-
TDR Magazine subscribers receive more than the magazine! You also gain additional forum privileges!
Details here: TDR Privileges
Subscribe to TDR Magazine here: https://www.tdr-online.com/
Pledge of Allegiance: Unconstitutional
- Thread starter milehiscott
- Start Date
Attention: TDR Forum Junkies To the point: Click this link and check out the Front Page News story(ies) where we are tracking the introduction of the 2025 Ram HD trucks.
Thanks, TDR Staff
AMEN!
... ...
... ...
????
Sregorb - I know you didn't write it, so this isn't directed at you, just answering one important point in your article:
"Can you imagine what would happen if some judges decided that children would be harmed by reciting the Pledge during World War II? Do you think Americans would stand for it?"
The Pledge of 1942 DID NOT include the words "under God" so this whole issue would be moot anyway. Those 2 words weren't added until after a successful campaign by the (self described) "largest lay organization in the Catholic Church". It was also a (sad) time in our country when merely looking sideways at someone got you branded a communist, subversive etc. By some accounts - I haven't verified this personally - the timing was right to add "under God" as a thumb of the nose to the atheistic Soviet state.
To everyone calling the judge that made the ruling a flaming liberal and worse - do you all know who appointed the chief judge of that panel? Nope, not Clinton. Not Carter (he appointed one of them). He was a NIXON appointee. Remind me again - where did Nixon fall in the liberal/conservative spectrum? I'm thinking somewhere (far, far) to the right of Clinton. And Bush, Sr. appointed the 3rd. Nice try there. Judges aren't supposed to be swayed by public opinion, either, only the law. Then if we don't like the rulings, according to law or the Constitution, it's up to us to change them.
ol ron... "you guys who have not served in the military... . " Maybe I'm reading too much into that statement, but I read it as if you'd served, you'd understand that God is part of the country and all that. Hmmmm..... I've served for 15 years and counting and, well, sir, that's just so much hogwash. I've seen the things you've mentioned with the exception of the Arizona. I've stood many hours of duty. I've even been shot at defending this country and all it stands for and I still think this was a good ruling. I know what's at stake and what it means. The founding fathers were not stupid men. Neither were they forgetful. They were very deliberate and encompassing about what they included in the Constitution. They also knew that only what was written in that document counted, not their notes and diaries. The word "God" is not used once in the original document or any of the subsequent amendments (if I may, "Read the Constitution. "). Many of the drafters and signers were military men who knew the value of spirituality. They were also lawyers who knew how the rule of law worked and that' s what they went with and what has served us well (no, not perfectly) for over 200 years now.
FATCAT - While the D of I did come first and may in some way be thought of as some kind of charter, it is in no way a legal document. The Constitution is the basis for our government, ratified by the states. The D of I basically just told England to "bugger off" and why. If it was to be the basis of our nation, then it would be a very different document. Obviously some of the concepts in the D of I made it into the Constitution, but you can't cite the D of I in a court of law, to my knowlege.
As for the money issue, I agree that it will be next. I don't necessarily agree that "In God we Trust" printed on money is unconstitutional. The difference between the two, as I see it, is that people are forced to recite the Pledge - to Pledge allegiance to a country "under God". Simply handling money or anything else with words someone else said/printed doesn't mean that much but actually saying them, PLEDGING something you don't agree with... . well, that's totally different. Hell, many of you can't even bear to type the words FORD or CHEVY. But, if I type it - it's no big deal. Many of you would feel offended - deeply offended - if you were required by... say the moderators of this board as a condition of participation, to proclaim (and sign your name to the fact) that we are one community of diesel owners, all are equal: Cummins, Powerstroke and Duramax. Blah, blah. Yeah, I know, pretty simplistic but the point is that being required to pledge allegiance to something is totally different than just seeing the words printed somewhere.
Finally, to all of you "God fearing" people advocating shooting the guy who filed the suit and/or the judges who made the ruling (in jest or not): I say you are the epitome of a hypocrite. I know of no religion that advocates killing people who have different opinions and beliefs. Congratulations, you've made it very clear why the government should, must stay out of religion!
Sregorb - I know you didn't write it, so this isn't directed at you, just answering one important point in your article:
"Can you imagine what would happen if some judges decided that children would be harmed by reciting the Pledge during World War II? Do you think Americans would stand for it?"
The Pledge of 1942 DID NOT include the words "under God" so this whole issue would be moot anyway. Those 2 words weren't added until after a successful campaign by the (self described) "largest lay organization in the Catholic Church". It was also a (sad) time in our country when merely looking sideways at someone got you branded a communist, subversive etc. By some accounts - I haven't verified this personally - the timing was right to add "under God" as a thumb of the nose to the atheistic Soviet state.
To everyone calling the judge that made the ruling a flaming liberal and worse - do you all know who appointed the chief judge of that panel? Nope, not Clinton. Not Carter (he appointed one of them). He was a NIXON appointee. Remind me again - where did Nixon fall in the liberal/conservative spectrum? I'm thinking somewhere (far, far) to the right of Clinton. And Bush, Sr. appointed the 3rd. Nice try there. Judges aren't supposed to be swayed by public opinion, either, only the law. Then if we don't like the rulings, according to law or the Constitution, it's up to us to change them.
ol ron... "you guys who have not served in the military... . " Maybe I'm reading too much into that statement, but I read it as if you'd served, you'd understand that God is part of the country and all that. Hmmmm..... I've served for 15 years and counting and, well, sir, that's just so much hogwash. I've seen the things you've mentioned with the exception of the Arizona. I've stood many hours of duty. I've even been shot at defending this country and all it stands for and I still think this was a good ruling. I know what's at stake and what it means. The founding fathers were not stupid men. Neither were they forgetful. They were very deliberate and encompassing about what they included in the Constitution. They also knew that only what was written in that document counted, not their notes and diaries. The word "God" is not used once in the original document or any of the subsequent amendments (if I may, "Read the Constitution. "). Many of the drafters and signers were military men who knew the value of spirituality. They were also lawyers who knew how the rule of law worked and that' s what they went with and what has served us well (no, not perfectly) for over 200 years now.
FATCAT - While the D of I did come first and may in some way be thought of as some kind of charter, it is in no way a legal document. The Constitution is the basis for our government, ratified by the states. The D of I basically just told England to "bugger off" and why. If it was to be the basis of our nation, then it would be a very different document. Obviously some of the concepts in the D of I made it into the Constitution, but you can't cite the D of I in a court of law, to my knowlege.
As for the money issue, I agree that it will be next. I don't necessarily agree that "In God we Trust" printed on money is unconstitutional. The difference between the two, as I see it, is that people are forced to recite the Pledge - to Pledge allegiance to a country "under God". Simply handling money or anything else with words someone else said/printed doesn't mean that much but actually saying them, PLEDGING something you don't agree with... . well, that's totally different. Hell, many of you can't even bear to type the words FORD or CHEVY. But, if I type it - it's no big deal. Many of you would feel offended - deeply offended - if you were required by... say the moderators of this board as a condition of participation, to proclaim (and sign your name to the fact) that we are one community of diesel owners, all are equal: Cummins, Powerstroke and Duramax. Blah, blah. Yeah, I know, pretty simplistic but the point is that being required to pledge allegiance to something is totally different than just seeing the words printed somewhere.
Finally, to all of you "God fearing" people advocating shooting the guy who filed the suit and/or the judges who made the ruling (in jest or not): I say you are the epitome of a hypocrite. I know of no religion that advocates killing people who have different opinions and beliefs. Congratulations, you've made it very clear why the government should, must stay out of religion!
Last edited:
OUR GREAT COUNTRY
I think our great country shouldn't be told by ONE MAN what to do. Thats why we have Our Congress and Senators and the Great Goverment we have. We have and live by a set of rules. I've served in the Airforce and have lived by our Rules for 64 years. I'm proud to say that I love our Country and am Glad i can Live here. If the Judge doesn' like the way we live Maybe he would like to go over To Iran or Irac and Live There..... I get a little Mad when i see or hear stuff that effects the way we chose to live by VOTEing and Doing and Keeping our Nose Clean. How bought you GUY'S ?Are you behind our Flag?? I AM... ... Bill Matthes...
I think our great country shouldn't be told by ONE MAN what to do. Thats why we have Our Congress and Senators and the Great Goverment we have. We have and live by a set of rules. I've served in the Airforce and have lived by our Rules for 64 years. I'm proud to say that I love our Country and am Glad i can Live here. If the Judge doesn' like the way we live Maybe he would like to go over To Iran or Irac and Live There..... I get a little Mad when i see or hear stuff that effects the way we chose to live by VOTEing and Doing and Keeping our Nose Clean. How bought you GUY'S ?Are you behind our Flag?? I AM... ... Bill Matthes...
Under whatever?
I say anyone that the the words "under God" offends, can recite whatever they want in place of it. It will not hurt my feelings, unless they want to change the words just before it "One nation" . What a stink over nothing.
I am a Vet also and found that "there are very few Atheists in foxholes" to be true. Although just shouting his name over and over again while under fire doesen't really show your sprituality... ... ... ... . It does help though. Good post Joel.
I say anyone that the the words "under God" offends, can recite whatever they want in place of it. It will not hurt my feelings, unless they want to change the words just before it "One nation" . What a stink over nothing.
I am a Vet also and found that "there are very few Atheists in foxholes" to be true. Although just shouting his name over and over again while under fire doesen't really show your sprituality... ... ... ... . It does help though. Good post Joel.
BK
TDR MEMBER
illflem, I know, it's very interesting. That's part of my point and what's been stuck in my mind since my political classes 25 years ago.
But I wonder what's the tie's between the C. Church's emence wealth (which they wont liquidate to feed and house the poor) and this entire situation?
The gent that started this whole lawsuit was asked during an interview - when he took the stand if he was sworn in by putting his hand on the bible... of course he replied no.
And if someone who doesn't believe in God is sworn in by placing their hand on the Bible... does that mean their swearing means nothing?
I like the Aztec approach to having religion forced upon you. When the missionaries "conquered" the Mexican heathens and forced them to make statues of Jesus, Mary, etc they just placed their own religious icons inside the statues during construction and continued worshiping their own religion through the outer image. The missionaries never caught on. Easy enough for a person to just mouth one nation under Odd during the pledge.
FACT is, the decision to "erase" God from our society is, in itself, of little actual consequence...
NOR is the effort by our government to outlaw personal ownership of weapons - or the right of free
speech...
What *IS* significant, is the FACT that such efforts are the YARDSTICK by which we measure exactly
WHERE we currently find ourselves in time and the eyes of our government and those who vigorously
support such measures!
The GUNS - or newspapers - or use of "God" in pledges are NOT the main issue - merely a SYMPTOM of
the REAL illness!
Those who would propose to LEGISLATE AWAY from our society the FREEDOM to openly express their
PERSONAL devotion to their God, to vigorously and aggressively PROTECT themselves from the physical
abuses of predators - 2 OR 4 legged - and to openly express their opposition to thoughts and actions
they feel are designed to HARM them in any significant way, are the very ones who are actively drilling
a multitude of HOLES in the hull of the "ship" that carries us all - and we ALL will just as surely
DROWN in the disaster of our OWN MAKING as did Rome and other civilazations and governments that
came before us!
Count on it!
NOR is the effort by our government to outlaw personal ownership of weapons - or the right of free
speech...
What *IS* significant, is the FACT that such efforts are the YARDSTICK by which we measure exactly
WHERE we currently find ourselves in time and the eyes of our government and those who vigorously
support such measures!
The GUNS - or newspapers - or use of "God" in pledges are NOT the main issue - merely a SYMPTOM of
the REAL illness!
Those who would propose to LEGISLATE AWAY from our society the FREEDOM to openly express their
PERSONAL devotion to their God, to vigorously and aggressively PROTECT themselves from the physical
abuses of predators - 2 OR 4 legged - and to openly express their opposition to thoughts and actions
they feel are designed to HARM them in any significant way, are the very ones who are actively drilling
a multitude of HOLES in the hull of the "ship" that carries us all - and we ALL will just as surely
DROWN in the disaster of our OWN MAKING as did Rome and other civilazations and governments that
came before us!
Count on it!
Agreed!
Also, I always took the words "Under God", along w/ the right to freedon of religion, to mean whatever god you choose to believe in. Doesnt matter if its not mainstream, you have a right to believe it.
Its amazing how people are doing anything they can to tear down our pride & traditions that have reminded us who & what we fight for (too bad we have to fight, but we do).
Now were fighting insiders as well as terrorists.
Franlky, I dont care about a few lines of wording as much as I care for the lack of awareness around us, and the comptempt for this country, especially coming from the very people that take from it (some are neighbors).
To some extent I agree with Joel. I am a part time preacher and love my country. I for one do not believe that Allah and Buddha are the same God as I believe in. I believe in the trinity of God, the father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Also, look at what has slowly come about in our schools after one woman took out the bible from our schools. Look at the violence and the killings that only the Devil could come up with. So we take out patriatism AND the "under God" , the end of the world is upon us. I can see the point of all the views, only because I know God is TRULY in control and will conquer all very soon. I know his plan. THis does truly fit to it. I think it is a shame that Atheist are as narrow minded to see that we just appeared from no-where. Someone had to create us. That person shall be God. He also blessed us with rights and freedoms that only man can take away, and are doing. I don't agree with killing anyone over this, what makes the killer any different than the person who is doing this commotion. That is a horrible thing to do. There is no need to make death threats, or any other kind of threat to anyone that wants to follow there GOD given rights to do what they want. I do agree woth doing some smoking out though... . I will not and am not trying to convince anyone to believe in God, because I believe that He has to convince you, and we as humans show God to them. I don't belive in forcing someone to religion, but taking the word of God out of schools is taking away my free speech of the word of God.
Issue 128 – Digital Version
Digital Magazines
FREE!
TDR Test Drive - Digital Edition
Renew
Subscribe
Gift Subscriptions
Back Issues
Subscription Status
Address Change Form
Buyer's Guides
Ram Diagnostic Trouble Codes
The Perfect Collection
The Perfect Collection Vol. II
TSB Updates
Dodge/Cummins Historical Overview
Cameron Collection
What Makes Us Tick?
Product Showcase
Advertising
Turbo Diesel Register
Issue 128 – Digital Version
Digital Magazines
FREE!
TDR Test Drive - Digital Edition
Renew
Subscribe
Gift Subscriptions
Back Issues
Subscription Status
Address Change Form
Buyer's Guides
Ram Diagnostic Trouble Codes
The Perfect Collection
The Perfect Collection Vol. II
TSB Updates
Dodge/Cummins Historical Overview
Cameron Collection
What Makes Us Tick?
Product Showcase
Advertising
