Sabine Grant

We yet have to agree on what kind of wine goes in a red sauce...
As far as patriotism is concerned... trying to not be bius but I have found that the words of la Marseillaise have not only remained secular but they express the desire for a nation to remain unoccupied by intruders. We do not recitate any Pledge in my douce France. It is also a definite alien ( no pun intended) thing for me to do to pledge allegiance to a particular regime or government.

If we explore the need people have to reinforce a patriotic notion by carrying an oath to a system, it also means they become vulnerable to the failures of that system. They become an assimilated crowd where individualities are not respected. And the individuality of americans who do not believe in any god or do not consider the Pledge as applying to their own feelings for their own country is IMO not respected in the US.

Maybe it is the product of US history which had to suffer thru a civil war where americans were indeed divided... ( the notion of the indivisible) . A way for a nation to reassure itself that such division will never occur again. Also a way to deny the diversity of ethnicity and mentalities within the US so it can prove the term " melting pot".

Anyone knows what inspired the author of the Pledge? ( the original one).

Ronin

What are your views regarding the rest of that post, Rational BAC?

~ your 60's flashback notwithstanding.

How about not obeying your authority figure...wasn't Jesus a teacher?

I do know what's best and that is the whole point...the government is trying to impose a nationalistic ritual upon my children against what I deem best.

I hope you can, at the very least, perceive that.

Rhea

Thank you for answering. There is a difference, I believe, between hashing things out for the first time and "rehashing" things. If you throw out a statement saying that The MAJORITY of christian people are extremist controlmongers and then think discussing that doesn't make sense then you shouldn't throw it out in the first place.

Please do us all the courtesy of expecting to respond at least one time to queries about the statements that you make.

If you are not willing to respond one time about something you say, then, I respectfully suggest, don't say it. Especially if it is as truly momentous as claiming that the majority of Christians are control freaks with evil intent. That's pretty powerful, don't you think?


So, how do we all get along? Easy, IMO. Keep religions in hearts and churches where it belongs. If we ALL (Christians, Atheists, Buddhists, Hindus, Jews, Muslims, Humanists, Agnostics) ALL fight to keep our country secular, then we can ALL be certain of our rights.

Well, that's easy to say. But the power-grubbing Christians who want to pooh-pooh the experience of others who are facing negative reaction for merely not being Christians (or citizens) are hard to convince.

I submit that power grubbing Christians would never listen to an Atheist. I submit that it will take the rising up of the righteous minority of Christians to do the trick.

As one looks at racial rights and gender rights, it is not until a part of the majority steps over to the side of the oppressed that real progress is made. Because the oppressors feel their victims are worthless (they should just mouth the words and shut up, e.g.) and their opinions and feeling even more so.

I think it takes more of a witnessing of Good Christions to the Majority Bad Christians to make change. I do not exist to them and can make no impact.

Rational BAC

Sabine---------

When you think about it------the whole purpose of the Pledge of Allegiance was to bypass the Constitution of the United States.

Read it with an objective mind. It is all about teaching poor lil chilluns that this nation is INDIVISIBLE even though there is nothing in the Constitution that says it is that way. Read the 10th amendment to the Constitution --------secession has always been and is still now completely Constitutional.

Dammed Yankees sucked us in pretty good on that one. Do not bother to make an amendment to the Constitution saying that the US of A is like the Hotel California ------you can check out but you can never leave.

NOOOOO. It is much easier to have little chilluns recite a stupid pledge saying that this country IS indivisible---------and after saying it 10000 times they will believe it.

That is the problem with the Pledge---not the silly, tacked on McCarthyist "under God" part.

Propoganda pure and simple ----that is what the Pledge is.

Ronin

The "under God" part merely reinforces further divisiveness and should have no place in an institution designed for developing critical thinking skills.

"under God"...what lunacy.

The Other Michael

They seemed to do pretty well so far with Iran and Afghanistan. They have significant power in a number of other countries, and are poised to gain power in others.

Our Constitution is under constant assault by those of a fundementalist bent, and much of that assault is very well funded and organized, as well as being abetted by a number of politicians holding significant positions.

I think there are even some of what appears to be your generation who are in the current administration, and they seem to take some things very seriously (unfortunately for the rest of the country and world).

I appreciate your promise, but I think I'd like just a teensy bit more assurance before I start sleeping better at night.

cheers,
Michael

Sabine Grant

I know.. you have expressed your rejection for the notion of a God who can inspire goodness in humans many times. But why not looking at the end result for a person such as myself? If that God concept is what gives me wings....how and why should it stand between us ,people who overall, are fully aware there is much to do in this world? we obviously agree that life is not to be a self centered experience but altruism will enrich our existence.
We agree on the essence of how we willfully mean to live our lives. We try to intervene. We are trying to keep ourselves from being oblivious and indifferent. We are working on ourselves in that process.

Ronin... I value the goodness of any individual and respect any source they wish to attribute their goodness from. It nevers interferes with my own spiritual path. How can my path interfere with your choice to follow humanism as the ultimate guide to how you will live your own life?

By the way offering your Bible to that poor little fellow was what it is all about.... finding ways to modify the misery or distress of others. Being in their shoes for an instant.
I wish for christianity to become a noble endeavor.... do not you think I grieve over the state of division and warmonging ? I want to retain the idealistic notion that there is a potential in christianity to transform human nature into an altruistic goal. I can see the potential. I can see it thru my own personal experience.

livius drusus

I'm very much digging this pledge discussion, but it's a 3 page derailment and I would like to split it off into CSS. If y'all will do me the courtesy of not posting for 5 minutes, I'll have it all tidied up and ready to go so this thread can get back to Muffinstuffer's atheists vs evangelists question.

Sabine Grant

RATIONAL BAC : I understand your perception... however...does not history or the scars of history often determine how people will need to reassure themselves? Did the author of the Pledge have the intent you reveal here? I am trying to examine all that could contribute to the need of so many americans to rally under that pledge... and forfeit the right for any individual citizen of this country to feel differently.

Calzaer

*raises hand*
Uh, I went to middle school in the tidewater area... we said the pledge, with "Under God", every day. And that was about '94-'96. I seem to recall it in high school there, too, but we moved just after my freshman year so I might be confusing things on that part.