Pledge of Allegence

[pegan]

Bad enough that the two party system makes it impossible to elect representatives who aren't Republicans or Democrats ( and very few who aren't rich white male Protestants).

Too true...although black, female, or atheist candidates probably wouldn't get the top vote. Pity really, they'd probably have mine.

~*Pegan*~

 

[mahayana]

The answer to this would be to apportion representation according to the number of votes cast for each party. It's a different system than the US, more of a coalition approach to representation, more democratic in my opinion. Two party crushes the real views of a large part ofthe public, makes a third party's views irrelevant to the ruling one, causes many not to participate in elections.

But the only constitutional change congress is considering is banning gay marriage...maybe another day for this one?

 

[Ardhanariswar]

people need to grow up and stop whining and realize that gay marriage is an imporant issue.

the pledge keeps changing. so what. frankly i couldnt care less. profess you faith else where. or if they keep it, then hold your tongue so you wont say it. i mean, you obviously werent complaining before this issue was brought up.

i dont mean you, you. i meant all those people who whine constantly and dont realize that there are bigger problems to be addressed like aids, homlessness, and political stuff...u kno what i mean.

 

[Linus]

Gerani1248, I agree that it really is not important. If people don't want to say "under God," then they don't have to. I mean really, even if you are forced to stand up and say the pledge, no one will complain if you don't say that part (and most people won't even notice).

Besides, if you're gonna change that, then you might as well change everything else that has a religious tint to it. Why not change the name of the city of L.A.? Los Ageles is spanish for "the angels." What if someone living there doesn't believe in angels? It really doesn't make any sense.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

I agree with you, Gerani and Linus.

mahayana-- you bring up some great points about our political system. Go here http://www.religiousforums.com/parkweb/viewtopic.php?t=886 for some more discussion of the two party issue.

 

[Nga_Believe]

Alright, here's my issue with the last few posts: You all are saying that people who don't believe in God or don't want "under God" in the pledge should just omit that part when they say it, just leave it out. I have 2 problems with that:
1) It sets non-believers apart and we develop this unofficial second version of the pledge. We no longer have "one nation under God" but rather "one nation, half of which is under God and half of which isn't."
2) It isn't just about saying the pledge. It's about this idea that our nation which prides itself on freedom of religion has a pledge that contradicts that same freedom. We have a separation between church and state and our pledge doesn't reflect that separation.

But I also must say, as much as I don't think it should be there, I think that are far bigger and more important issues than the pledge, it's not like anyone is going to die because of it, but it still is inconsistent with the ideals our country was founded upon.

 

[Pah]

Can an atheist say "Amen"? - Well, I do for the preceding post.

The history of the phrase is that it was inserted in response to the godless, atheistic Soviet Union. It conveys a meaning of authority as well as status - both being wrong for the principles of the American nation.

 

[AtheistAJ]

All federal documents containing the word "god" should be changed as to not. Like before baby boomers.

 

[indecisive cookies!!!]

All federal documents containing the word "god" should be changed as to not. Like before baby boomers.

it doesn't bother me that they are in there, but yes i would like it changed.

 

[Real Sorceror]

What? I can't vote "I don't care"?
This really isn't an issue to me. Niether is the "In God we Trust" on the dollar. I just see this as another thing that no-life busy-bodies want to rabble about.

Can an atheist say "Amen"? - Well, I do for the preceding post.

More importantly, what should I say when an athiest sneezes?

 

[spacemonkey]

There was a question in an e-mail the other day "Why won't they allow the Ten Commandments in the same courthouse where everyone has to swear on the Bible before testifying?"

Have you ever been to court? You don't have to place your hand on a Bible, nor swear to God before you testify if you chose not to, asking instead for an affirmation.

 

[mostly harmless]

I think the words should be cut for the simple reason that not everyone believes in any kind of god.

 

[painted wolf]

just as an aside... I don't like the pledge at all anyway.
I will not pledge my allegance to a symbol of anything. Symbols can be corrupted and empty recitiation of a hollow pledge is no way to show loyalty to anything.

My patriotism needs no cloth banner, and no mindless ritual. :fight:

wa:do

 

[kateyes]

I don't have a problem with the pledge itself--and despite all the arguments about this being a Christian nation and the founding fathers intending it that way--I think it is important to remember the founding fathers didn't include the line "under God" in the original pledge--it was added in the 1950's. I am consider myself Christian-but don't think those 2 words have a place in the pledge.

 

[Toblerone2]

just as an aside... I don't like the pledge at all anyway.
I will not pledge my allegance to a symbol of anything. Symbols can be corrupted and empty recitiation of a hollow pledge is no way to show loyalty to anything.

My patriotism needs no cloth banner, and no mindless ritual. :fight:

wa:do

Well said Painted Wolf, especially as you'd be pledging alliegence to all the invaders who came in, took over your country, and forced you out of most of it. I can't imagine any native american finding meaning in this.

Aside from that, I don't like the addition of "under God" simply because of the motivations of those who added it. It's not like they added it for unselfish reasons.

 

[dbakerman76]

I would go a step further and get rid of the pledge of allegiance altogether. It is in esssence the creation of a state religion with flag worship at its center.

Why a "free" country would ever ask its citizens to proclaim their faithfulness to its founding principles is beyond me. As soon as I understood the words, I stopped saying the pledge.

 

[Random]

Take it out as a mark of respect for the diversity of opinion and belief that America is supposed to stand for.

 

[Booko]

Have you ever been to court? You don't have to place your hand on a Bible, nor swear to God before you testify if you chose not to, asking instead for an affirmation.

In the courts here in my county in Georgia, they don't ask anyone to swear to God or place their hand on a Bible.

Which is probably wise...because if that were the general practice and someone just did the affirmation, it could easily prejudice jury members.

 

[spacemonkey]

In the courts here in my county in Georgia, they don't ask anyone to swear to God or place their hand on a Bible.

Which is probably wise...because if that were the general practice and someone just did the affirmation, it could easily prejudice jury members.

Its been awile since I've been to court but its good to know they are doing away with the whole Bible thing altogeather.

 

[Ulver]

The Pledge of Allegence should just be done away with. It's a relic of American Nationalism.