braces_for_impact

TYPHON

You the Man!

<img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" /> <img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" /> <img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" />

braces_for_impact

Posted by Typhon:

If any point has been proven here, it is indeed, that religion, at least the fundamentalist Christian sort that holds our nation in a political and private stranglehold, is so insecure and so fearful of non-belief, that it will go to any lengths, stoop to any depths, to prevent those who lack belief in its validity of having the same rights and privileges granted to them under the constitution of the United States. So fearful, that it views the loss of any ground in what many Christian-Americans see as a public battlefield for the armies of faith, as a virulent and willful attack upon religion itself. So fearful, that these wonderful theists have expressed their displeasure in death-threats, hate-filled speeches, rants by publicly elected officials to blackball and punish judges involved in the case, promises by our un-elected presidential usurper to place new judges who will support religion over secular rights, and in general a frenzied and fearful backlash against a non-Christian, non-theist minority.

And this is exactly what concerns me most. The backlash and result of this ruling. Watching our "wise leaders" foam at the mouth in rage like rabid dogs, vowing revenge. Talk of congress simply steamrolling a court ruling. We have a system of checks and balances for a reason, to prevent exactly what seems to be forthcoming, I fervently hope that the system will operate as designed.

Autonemesis

That's right. The only way "under God" can avoid running afoul of the Establishment Clause, is if it is interpreted as meaningless ceremonial ornamentation.

But somehow, I think you will be less than satisfied with that.

Does "under God" mean anything, David? Or is it merely part of a rote ceremonial recitation?

Spazmatic

The thing I just posted doesn't seem to be here and I trashed it already. No matter, it was just a rehashing of Typhon's post.

The one hope I have of the ruling staying is judges fearing that their branch of the government is about to be smashed... That would quickly motivate them to actually do their job cuz, in the end, a Supreme Court ruling could not be overrode, and they might just get kinda scared at Congress going mental.

schu

Wrong! Not only that, but the only reason there are viable churches in this country is because of freedom of religion brought to you by people like Dr. Newdow.

If there were a state church, you and your stupid Campbellite church would never have existed.

What ignorance!

David Mathews

Hello Everyone,

I appreciate all the comments that people have given so far in this discussion. I would like to point out that the legal wisdom of the 9th appellate court is not acknowledged by the Supreme Court, as it has overturned a majority of rulings from that court over the last several years.

Given that your children will most likely attend schools in which the Pledge of Allegiance will be spoken on a daily basis, what sort of harm will they suffer as a result?

Sincerely,

David Mathews

hezekiah jones

That is not a reasonable conclusion to draw. The Ninth Circuit covers a very large area, and a huge population, so it stands to reason that many of its decisions would be appealed based on the sheer volume of its caseload. To suggest that its "wisdom is not acknowledged by the Supreme Court" is absurd.

The fact of the matter is most cases get to the Supreme Court by being appealed from lower courts, and the Supreme Court in fact overturns many of them. So you might as well say the legal wisdom of all lower courts is not acknowledged by the Supreme Court.

You may be interested to know that the Supreme Court has overruled a greater percentage of the Sixth Circuit's decisions this term. The Sixth Circuit serves that wild enclave of radical liberal activism, Ohio.

GodLessWarriorTM

David Mathews:
In a previous post you stated something along the lines of "they don't have to say the pledge in the first place.......". I guess that means that I should be allowed to run around naked in the streets, you just shouldn't look. In order for me to pledge my allegiance to this nation, The United States of America, I must say the whole thing. The entire pledge is endorsed by the government. If instead it said vishnu and you were told that you could just skip over that part when YOU are saying how would that make you feel. In all seriousness, TRY to think of what it would be like. TRY to think outside of your box.
Let me ask you something, WHY should "under god" be in the pledge in the first place?? Why?

HumanisTim

[QUOTE]Originally posted by himynameisPwn:
[QB]David, do you ever even think of the other persons position before you make your judgements? What if the pledge of allegiance made you say 'under no god', 'under Zues because the christian god is a big phoney, christians are idiots'? Wouldn't you be offended? Doesn't the idea of a theocracy where the government forces religion down your throat make you sick? What if this gets rejected, then an amendment was passed making Hinduism the official religion of the US. Im sure millions would protest. Why? Because the government should be secular and not involved in private affairs and shouldn't sponsor religion.

The difference between sponsoring atheism and being nuetral to religion is a big one. The government doesn't have to support my beliefs that no God exists, it can simply not mention it.


I agree fully with that. I just told my Dad that if somehow something ever happened. That our government banned christianity. And made it illegal to be a christian. I would not be celebrating. I would be protesting the decison along with the christians. Religion is a personal choice and should stay that way.

Bill Snedden

They will suffer the harm of having to realize that the majority of Americans, including elected officials and the Judiciary, believe that the Establishment clause prohibits Congress from making laws regarding an establishment of religion except when they want to.

In other words, that the Constitution actually only protects the religious freedoms of the majority, and further that the majority generally feels that the minority can just go spit.

That is not the America our Founders wanted and it's not the America they designed in the Constitution.

Regards,

Bill Snedden