Freethought & Rationalism Archive

gravitybow · 03-07-2003, 11:02 AM

Emphasizing a different part of the Sherman v. Community Consolidated School District quote posted by Toto:

Quote:

By remaining neutral on religious issues, the state satisfies its duties under the free exercise clause. Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990). All that remains is Barnette itself, and so long as the school does not compel pupils to espouse the content of the Pledge as their own belief, it may carry on with patriotic exercises. Objection by the few does not reduce to silence the many who want to pledge allegiance to the flag "and to the Republic for which it stands".

But Pres. Eisenhower made the following statement after he signed the 1954 Pledge legislation adding "under God":

Quote:

"From this day forward, the millions of our schoolchildren will daily proclaim in every city and town, every village and rural schoolhouse, the dedication of our nation and our people to the Almighty."

Does that sound neutral to you? You know, it's funny how folks use the words of early Americans and the Founding Fathers to demonstrate the original intentions of this country (most often to claim it as a Christian country for the benefit and ownership of Christians), so doesn't this count for understanding the meaning of "under God"? Who better than the President to understand and interpret what he just signed?

03-07-2003, 10:05 PM

Quote:

A federal judge in Alexandria has upheld the constitutionality of Virginia laws that require daily recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance and the posting of the motto "In God We Trust" in state schools, weighing in on the fierce national debate over the role of religion in schools.

Judge Backs Va. Laws Requiring Pledge, Motto

Toto · 03-07-2003, 10:12 PM

The Plaintiff in the Virginia case was not an atheist, but a Menonnite, who was representing himself.

Quote:

In his Feb. 21 decision, Cacheris dismissed a lawsuit filed against Loudoun County schools that challenged the constitutionality of the two state laws, writing that "the statute mandating recitation of the pledge is secular because it aims to foster democracy, which is both necessary to the survival of the concept and entirely independent of religion."

Loudoun County resident Edward Myers had sued the School Board and Superintendent Edgar B. Hatrick, arguing that the pledge is an idolatrous prayer that his two elementary school-age children should not have to hear. He also argued that the posting of the "In God We Trust" motto is unconstitutional because the posters were provided to the schools by a private religious organization. Myers grew up on a Pennsylvania farm as a Mennonite, a religious tradition that forbids followers to swear from allegiance to any entity other than God.

(enphasis added)

exile · 03-13-2003, 02:08 AM

As a Brit, I wonder if this is a battle worth fighting?

In Britain the head of state is also head of the Anglican Church; Bishops of that church sit in the upper house of Parliament. Religious education is compulsory in schools. A Christian religious service must be held in all schools every day (though one is allowed to opt out)

And yet, atheism is far more common than in the US, and since the time of Bradlaugh over 100 years ago atheists have suffered no real disability in law or civil rights.

For those of you who haven't heard of Bradlaugh, he was elected into parliament but not allowed to take his seat as, though he was prepared to take the oath of allegiance (which ended "so help me God") it was held that as an atheist the oath would be meaningless. Eventually he was allowed to "affirm" instead.

Has there EVER been an avowedly atheist member of Congress?

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

03-13-2003, 02:08 AM	#54
exile Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: England Posts: 735	As a Brit, I wonder if this is a battle worth fighting? In Britain the head of state is also head of the Anglican Church; Bishops of that church sit in the upper house of Parliament. Religious education is compulsory in schools. A Christian religious service must be held in all schools every day (though one is allowed to opt out) And yet, atheism is far more common than in the US, and since the time of Bradlaugh over 100 years ago atheists have suffered no real disability in law or civil rights. For those of you who haven't heard of Bradlaugh, he was elected into parliament but not allowed to take his seat as, though he was prepared to take the oath of allegiance (which ended "so help me God") it was held that as an atheist the oath would be meaningless. Eventually he was allowed to "affirm" instead. Has there EVER been an avowedly atheist member of Congress?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.