Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Alonzo Fyfe · 07-14-2002, 05:13 AM

The easiest type of battle to win -- in spite of the initial opposition -- is one in which the truth of the matter can easily be presented in simple, short, easy to remember sound bite and to repeat that sound bite as often as possible.

The Pledge ruling is one such case.

Here are two examples of the same basic message.

The Pledge as written identifies the four enemies of the Republic as Atheism, rebellion, tyranny, and injustice. I resent that. I have the right to resent it. And you have no right to force my child to listen to this message every day, even if she is not forced to repeat it.

Or...

The Pledge as written identifies the four enemies of the Republic as Atheism, rebellion, tyranny, and injustice. There can be no clearer example of a violation of the first Amendment than for the government to define a view about God as one of the four great enemies of the Republic.

Note: If you think that the message needs to be made a little clearer, you can present the argument this way:

The Pledge as written identifies the four enemies of the Republic as Atheism (under God), rebellion (Indivisible), tyranny (with Liberty), and injustice (and Justice for All). There can be no clearer example of a violation of the first Amendment than for the government to define a view about God as one of the four great enemies of the Republic.

This is the message that I have been using. If you can think of a good comeback to this, then please let me know.

The most common comeback that I have experienced is for a person to say, "having under God in the pledge does not say anything against atheism."

Which, again, has an easy response...

"So, the words 'with libery and justice for all' really doesn't say anything bad about tyranny and injustice."

GaryP · 07-14-2002, 05:37 AM

I like it!

excreationist · 07-14-2002, 06:47 AM

You can write to newspapers and magazines (like Time magazine) as well with a snappy line similar to that one.

Alonzo Fyfe · 07-14-2002, 08:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by excreationist:
I have found it quite useful in emails to TV news shows -- it is just the type of short, snappy answer that they like to read on TV.

Autonemesis · 07-14-2002, 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Alonzo Fyfe:
This is the message that I have been using. If you can think of a good comeback to this, then please let me know.

[puts on theist hat]
You atheists squeal when we show you where the plain language of the Declaration of Independence says this is a God fearin' country. The Declaration isn't in the Constitution any more than the Pledge, so what do you think you're trying to get away with, you godless commie scumbag?
[removes theist hat]

Alonzo Fyfe · 07-14-2002, 09:16 AM

Kind Bud:

You are correct that this statement will have no effect on people who actually believe that Atheism is one of the four great evils against which this country has dedicated itself.

Here, I question whether such a response has much hope of being effective -- or whether it will serve to identify a small group of militant extremists -- much like the KKK -- that the average American moderate can then marginalize and ignore.

Autonemesis · 07-14-2002, 09:31 AM

I think my tongue-in-cheek charicature misled you, Alonzo. What about the objection that the Pledge isn't in the Constitution anymore than the Declaration of Independence. So if Pledge supporters can't cite the DoI to support their case, on the grounds it is extra-constitutional and therefore cannot be considered official policy, then neither can the 9th Circuit supporters object to the Pledge, on the same grounds.

I see that one coming, or at least I'd have thought of it if I opposed the ruling. How do you respond to my "simulated rebuttal".

[ July 14, 2002: Message edited by: Kind Bud ]

07-14-2002, 10:26 AM

The Pledge of Allegiance is a congress passed law. The Constitution protects us from laws that violate the rights we get from the bill of rights. So, the constitution applies to the law, whereas the declaration isnt a law.

If there was a segregation law passed, we couldnt object to it because its extra constitutional? Thats horrible horrible logic. (no theist cracks please, lets keep this clean)

Alonzo Fyfe · 07-14-2002, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kind Bud:
What about the objection that the Pledge isn't in the Constitution anymore than the Declaration of Independence.

The issue does not concern the Pledge itself, but a set of laws that culminate in a requirement that a teacher stand before a class each day and say, in effect, "All of you who are not atheists repeat after me: 'The Republic faces four great evils which we hereby pledge to fight against: Atheism, rebellion, tyranny, and injustice."

No individual or group should be prohibited from making such a statement if they actually believe it -- just as it should not be illegal for the KKK to pledge themselves to forming an all-white society.

At issue is whether it is constitional for the government to name Atheism as one of the four great evils against which every loyal citizen should pledge to fight.

07-14-2002, 05:13 AM	#1
Alonzo Fyfe Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: 920B Milo Circle Lafayette, CO Posts: 3,515	How to win the pledge fight. The easiest type of battle to win -- in spite of the initial opposition -- is one in which the truth of the matter can easily be presented in simple, short, easy to remember sound bite and to repeat that sound bite as often as possible. The Pledge ruling is one such case. Here are two examples of the same basic message. The Pledge as written identifies the four enemies of the Republic as Atheism, rebellion, tyranny, and injustice. I resent that. I have the right to resent it. And you have no right to force my child to listen to this message every day, even if she is not forced to repeat it. Or... The Pledge as written identifies the four enemies of the Republic as Atheism, rebellion, tyranny, and injustice. There can be no clearer example of a violation of the first Amendment than for the government to define a view about God as one of the four great enemies of the Republic. Note: If you think that the message needs to be made a little clearer, you can present the argument this way: The Pledge as written identifies the four enemies of the Republic as Atheism (under God), rebellion (Indivisible), tyranny (with Liberty), and injustice (and Justice for All). There can be no clearer example of a violation of the first Amendment than for the government to define a view about God as one of the four great enemies of the Republic. This is the message that I have been using. If you can think of a good comeback to this, then please let me know. The most common comeback that I have experienced is for a person to say, "having under God in the pledge does not say anything against atheism." Which, again, has an easy response... "So, the words 'with libery and justice for all' really doesn't say anything bad about tyranny and injustice."

07-14-2002, 09:31 AM	#7
Autonemesis Contributor Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: I've left FRDB for good, due to new WI&P policy Posts: 12,048	I think my tongue-in-cheek charicature misled you, Alonzo. What about the objection that the Pledge isn't in the Constitution anymore than the Declaration of Independence. So if Pledge supporters can't cite the DoI to support their case, on the grounds it is extra-constitutional and therefore cannot be considered official policy, then neither can the 9th Circuit supporters object to the Pledge, on the same grounds. I see that one coming, or at least I'd have thought of it if I opposed the ruling. How do you respond to my "simulated rebuttal". [ July 14, 2002: Message edited by: Kind Bud ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-14-2002, 05:37 AM	#2
GaryP Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Lancaster, OH Posts: 1,792	I like it!

07-14-2002, 06:47 AM	#3
excreationist Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Australia Posts: 4,886	You can write to newspapers and magazines (like Time magazine) as well with a snappy line similar to that one.

07-14-2002, 09:16 AM	#6
Alonzo Fyfe Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: 920B Milo Circle Lafayette, CO Posts: 3,515	Kind Bud: You are correct that this statement will have no effect on people who actually believe that Atheism is one of the four great evils against which this country has dedicated itself. Here, I question whether such a response has much hope of being effective -- or whether it will serve to identify a small group of militant extremists -- much like the KKK -- that the average American moderate can then marginalize and ignore.

07-14-2002, 10:26 AM	#8
himynameisPwn Guest Posts: n/a	The Pledge of Allegiance is a congress passed law. The Constitution protects us from laws that violate the rights we get from the bill of rights. So, the constitution applies to the law, whereas the declaration isnt a law. If there was a segregation law passed, we couldnt object to it because its extra constitutional? Thats horrible horrible logic. (no theist cracks please, lets keep this clean)

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.