Freedom of Religion anyone? And don't say it doesn't say which God is. The freedom of religion also applies for non religious people.Stingray24 wrote:
I would like to know where this "right" to be offended came from all the sudden. If anyone does not want to say something, don't say it. Quit trying to tell everyone else who wants to say it that they cannot. Freedom of speech anyone?
Poll
Should the Pledge of Allegiance Say "One Nation Under God"?
| Yes | 58% | 58% - 72 | ||||
| No | 41% | 41% - 52 | ||||
| Total: 124 | ||||||
state and religion should be seperate, if thats donne, it means state dont have raligion, so anything having any link with religion and god should be excluded from like : swearing allegancy to nation ( it dont have religion) , in the court room ( justice system is official part of the state => no religion ), marine corps, army, navy, .... ( they are official military organisations from the state => no religion ),.....
So according to your logic, the armed forces should not have a Chaplin for every unit? I mean, they are persons of faith and are paid by the government. So according to you, a soldier or Marine who is fataly wounded is not entitled to be given their last rights by a priest on the battlefield before they die? Im glad that persons last moments alive are spent thinking they are going to hell because you didnt want to be offended. Like I said earlier, I am not religious but some people are. Who's being denied in this circumstance?Mogura wrote:
state and religion should be seperate, if thats donne, it means state dont have raligion, so anything having any link with religion and god should be excluded from like : swearing allegancy to nation ( it dont have religion) , in the court room ( justice system is official part of the state => no religion ), marine corps, army, navy, .... ( they are official military organisations from the state => no religion ),.....
Last edited by deeznutz1245 (2006-12-28 07:00:58)
Malloy must go
Democracy is the rule of the people, the majority that is. Unfortunately for atheists, they are a minority.PBAsydney wrote:
Atheists have been screwed over for too long, time to make a change.deeznutz1245 wrote:
I am not a religous man. I honestly believe that organized religions are elaborate businesses that just cluster fuck everyone else trying to co-exist. But that is my opinion and holds no value because it is just an opinion. What my point is, there are MANY religious people who are very peaceful and kind. Wouldnt taking away their right to say it be equally offensive to them? If something is not apprehensive or threatening then dont do it. Leve it be and dont participate. I am a heterosexual, should I try and make gay people illegal? Every month when I pay my cable bill I am being FORCED to pay for the 2 fucking Spanish channels that I do not want. I could opt to not get cable (thats not happening) but I dont. That is money that I have labored to earn making it more offensive than anything to me.
Last edited by EVieira (2006-12-28 07:01:03)
"All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them."
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
can you have in your army, an priest,monk,..... for every religion/believe of every man/woman in your military forces ? you would have more priests than soldiers....deeznutz1245 wrote:
So according to your logic, the armed forces should not have a Chaplin for every unit? I mean, they are persons of faith and are paid by the government. So according to you, a soldier or Marine who is fataly wounded is not entitled to be given their last rights by a priest on the battlefield before they die? Im glad that persons last moments alive are spent thinking they are going to hell because you didnt want to be offended. Like I said earlier, I am not religious but some people are. Who's being denied in this circumstance?Mogura wrote:
state and religion should be seperate, if thats donne, it means state dont have raligion, so anything having any link with religion and god should be excluded from like : swearing allegancy to nation ( it dont have religion) , in the court room ( justice system is official part of the state => no religion ), marine corps, army, navy, .... ( they are official military organisations from the state => no religion ),.....
and any way it says "one nation under GOD" does that suppose there is only 1 god ? what about hindu people who have a lot of them ? what about shinto ? what about american indian beliefs ? what about wiccan ? ......
So Democracy doesn't take care of minorities? Minorities are the people too, and Democracy and religion are two different things.EVieira wrote:
Democracy is the rule of the people, the majority that is. Unfortunately for atheists, they are a minority.PBAsydney wrote:
Atheists have been screwed over for too long, time to make a change.deeznutz1245 wrote:
I am not a religous man. I honestly believe that organized religions are elaborate businesses that just cluster fuck everyone else trying to co-exist. But that is my opinion and holds no value because it is just an opinion. What my point is, there are MANY religious people who are very peaceful and kind. Wouldnt taking away their right to say it be equally offensive to them? If something is not apprehensive or threatening then dont do it. Leve it be and dont participate. I am a heterosexual, should I try and make gay people illegal? Every month when I pay my cable bill I am being FORCED to pay for the 2 fucking Spanish channels that I do not want. I could opt to not get cable (thats not happening) but I dont. That is money that I have labored to earn making it more offensive than anything to me.
At least communism had no religions attached to the state.
What about them? It does not suggest anything other than we are united under the protection of the God you choose as your own. And BTW yes, you can request to have your own religious leader. So long as said religious leader is willing to strap on a vest and do it. Funny how it is dominated by Catholic and Baptist priests...isnt it?Mogura wrote:
can you have in your army, an priest,monk,..... for every religion/believe of every man/woman in your military forces ? you would have more priests than soldiers....deeznutz1245 wrote:
So according to your logic, the armed forces should not have a Chaplin for every unit? I mean, they are persons of faith and are paid by the government. So according to you, a soldier or Marine who is fataly wounded is not entitled to be given their last rights by a priest on the battlefield before they die? Im glad that persons last moments alive are spent thinking they are going to hell because you didnt want to be offended. Like I said earlier, I am not religious but some people are. Who's being denied in this circumstance?Mogura wrote:
state and religion should be seperate, if thats donne, it means state dont have raligion, so anything having any link with religion and god should be excluded from like : swearing allegancy to nation ( it dont have religion) , in the court room ( justice system is official part of the state => no religion ), marine corps, army, navy, .... ( they are official military organisations from the state => no religion ),.....
and any way it says "one nation under GOD" does that suppose there is only 1 god ? what about hindu people who have a lot of them ? what about shinto ? what about american indian beliefs ? what about wiccan ? ......
Malloy must go
We've banned school prayer (even if it's student led), banned the Ten Commandments (that were displayed for decades) from a judicial building, cities get sued by the ACLU when they dare to display a nativity scene or label a pine tree a "Christmas tree" and the list goes on. What the heck, might as well remove the word "God" from the pledge, too, while we're at it. There is still a prayer said before Senate sessions, though. Soon there will be forced conversions in order to serve for public office if we allow those prayers to continue!
If you change the pledge religious people will complain. Since people who beleive in God (not necessarily a religious person, remeber) are a vast majority over atheists in the US the pledge should remain the same.sergeriver wrote:
So Democracy doesn't take care of minorities? Minorities are the people too, and Democracy and religion are two different things.EVieira wrote:
Democracy is the rule of the people, the majority that is. Unfortunately for atheists, they are a minority.PBAsydney wrote:
Atheists have been screwed over for too long, time to make a change.
Would it be democratic to change the pledge to the will of the minority?
"All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them."
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
And most of them fail.PBAsydney wrote:
At least communism had no religions attached to the state.
Malloy must go
I think the whole thing should be scrapped. I love my country but on my own terms, not because my government say I should and then force me (albeit not physically but emotionally) to pledge my alligence everyday at school.
It sounds cheesy but I'm a Human being first, World Citizen second and Brit third.
It sounds cheesy but I'm a Human being first, World Citizen second and Brit third.
It's not like changing it to THERE IS NO GOD or something like that, just removing it so people can be on either side, whichever they like.EVieira wrote:
If you change the pledge religious people will complain. Since people who beleive in God (not necessarily a religious person, remeber) are a vast majority over atheists in the US the pledge should remain the same.sergeriver wrote:
So Democracy doesn't take care of minorities? Minorities are the people too, and Democracy and religion are two different things.EVieira wrote:
Democracy is the rule of the people, the majority that is. Unfortunately for atheists, they are a minority.
Would it be democratic to change the pledge to the will of the minority?
lets say im an civilian, im an atheist or any other religion than christian, i pay taxes, state use those taxes to pay soldiers AND those priests !!! WAIT !? im paying for an priest ! i dont want ! i vote to have an atheist state and give taxes to that atheist state , i dont do it so they can give that money to a church.deeznutz1245 wrote:
What about them? It does not suggest anything other than we are united under the protection of the God you choose as your own. And BTW yes, you can request to have your own religious leader. So long as said religious leader is willing to strap on a vest and do it. Funny how it is dominated by Catholic and Baptist priests...isnt it?Mogura wrote:
can you have in your army, an priest,monk,..... for every religion/believe of every man/woman in your military forces ? you would have more priests than soldiers....deeznutz1245 wrote:
So according to your logic, the armed forces should not have a Chaplin for every unit? I mean, they are persons of faith and are paid by the government. So according to you, a soldier or Marine who is fataly wounded is not entitled to be given their last rights by a priest on the battlefield before they die? Im glad that persons last moments alive are spent thinking they are going to hell because you didnt want to be offended. Like I said earlier, I am not religious but some people are. Who's being denied in this circumstance?
and any way it says "one nation under GOD" does that suppose there is only 1 god ? what about hindu people who have a lot of them ? what about shinto ? what about american indian beliefs ? what about wiccan ? ......
/ religions i names are exemple, you can put im catholic and army pay an muslim imam, or other ...
PS religion is a personal thing, state should not have any link with that
Last edited by Mogura (2006-12-28 07:15:30)
And communism has been a resounding success hasn't it.PBAsydney wrote:
At least communism had no religions attached to the state.
Then perhaps you should move to North Korea? American democracy was founded on Christian beleifs and morals, many of the first colonizers were religious refugees from Europe. Noone is forcing you to convert, but your roots and ancestors cannot be forgotten.PBAsydney wrote:
At least communism had no religions attached to the state.
Last edited by EVieira (2006-12-28 07:16:19)
"All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them."
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
Students can pray silently all they want, as well as read the Bible, so long as it is on their own time. If you want open prayers and Bible study in school, then go to a private religious school. And what does the ten commandments, other than killing and stealing, have to do with the judicial system?Stingray24 wrote:
We've banned school prayer (even if it's student led), banned the Ten Commandments (that were displayed for decades) from a judicial building, cities get sued by the ACLU when they dare to display a nativity scene or label a pine tree a "Christmas tree" and the list goes on. What the heck, might as well remove the word "God" from the pledge, too, while we're at it. There is still a prayer said before Senate sessions, though. Soon there will be forced conversions in order to serve for public office if we allow those prayers to continue!
God is a synonym for "Uncle Sam", every dollar you have in your wallet says "In God we trust", i recommend if you want to change the pledge, you have to change everysingle piece of currency we have in existence
trough middle ages europe was ruled by church ( middle ages aka dark ages ) , later when church loose power in europe the period is called Renaissance ( re birth )EVieira wrote:
Then perhaps you should move to North Korea? American democracy was founded on Christian beleifs and morals, many of the first colonizers were religious refugees from Europe. Noone is forcing you to convert, but your roots and ancestors cannot be forgotten.PBAsydney wrote:
At least communism had no religions attached to the state.
I KNOW!!!! OMG!!!! Imagine the thought of your tax dollars paying for soldiers to have priests. These are the guys that die for your right to be Athiest by the way. I'll tell you what, you keep your few cents a year in tax dollars, I'll tell the military to pack it up cuz we are done here, and then in a year you will be forced to worship Buddah. By the way, it is the soldiers right to have that provided for them seeing how there are not very many churches in the middle of the fucking ocean which is where most of them are.Mogura wrote:
lets say im an civilian, im an atheist or any other religion than christian, i pay taxes, state use those taxes to pay soldiers AND those priests !!! WAIT !? im paying for an priest ! i dont want ! i vote to have an atheist state and give taxes to that atheist state , i dont do it so they can give that money to a church.deeznutz1245 wrote:
What about them? It does not suggest anything other than we are united under the protection of the God you choose as your own. And BTW yes, you can request to have your own religious leader. So long as said religious leader is willing to strap on a vest and do it. Funny how it is dominated by Catholic and Baptist priests...isnt it?Mogura wrote:
can you have in your army, an priest,monk,..... for every religion/believe of every man/woman in your military forces ? you would have more priests than soldiers....
and any way it says "one nation under GOD" does that suppose there is only 1 god ? what about hindu people who have a lot of them ? what about shinto ? what about american indian beliefs ? what about wiccan ? ......
/ religions i names are exemple, you can put im catholic and army pay an muslim imam, or other ...
PS religion is a personal thing, state should not have any link with that
Malloy must go
why you always talk about church ? dont build only a church, buil a mosque too and a jewish temple, and the hindu one, and budhist one and shinto, and satanic cult whatever,.... so just throw all aircrafts from the carrierdeeznutz1245 wrote:
I KNOW!!!! OMG!!!! Imagine the thought of your tax dollars paying for soldiers to have priests. These are the guys that die for your right to be Athiest by the way. I'll tell you what, you keep your few cents a year in tax dollars, I'll tell the military to pack it up cuz we are done here, and then in a year you will be forced to worship Buddah. By the way, it is the soldiers right to have that provided for them seeing how there are not very many churches in the middle of the fucking ocean which is where most of them are.Mogura wrote:
lets say im an civilian, im an atheist or any other religion than christian, i pay taxes, state use those taxes to pay soldiers AND those priests !!! WAIT !? im paying for an priest ! i dont want ! i vote to have an atheist state and give taxes to that atheist state , i dont do it so they can give that money to a church.deeznutz1245 wrote:
What about them? It does not suggest anything other than we are united under the protection of the God you choose as your own. And BTW yes, you can request to have your own religious leader. So long as said religious leader is willing to strap on a vest and do it. Funny how it is dominated by Catholic and Baptist priests...isnt it?
/ religions i names are exemple, you can put im catholic and army pay an muslim imam, or other ...
PS religion is a personal thing, state should not have any link with that
and build religius buildings on them.
(priests and other dont fight, they just watch other fighting and dieing )
The founding fathers wanted to protect religion from being affected by an oppressive government - that does not mean at all that religion can't have any affect on government/lawmaking/etc.sergeriver wrote:
The words "under God" were added in 1954. Despite that, it's a violation to the First Amedment which prohibits the establishment of a national religion by Congress or the preference of one religion over another, or religion over nonreligion.Stingray24 wrote:
Yes, it has always said one nation under God and should stay that way. The US was founded by decidedly Christian people, that is our heritage. The pledge is not a prayer to any specific diety and is not a violation of the 1st amendment. No one is forced to say the pledge if they don't want to and the pledge does not say which God (Jesus, Alllah, Buddha etc etc).
The separation of Church and State is not contained in the US Constitution and should have no bearing on this or any other legal matter. Yet it's mentioned time and time again in an attempt to remove anything remotely acknowledging the existence of God from the symbols of our nation.
thats the problem, it can, and it should notURE_DED wrote:
The founding fathers wanted to protect religion from being affected by an oppressive government - that does not mean at all that religion can't have any affect on government/lawmaking/etc.sergeriver wrote:
The words "under God" were added in 1954. Despite that, it's a violation to the First Amedment which prohibits the establishment of a national religion by Congress or the preference of one religion over another, or religion over nonreligion.Stingray24 wrote:
Yes, it has always said one nation under God and should stay that way. The US was founded by decidedly Christian people, that is our heritage. The pledge is not a prayer to any specific diety and is not a violation of the 1st amendment. No one is forced to say the pledge if they don't want to and the pledge does not say which God (Jesus, Alllah, Buddha etc etc).
The separation of Church and State is not contained in the US Constitution and should have no bearing on this or any other legal matter. Yet it's mentioned time and time again in an attempt to remove anything remotely acknowledging the existence of God from the symbols of our nation.
Wait, isnt that backwards? we are protecting our government not the religion. The US of America is made up of many religions and one GovernmentURE_DED wrote:
The founding fathers wanted to protect religion from being affected by an oppressive government - that does not mean at all that religion can't have any affect on government/lawmaking/etc.
This nation was founded by Christians with Christian beliefs. By saying one nation under God in no way hurts anyone anywhere. Christian beliefs are nothing but good. If you are an atheist so be it, but Christian beliefs are mostly common sense morals that everyone should follow. Being one nation under God is a good and moral way to live and has nothing to do with church and state working together. The United States in no wawy forces anyone to worship God (yet).