Freethought & Rationalism Archive

simian · 03-20-2003, 11:09 AM

See here.

Well, it took them a few days to beat their chests this time.

Simian

Psycho Economist · 03-20-2003, 11:27 AM

Yeah... and it's also patriotic (and not religious) to take communion, recite the Apostle's Creed and sing "Jesus Loves Me"... especially that line about "'cause the Bible tells me so."

Toto · 03-20-2003, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Lawmakers not supporting the resolution questioned whether Congress should be telling the judicial branch how to interpret the law. They opposed a provision in the resolution stating that the president should nominate federal court judges who interpret the Constitution correctly.

"It doesn't stop at expressing disapproval," said Rep. William Delahunt (news, bio, voting record), D-Mass., who voted "present." "It goes further in a way that I believe would set an unwise and dangerous precedent." He said it sends a "not-so-subtle message" to judges that "they had better tailor their constitutional views to those of the congressional majority if they wish to be confirmed."

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (news, bio, voting record), D-N.Y., said the 9th Circuit decision was "exactly consistent" with the Supreme Court rulings over the last 40 years on school prayers. The court, he said, "has said that we cannot ask schoolchildren to recite a prayer or a belief in God in the classroom setting, even if we allow the dissenters to walk out of the room."

Nadler was one of seven Democrats to vote against the resolution. The others were Robert Scott of Virginia; Jim McDermott of Washington; Pete Stark and Mike Honda of California, Gary Ackerman of New York and Barney Frank of Massachusetts.

Seven Democrats from safe liberal districts.

sandlewood · 03-20-2003, 12:54 PM

Quote:

The nonbinding resolution, passed 400-7 with 15 members voting present, states that the phrase "one nation under God" in the pledge reflects the religious faith central to the founding of the nation and that its recitation is a patriotic act, not a statement of religious faith.

I�m always amazed when I see people�especially leaders of the country who are supposedly well-versed in the history and structure of the government�try to claim that the US was founded on Christianity.

Quote:

Lawmakers warned that the court decision also threatened school recitations of other historic documents such as the Declaration of Independence and the Gettysburg Address.

Slippery slope. I can�t believe lawmakers are this ignorant. They must think everyone else is.

Edit: What worries me most is that it doesn�t matter whether they are interpreting the Constitution correctly or not. If 85% of the people want to interpret it their own way, they will. If 85% of the people want to throw out or rewrite the Constitution altogether, they can. I�m not sure what the 15% can do if the 85% are making no sense.

Tabula_rasa · 03-20-2003, 01:06 PM

Damn. Only two congressman from MA voted against. I sent my congressman John Olver, D-MA, a firm email telling him to uphold the constitution and keep his personal religious beliefs out of his decision making. Not good, Mr. Olver. Not good at all.

Tabula_rasa

Majestyk · 03-20-2003, 02:17 PM

"one nation under God" in the pledge reflects the religious faith central to the founding of the nation and that its recitation is a patriotic act, not a statement of religious faith. "

I guess if, we can delude ourselves into belief in a anthrocentric, omnipotent, supreme being, we can delude ourselves into beleif that this statement makes any kind of sense.

That's not me standing on your neck. That's just a reflection of me standing on your neck.

Lynn of the Prairie · 03-23-2003, 12:11 PM

Any congressional resolution passed by over 400 versus single digits can only mean one thing: "tyranny of the majority".

lpetrich · 03-23-2003, 02:38 PM

Except that the Constitution nowhere claims divine origin; its writers never claimed that they heard a voice coming out of the sky dictating its contents.

crazyfingers · 03-23-2003, 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Toto
Barney Frank of Massachusetts.

He's my rep. The last time they had this show he voted no also. I sent him a letter thanking him. He sent a letter back saying it's not the government business telling people to be religious.

Fiach · 03-23-2003, 05:45 PM

Suppose an American atheist at a public function, says the Pledge of Allegience. But he deletes the "under God". Is he at risk of prosecution? Is he arrested by KGB John Ashcrofts secret police?

Suppose he substitutes "under our Constitution" for "under God"? How can that be considered "unpatriotic?" I would take the reverse view. Any American who place allegience to a God over his own country, is the real traitor.

Fiach, Scotsman trying to understand American Political Christianity.

03-20-2003, 11:09 AM	#1
simian Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: St. Louis, MO area Posts: 1,924	US House of Reps and Newdow case See here. Well, it took them a few days to beat their chests this time. Simian

03-23-2003, 05:45 PM	#10
Fiach Banned Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Scotland, UK Posts: 602	What happens legally? Suppose an American atheist at a public function, says the Pledge of Allegience. But he deletes the "under God". Is he at risk of prosecution? Is he arrested by KGB John Ashcrofts secret police? Suppose he substitutes "under our Constitution" for "under God"? How can that be considered "unpatriotic?" I would take the reverse view. Any American who place allegience to a God over his own country, is the real traitor. Fiach, Scotsman trying to understand American Political Christianity.

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

03-20-2003, 11:27 AM	#2
Psycho Economist Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Peoria, IL Posts: 854	Yeah... and it's also patriotic (and not religious) to take communion, recite the Apostle's Creed and sing "Jesus Loves Me"... especially that line about "'cause the Bible tells me so."

03-20-2003, 01:06 PM	#5
Tabula_rasa Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: East of Dumbville, MA Posts: 144	Damn. Only two congressman from MA voted against. I sent my congressman John Olver, D-MA, a firm email telling him to uphold the constitution and keep his personal religious beliefs out of his decision making. Not good, Mr. Olver. Not good at all. Tabula_rasa

03-20-2003, 02:17 PM	#6
Majestyk Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Northeast Ohio Posts: 2,846	"one nation under God" in the pledge reflects the religious faith central to the founding of the nation and that its recitation is a patriotic act, not a statement of religious faith. " I guess if, we can delude ourselves into belief in a anthrocentric, omnipotent, supreme being, we can delude ourselves into beleif that this statement makes any kind of sense. That's not me standing on your neck. That's just a reflection of me standing on your neck.

03-23-2003, 12:11 PM	#7
Lynn of the Prairie Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: BROOKLYN (FORMERLY TEXAS) Posts: 1,135	Any congressional resolution passed by over 400 versus single digits can only mean one thing: "tyranny of the majority".

03-23-2003, 02:38 PM	#8
lpetrich Contributor Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Lebanon, OR, USA Posts: 16,829	Except that the Constitution nowhere claims divine origin; its writers never claimed that they heard a voice coming out of the sky dictating its contents.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.