Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by lsugrad00, Jun 14, 2004.
It was nice to see that 3 of the justices also noted that they would rule that the phrase "under God" was constitutional.
only 3 is not very good. and keep in mind they didnt decide the constitutionality of "under god", but rather the right of this man to argue for his daughter.
i cant imagine how anyone thinks this is constitutional, when clearly monotheism is a religion and our government is supposed to steer clear of endorsing a religion of any kind.
The most absurd lawsuit EVER filed.
If you don't like saying "under God", DON'T SAY IT!!!!
...and stop spending any money that has the word "God" on it as well...
...send it to me instead...
you cant justify it by saying "don't say it".
the fact is the government is not supposed to endorse any religion. that is indisputable. saying we are a nation "under god" is clearly and without question monotheistic. there is nothing to debate. it is wrong and should be removed. i dont play your magical games, i am american, not monotheistic. i am not pledging to your god.
That's a good thing because you don't need Him in the first place.
The words "under God" is not an endorsement of any particular religion. The majority of Americans believe that there is a single diety. Catholics, Protestants, Jews, and even Muslim believe in this concept. I don't know what religion most Asian Americans follow but if they are Buddhists they would be the only sizable minority that rejects monotheism.
it doesnt matter if it is no specific religion. monotheism is clearly religion, it doesnt matter than they dont mention more specifics so we can nail it down to a particular denomination.
monotheism *is* religion. if i was an idiot polytheist, i would surely claim to not be represented, wouldnt i? would i be wrong to claim the government was endorsing a religion that i did not believe, and that gov't should be separate from such things?
and is also is not relevant what % of people happen to be monotheist, any more than it would justify muslim dogma in the pledge if we happened to be mostly a muslim country.
EXACTLY! But "God" is not a religion. The framers of the constitution did not intend to remove any reference to God. If they were here today they would tell the 9th circuit justices "NO NO NO, you freakin' morons. You got it all wrong!!!
would i be wrong to claim the government was endorsing a religion that i did not believe, and that gov't should be separate from such things?
The word "endorse" is nowhere to be found in the first amendment. The word establish is.