- #71
Zero
On the other hand, I believe there are certain people who would use the good intentions of people like Nicool, in order to try to undermine democracy.
Should the Pledge of Allegiance Include Under God?
- News
- Thread starter Nicool003
- Start date
The Pledge of Allegiance has been a controversial topic for many years, with some people arguing that it should be changed while others are passionate about keeping it as it is. Some believe that changing it would be disrespectful to the country and those who have fought for it. Others argue that the pledge is outdated and unnecessary, and that its inclusion of "under God" is offensive to those who do not believe in a Christian God. The pledge was originally created in 1892 by Francis Bellamy, a Christian Socialist, and the words "under God" were added in 1954. Many argue that the pledge is taught to children at a young age, before they can truly understand its meaning, and that it promotes a sense of blind
On the other hand, I believe there are certain people who would use the good intentions of people like Nicool, in order to try to undermine democracy.
- #72
Dissident Dan
- 238
- 2
I'm glad that you realize that it was added in in a religioius manner. I think (but I'm not sure) that it was Eisenhower who said something like "Now, every child will [something something] the Almighty."
But I find your saying that it is not religious a horrible argument. "Oh, my god" is an exclamation that just comes out. "under god" is not an exclamation. It has premeditation and meaning. If it is not religious, then please tell me what else it could possibly mean, and please convince me that most people take it that way.
- #73
Zero
If it doesn't mean anything religious, then why is there so much fervor to keep it around? No one has ever included 'by heck' in a patriotic pledge before, to my knowledge!
- #74
Dissident Dan
- 238
- 2
Good point.
- #75
Zero
So, either it is government-sponsored religious endorsement, which is illegal...or it is the semantic equivalent of 'darn tootin'!', in which case no one should care if it is removed!
- #76
kat
- 42
- 0
So...how do those who support removing "God" from the pledge of allegiance..in schools, in particular, as well as other places..how do you propose enforcing this? After having said "under God" for centuries..I don't find myself saying it otherwise because someone else dictates I should do so.
- #77
Zero
Kat, if you have been saying the Pledgfe with 'under God' in it for centuries(since it has only existed in that form for 50 years, and you don't look a single day over 150), you've got bigger problems, don't you?
And how does your personal inconvenience affect what the law says?
- #78
kat
- 42
- 0
Lol, sorry...now that I've had a cup o' coffee...make that decades! =)
My personal invonvenience is an aside, I doubt that MY anything has a great impact on national policy. However, how a law is implemented has a great impact, and I'm curious how you (and others) see this law enforced? Or is this just a feel good movement?
- #79
Zero
I say you implement it the way that you would anything else like this. You put out press releases, you hire a PR team, and then...you start throwing teachers out on their butts when they break the law.
- #80
Dissident Dan
- 238
- 2
Well, I wouldn't say to throw them out on their butts, unless they're belligerent repeat offenders. Otherwise, make the corrective measures something involving a fine and/or probation or suspension.
- #81
Zero
Well, ok..some leniency at first...like a 6 month probabtion or something.
- #82
FZ+
- 1,604
- 3
Er... I don't think you need to punish. Simply change it from all texts. If someone add the words "under God" when they say it themselves, then big deal. Just have whoever leads it or something miss it out. If they don't they are not saying it officially. The whole pledge is mostly symbolic anyways. I don't think they had much trouble when they added it in the first place, so I dare say there won't be too many rebel pledgers hiding out...
- #83
Dissident Dan
- 238
- 2
With all the stink that people are making about the Newdow thing, many people will probably feel outraged if "under god" is taken out and resort illegalities.
- #84
Zero
Oh yeah...isn't it wonderful when 'patriots' act like slime for the sake of 'morals'?
- #85
LogicalAtheist
The supreme court ruled that it needed to be removed.
What is the current status of this, anyone know?
What is the current status of this, anyone know?
- #86
kat
- 42
- 0
What's the "Newdow" thing?
Fine them? Probation? belligerent repeat offenders?
Lol, have you ever dealt with the teachers union?
so..5 year old Johnny and Suzy continue to say "under God" because mommy and daddy do..and it makes your atheist child uncomfortable..then what?
Fine them? Probation? belligerent repeat offenders?
Lol, have you ever dealt with the teachers union?
so..5 year old Johnny and Suzy continue to say "under God" because mommy and daddy do..and it makes your atheist child uncomfortable..then what?
- #87
LogicalAtheist
Excuse me?
Let me explain something.
America is founded on documents which define this countries parameters.
When a statement (law, consititution) is broken, it defies the rules of our country.
When a person breaks these rules, there are punishments.
Having the phrase "under god" in our governments statement breaks rules set aside earlier.
Earlier rules preside over newer ones.
It needs to be fixed, otherwise our government is breaking the paramaters of our country.
It's not a should or shouldn't or right or wrong.
Surely I wish I could set the government on fire for what they do. Sure I know that it'd serve humanity better if they died.
But it's illogical to fight the under god debate because of what you say should happen, or what you say is right or wrong. That's BS and has no place in reality.
The proper argument is that it breaks the law.
If the government changes the law saw it doesn't break the law so be it. Then it's fine by me on those standards.
Right or wrong is for pansies. Those in power will defy those not in power, it's the nature of power.
- #88
kat
- 42
- 0
lol, excuse me?
Irrelevent of what this country may be "found on" it is most certainly dependant upon case law. It's always good to do your due diligence and look at ramifications, irrelevant of good-bad, right-wrong. Also, legality is usually based upon good-bad, right-wrong, negative-positive, beneficial or detrimental to society bleah bleah etc.
so, save me the speach already and answer my question:
- #89
LogicalAtheist
You warranted the speech because of your attitude and lack of well speaking.
Furthermore, if you read your question, it makes no sense in the english language. Restate it so it's a REAL question.
Furthermore, if you read your question, it makes no sense in the english language. Restate it so it's a REAL question.
- #90
Zero
Then you tell those 5 year olds to shut up...you wouldn't allow them to use racial slurs, would you?
- #91
Zero
LA, you're done for the night...hit the bleachers, ok!
I don't agree with Kat, but it is still a good question, one that needs to be answered.
- #92
LogicalAtheist
I absolutely don't understand her question one bit.
Furthermore, it's my duty as a teacher to disallow people to spread falsities to others.
- #93
Zero
You absolutely need to re-read the question...and it isn't a teacher's duty to do any more than teach! This is one good reason for the removal of religious speech from government workers, so no one has to interpret what their job is.
- #94
LogicalAtheist
Ha? I read it 3 times. It makes no sense.
Don't tell me to re-read it.
- #95
Zero
Should I tell you to re-learn reading then? YOU ARE DONE HERE!
Go be belligerant somewhere else, ok? In other words, if you have nothing else to contribute here, stop posting here. Any further off-topic posts will be deleted.
- #96
LogicalAtheist
*edited for being off-topic*
Last edited by a moderator:
- #97
LogicalAtheist
*edited for being off-topic*
- #98
LogicalAtheist
I read it, it makes no sense. It's not a proper sentence...
"5 year old Johnny and Suzy continue to say "under God" because mommy and daddy do..and it makes your atheist child uncomfortable..then what? "
whose atheist child?
what do you mean then what?
then what for who?
Whose kids are these?
Answer these and I'll attempt to speak on your rewritten question.
"5 year old Johnny and Suzy continue to say "under God" because mommy and daddy do..and it makes your atheist child uncomfortable..then what? "
whose atheist child?
what do you mean then what?
then what for who?
Whose kids are these?
Answer these and I'll attempt to speak on your rewritten question.
- #99
Zero
This isn't an English class, but I guess I can re-write it for you in proper sentences.
"5 year old Johnny and Suzy continue to say "under God", because their parents do. It makes an atheist child uncomfortable. What should the parents of the atheist child do? What should teh teacher and teh school do?"
Does that meet your approval?
- #100
LogicalAtheist
You aren't the one who asked the question. You aren't the one who I want to hear it from. I'll wait till Kat explains as I can see a few versions this question could take.
- #101
Dissident Dan
- 238
- 2
Well, then nothing. If their doing not is a kind manner, then they have the right to do that. It's not government-sponsored. Now, if they're doing it to taunt others, then that's something that should be reprimanded. Of course, it would be up to the teacher's discretion. I'm just giving my opinion on how I would handle it.
- #102
Zero
Yeah...well, say for instance that they say it together at the flag before school...not sponsored speech, they can do it. IF they have a Pledge reading in the classroom, and they shout out 'UNDER GOD', they can be disciplined for being disruptive.
- #103
LogicalAtheist
So, two kids say "under god" cuzz their parents taught them to.
1. Where are they saying this? When and where...
2. The assertion that an atheist child would be uncomfortable. If you're religious Kat, then perhaps you biasly added this.
Normally, it's religious children who are uncomfortable with any other children who do not share their exact religion. In my experience with atheist children (ages 6 to 14) they're very confident, and don't have a problem with religious people whatsoever.
But, if we were to assume an atheist child was uncomfortable, the answer is they should be conforted.
It's against the law for a public school teacher to assert a religion for the school.
But you failed to declare where and when this was being done. That's why I can't answer you, way to vague.
- #104
damgo
Whatever... who cares? It's completely a symbolic thing; just change it officially. Most people will switch over sooner or later, and if the 4th grade teacher at Robert E. Lee Elementary School in Hicksville, Mississippi wants to keep saying 'under God,' let him. 
- #105
LogicalAtheist
Originally posted by damgo
Whatever... who cares? It's completely a symbolic thing; just change it officially. Most people will switch over sooner or later, and if the 4th grade teacher at Robert E. Lee Elementary School in Hicksville, Mississippi wants to keep saying 'under God,' let him.
Let him break the law?
What if he wants to touch the children? That's factually only breaking the law. Only opinions say it's "right or wrong"?
Where do we stop from punishing people from breaking the law?