Freethought & Rationalism Archive

David Bowden · 06-26-2002, 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TPaine:
Honestly, if one is an atheist why can't they just not say the pledge.

A better solution to me seems to be: give us back the (pre-1954) pledge we all used to be able to say together and with complete integrity.

How could that small correction hurt anyone? Leaving "under God" in there puts an unnecessary social litmus test to an atheist's patriotism, and for young unbelievers it's a needless predicament to face, on a daily basis. We can eliminate that whole mess just by taking those two words back out of the pledge.

It's not like we're asking them to change it to "one nation, without God." So I say, fix the pledge and let's all be Americans.

-Wanderer

Kip · 06-26-2002, 09:15 PM

I just want to correct something. I am studying US Government now, and (I may be wrong) it is my understanding that no Amendment could reverse a decision about the Establishment clause. I do not understand all of this talk about Congress banding together and amending the Constitution to reverse this decision. You can amend the 11th Amendment but not the 10th. The Bill of Rights is untouchable. All of the Congressmen huffing and puffing about banding together and reversing the decision are deluding themselves. The only possibilities I can imagine are the circuit Court reversing itself or the Supreme Court reversing the decision. These judges are appointed for life and no group of Congress can stop them. The Senators and Representatives would need to content themselves with simply disobeying the Court, as they did today.

[ June 26, 2002: Message edited by: Kip ]

sandlewood · 06-26-2002, 09:43 PM

Kip, I agree. You would think that of all people, Congressmen would understand how that worked. I really don�t see the point of having a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals if they are just going to walk in all the time and undo what the court ruled.

What is most scary to me, though, is that there is really nothing to stop the majority when that majority has religion on the mind. In their minds, their religion trumps everything. It is more important than any government or constitution. So while the �rules� say that they cannot add an amendment to change the Bill of Rights, who�s to say they have to play by the rules or even to keep the same Constitution? They can just throw out the old Constitution and rewrite a new one. I�m afraid that they may believe that being Christian is more important than individual rights.

Orestes · 06-26-2002, 09:45 PM

Maybe they should leave the 'Under God' part in to make christian mythologists happy, and just make further amendments to the pledge so that everyone can be included, sort of like the following:

Quote:

"I Pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, under Vrishnu, under Shiva, under Brahma, under Khali, under Allah, under Buddha, under the Godess, under the Great Spirit, under Zeus, under Odin, under Jupiter, under the Kami, and under no gods whatosever, Indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all."

Hmm, wonder how many christians would support that, even with the option of just not saying, for example, 'Under Zeus' when it got to that part

.

Arrowman · 06-26-2002, 09:59 PM

Just saw the news and this thread. Congrats to you all; looks like you're in for some interesting times!

Our old fiends at the BB are on to it in these threads:

<a href="http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=32;t=000384" target="_blank">http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=32;t=000384</a>

<a href="http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=32;t=000383" target="_blank">http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=32;t=000383</a>

Go Morat, The Galatian and Rev Josh. Our Fifth Column in the BB!

Wouldn't it be nice if some Christians like Rev. Josh were heard in the public arena supporting this decision, and not just Evil Atheists?

David Bowden · 06-26-2002, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Orestes:
...just make further amendments to the pledge so that everyone can be included, sort of like the following:
...
wonder how many christians would support that, even with the option of just not saying, for example, 'Under Zeus' when it got to that part

.

Hehe - I really like that, Orestes. (Files it away for future use...)

Sadly, the hubbub so far makes it apparent that we're "...one nation, under fog..."

-Wanderer

d'naturalist · 06-26-2002, 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Nikolai:
Does anyone have the latest data on the persentages of each religion in the united states?

It's not the very latest, but...
<a href="http://www.adherents.com/rel_USA.html" target="_blank">Adherents.com</a>

06-26-2002, 10:31 PM

The TV talk shows have been truly disturbing tonight. One guy called in and said that god exists because it says so on our money. Another guy said that the judges who made this ruling should be skinned alive. And now as I type this some woman is saying that all atheists should be deported to China.

It's frightening to see what religion can do to people.

Bluenose · 06-26-2002, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Secular Elation:
Face it. When the decision is appealed to the SCOTUS, it's dead..

Maybe, maybe not. If it becomes an attack on the Federal judiciary, the unanamous SCt will quote Marbury v Madison and give all the 'know it alls' a much needed history lesson. They will write muliple opinions with a majority adding up to a win for the First Amendment because they do not dare overturn all of their past precedents. The First Amendent will win because any law (federal, state, or local) challenged as unconstitutional on its face under the FAm will be subjected to 'strict scrutiny' which is almost impossible to withstand. The doctor who brought the case is also a law grad.

The panel opinion (qv link supra) was firmly grounded on recent SCt cases built on precedents going back to the earliest First Amendent cases.
[No, these don't back 200 years, only to the start of the ACLU which has defended the First Amendent from it's (ACLU) begining around 1920.]

To tell which cases are "SCOTUS" look at the citations, for example the flag salute cases are Gobitis 310 U.S. 586 (1940) and Barnett 319 U.S. 624 (1943) where the U.S., or SCt, or LED2d refer to 3 different sets of SCOTUS cases. First number is the volume and second is the starting page.
The federal district courts are in FS or Fed Supp; while the Circuit courts of appeal are in Fed2d or Fed3d series.

Cozmoe · 06-26-2002, 10:41 PM

Just wanted to add my 2 cents.

Ahem...

WAAAAAAAAHOOOOOOOO!!!

YIPPEE!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Thank you.

06-26-2002, 09:15 PM	#292
Kip Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: not so required Posts: 228	I just want to correct something. I am studying US Government now, and (I may be wrong) it is my understanding that no Amendment could reverse a decision about the Establishment clause. I do not understand all of this talk about Congress banding together and amending the Constitution to reverse this decision. You can amend the 11th Amendment but not the 10th. The Bill of Rights is untouchable. All of the Congressmen huffing and puffing about banding together and reversing the decision are deluding themselves. The only possibilities I can imagine are the circuit Court reversing itself or the Supreme Court reversing the decision. These judges are appointed for life and no group of Congress can stop them. The Senators and Representatives would need to content themselves with simply disobeying the Court, as they did today. [ June 26, 2002: Message edited by: Kip ]</p>

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

06-26-2002, 09:43 PM	#293
sandlewood Regular Member Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: San Jose, CA, USA Posts: 264	Kip, I agree. You would think that of all people, Congressmen would understand how that worked. I really don�t see the point of having a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals if they are just going to walk in all the time and undo what the court ruled. What is most scary to me, though, is that there is really nothing to stop the majority when that majority has religion on the mind. In their minds, their religion trumps everything. It is more important than any government or constitution. So while the �rules� say that they cannot add an amendment to change the Bill of Rights, who�s to say they have to play by the rules or even to keep the same Constitution? They can just throw out the old Constitution and rewrite a new one. I�m afraid that they may believe that being Christian is more important than individual rights.

06-26-2002, 09:59 PM	#295
Arrowman Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Adelaide, South Australia Posts: 1,358	Just saw the news and this thread. Congrats to you all; looks like you're in for some interesting times! Our old fiends at the BB are on to it in these threads: <a href="http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=32;t=000384" target="_blank">http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=32;t=000384</a> <a href="http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=32;t=000383" target="_blank">http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=32;t=000383</a> Go Morat, The Galatian and Rev Josh. Our Fifth Column in the BB! Wouldn't it be nice if some Christians like Rev. Josh were heard in the public arena supporting this decision, and not just Evil Atheists?

06-26-2002, 10:31 PM	#298
atheist_in_foxhole Guest Posts: n/a	The TV talk shows have been truly disturbing tonight. One guy called in and said that god exists because it says so on our money. Another guy said that the judges who made this ruling should be skinned alive. And now as I type this some woman is saying that all atheists should be deported to China. It's frightening to see what religion can do to people.

06-26-2002, 10:41 PM	#300
Cozmoe Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Iowa Posts: 43	Just wanted to add my 2 cents. Ahem... WAAAAAAAAHOOOOOOOO!!! <img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" /> <img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" /> YIPPEE!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Thank you.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.