'mon, you can't possibly support that. Banning the pledge violates freedom of speach, the exact same right you are trying to protect. no one said you absolutely HAD to say the pledge, and if you did say the pledge, you didn't have to say the words "Under God". The solution is more simple than you think. And banning the pledge is too radical for my comfort.
Dang! half my post got deleted. oh well, hope this uch makes sense.
Binary_Digit said:Why not just let them say it and you don't? Then they're the only ones pledging under God, not you. Taking it out altogether isn't a compromise because then there wouldn't be any time for them to say it between words. And the fact it wasn't origionally in there doesn't imply a necessity to change it back. Not like changing things back to the way the Constitution intended anyway. Tradition is what we have today, there's no reason to revert backwards unless it's a practical reason.
The people behind this ban are idiots. If they don't want to pledge allegience to "the government" then they can stand there and ****ing be quiet for 45 seconds.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?