Non-Religious Sanctuary Thread

just on a related note, assuming i pass the bar exam in august, i shall take a secular oath to the court........no way will i endorse any religious oath

 

Anyone know of any quotes from the Founding Fathers regarding a pledge of allegiance?

They seemed to know what they were doing... but no pledge came around until 1942. Hmmm.

 

I heard on the radio an atheist talking, saying that a true atheist would not care about having "Under God" in the Pledge because it wouldn't be something they were required to say or had to believe in. Imagine if "God" was actually "Santa Claus", he says, and you see how seriously the monotheists take it; then you undrestand the atheist standpoint.

He further went on to say that no true atheist would bring this issue to the fore, but that it was most likely an agnostic, the infamous moderates of the religious world, who cannot make up their mind what to believe in so they fear any input.

That's what he said when he called into Rush Limbaugh (who here's surprised that I listen to him? ).

 

If it's so meaningless that you might as well stick Santa in there, why say it at all? And the fact is, it IS that meaningless when spouted by a bunch of sleepy school kids, half of whom think "indivisible" is "invisible" until they're 12. I think the pledge in schools - which came into vogue in the 50's during the cold war hysteria - was devised as a way to single out possible Commie kids. Ridiculous, of course, but so many things in that era devised for those purposes seem so in retrospect. Now that this is not really an issue, I think leaving the pledge out of schools is just fine.

But I disagree with your radio guy, Bane. He has the right to his opinion, but he is not the be-all end-all of "true atheists" and cannot speak for anyone else. "Under God" is something I refused to say back when I *was* Christian because I felt as a kid they had only stuck the words in there to make non-Christians feel like freaks. I'm not so sure of that anymore, but I still think it alienates people with very legitimate religious - and non-religious - views.

That said, I don't care as much what's in the pledge as I dislike the idea of forcing kids too young to legally consent to sex to swear their undying loyalty to a country they were born in and which is the only one they've experienced. For adults and immigrants, it has meaning.

 

"...I dislike the idea of forcing kids too young to legally consent to sex to swear their undying loyalty to a country they were born in and which is the only one they've experienced."

Interesting point, TreeCave. I agree.

For me, I'm glad to see this ruling, and I think it's about damn time. People argue that the pledge should contain "under God" because the U.S.'s Founding Fathers were religious, believed in God, were right for believing in God, blah, blah, blah... However, what people either neglect or just aren't aware of is that the pledge was written in 1892, but the words "under God" were not included until, at a height in the Cold War, 1954, President Eisenhower made it a mandatory phrase in the pledge in order to distinguish the United States from the "godless Communists," and for no other reason. The phrase has served its sole purpose for even being included in the first place, and the pledge can now stand to be restored to its original wording.

The phrase "under God" is unconstitutional, because students are instructed to recite it by teachers in public schools, and it can therefore be considered a government endorsement that:
1.) There is indeed a god;
2.) There is only one god, and if you instead say "godS," then you've got the pledge -wrong-, and;
3.) You're also wrong if you believe there is no god.

Having the government endorse any one of these three things is in violation of the Constitution, so certainly all three should be undeniably unconstitutional...

 

This is just great. I guess next you guys will be telling us you hate mom and apple pie. You know, if you don't like this country you have the option to leave. I don't mean to flame, but this country was founded by Christians, for Christians. If you are afraid of the Truth, that is absolutely your right. You have the right to be anti-capitalist pro socialist pro one- world government idealists. But please don't try to ruin it for all the other god fearing folk who are the backbone of this great nation. Kids need a moral compass, (yes, this includes the 10 Commandments, something i'm sure you're against for some reason) and the pledge reminds us that America is so great because of God. The founding fathers weren't lying when they said, "In God We Trust".

(file the preceding under "just kidding")

 

Ah, the patented Cydonia sarcasm

 

Nicely said, Emperor's Foot - thanks for taking the time to provide actual research (I was too lazy).

And thank you, Cy, for that split personality fundie rant. Always fun to watch and read!

The deists who read this may take consolation in knowing that I would also object to adding the phrase "humans evolved from apes" into any government document or pledge, because it can hardly be proven that we evolved from apes, and there are legitimate viewpoints that disagree with that take on our species' ancestry. I don't like dogma, whether it appears in religion, science, or in-crowd mentality, or anything else you can think of where people insist that their way is the only "right" way. To my way of thinking, sticking in the unprovable "evolved from apes" and the unprovable "under God" are equally pointless, and rather unfair to the minority who disagree with each statement.

 

...but that it was most likely an agnostic, the infamous moderates of the religious world, who cannot make up their mind what to believe in so they fear any input.

Most times I feel it is harder (or scarer) to doubt something than to believe (or deny) the same something right away, without (or few) pondering.

 

TreeCave, I hope by 'deist' you meant 'theist'. Deists aren't necessarily against the theory of evolution.

 

Er... what is difference between deist and theist again?

 

I am just a confusied agnostic trying to figure the world out.

Anyway, some people should stop whinning and grow up! The pledge is not some binding contract or anything. If you were forced to recite it, then something was wrong, but offically it is volentary.

If you are offended by 'under god,' then let me really frighten you. Imagen a nation that has an offical religion. Maybe out government answers to the Pope, maybe we will have gangs that go around into your house to make sure you practis the true faith, maybe there could be public desplays of punishment of so called heretics.

Instead, some people are worried about two little words in a volentary pledge that most kids dont even understand or care about.

Also, the way the pledge is recited now, with the 'under god' can be concidered a way to express your religious beliefe, and removing it could (it is a strech) be a way of keeping people from expresing their religious beliefes, violting the 1st admendment.

 

Lord Bane...

I heard on the radio an atheist talking, saying that a true atheist would not care about having "Under God" in the Pledge...

There's no such thing as a "true atheist", nor can atheism (or otherwise) be used to make assumptions about a person's church/state views. JFK, a Catholic, strongly favoured church/state separation; Napolean, an atheist, was one of its main proponents (he saw religion as a means of control).

Just to clarify, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that both the phrase "under God" itself, and asking students to recite it, violate the Establishment Clause. So the very words "under God" are illegal, as well as asking students to recite them.

cydonia...

This is just great. I guess next you guys will be telling us you hate mom and apple pie. You know, if you don't like this country you have the option to leave. I don't mean to flame, but this country was founded by Christians, for Christians. If you are afraid of the Truth, that is absolutely your right. You have the right to be anti-capitalist pro socialist pro one- world government idealists. But please don't try to ruin it for all the other god fearing folk who are the backbone of this great nation. Kids need a moral compass, (yes, this includes the 10 Commandments, something i'm sure you're against for some reason) and the pledge reminds us that America is so great because of God. The founding fathers weren't lying when they said, "In God We Trust".

LOL!

EnforcerSG...

Anyway, some people should stop whinning and grow up! The pledge is not some binding contract or anything. If you were forced to recite it, then something was wrong, but offically it is volentary.

By enacting "under God" as a national motto, Congress established religion. Therefore, it violates the Constitution. And the Senate, condemning the judgement 99-0, seems to think that it does matter. If the words don't matter anyway, what is all the fuss about?

If you are offended by 'under god,' then let me really frighten you. Imagen a nation that has an offical religion. Maybe out government answers to the Pope, maybe we will have gangs that go around into your house to make sure you practis the true faith, maybe there could be public desplays of punishment of so called heretics.

It's called medieval Europe. But it's not the words "under God" that are offensive; monotheists have every right to say them as a matter of personal choice. What is offensive, and unconstitutional, is instituting them as a national motto--one that is supposed to represent values for which all of America stands.

Instead, some people are worried about two little words in a volentary pledge that most kids dont even understand or care about.

It's not voluntary, because it's performed by the school as a matter of routine. Those who do not participate are made to stand aside and feel excluded--in violation of both the Establishment and Free Exercise clauses.

Also, the way the pledge is recited now, with the 'under god' can be concidered a way to express your religious beliefe, and removing it could (it is a strech) be a way of keeping people from expresing their religious beliefes, violting the 1st admendment.

Nonsense. People are free to submit to God as a matter of peresonal choice, and they can add in "under God" if they so wish. It's the institutionalisation that matters.

It's amusing that many people are branding this a "non-issue", "irrelevant" etc, but at the same time are making a lot of fuss about it

 

TreeCave, I hope by 'deist' you meant 'theist'. Deists aren't necessarily against the theory of evolution.

Sorry, that was badly worded. I just meant to refer to any non-evolution-believing folks who are offended by the desire to remove "under god" from the pledge. You're exactly right - every Baptist I grew up among believed in evolution, and felt it didn't contradict the Bible at all. I never heard of Christians not believing in evolution until I moved to Tennessee as a kid - there they still believe the world is flat and your soulmate is your cousin. Just teasing.... Tennesseaans aren't by and large backward, that state just has a VERY vocal minority of people born and raised under a rock.

If you were forced to recite it, then something was wrong, but offically it is volentary.

That's the problem - we were forced at my school, unless we had a note stating we were Jehovah's Witnesses. No argument of "I'm only 6 - how do I know if I love America yet or not" was tolerated. It amounted to teaching patriotism as a sanctioned religion. And most of my friends say they were forced to as well, though I think I'm the only one who actually made an argument to a teacher. Got me nowhere. so I just stood up and mouthed something else under my breath instead of saying the pledge.

Instead, some people are worried about two little words in a volentary pledge that most kids dont even understand or care about.

Which is why they shouldn't have to say it.

Also, the way the pledge is recited now, with the 'under god' can be concidered a way to express your religious beliefe, and removing it could (it is a strech) be a way of keeping people from expresing their religious beliefes, violting the 1st admendment.

This is not the only chance they have to express their religious beliefs. By your argument, not letting people proseletyze in a crowded theater during a movie would violate their First Amendment rights. The First Amendment doesn't guarantee you the right to express yourself anywhere and anytime you feel like it, at the expense of everyone around you. It only guarantees that there will BE a time and place where you're allowed to do it. That's why the KKK has to petition for a certain day and place to hold their parades. By your argument, they could waltz into your school and start lecturing about the value of lynching [n-word].

 

And I'm just wondering how many primary schoolkids are pledging their allegiance (or possibly 'elegance') to an 'invisible' nation. I can still remember some of the meaningless expressions I mangled, in my innocence, at their age. 'Let's perpetuate China from him' springs to mind.

 

well as an atheist i do care about swearing to god........and i believe myself to be a true atheist...........i don't like the baggage that goes with the whole "god" word, to say that it is ameaningless word is to me, non sensical....its akin to saying the word nazi is meaningless since i don't believe in fascism


//loses argument and all street cred by invoking nazis

 

I see your point, its like if we had the word "slavery" somewhere in the pledge and most of the non-slave-descendant people, (a majority of present day people, hypothetically) said "leave "slavery" in there, its tradition and doesn't hurt anybody! People who dislike saying "slavery" can skip over it, but don't destroy my right to say it! Leave the country if you can't realize we were a nation founded on slavery!!"

//realixes that if a point is not made by invoking nazis or Hitler, that slavery is the next best bet//

 

How do you like my "One Nation, Under Homer" idea, since a majority of Americans probably watch the Simpsons? The country was founded on majority rule (although some people have the temerity to argue that the opinions of the minority should silence those of the majority!) Nobody would be putting a gun to people's heads and forcing them to recite it and, therefore, the phrase would do no harm. It would be a recognition of the important role that Homer Simpson plays in the national tradition.

 

I had a similar thought on another thread, wherein the great majority of Seinfeld fans will be appeased by starting the pledge with:

Didja ever notice...

 

I remember standing and saying the pledge in elementry school, and never paying attention to the actual wording of it. You weren't forced to, either, I remember a few kids not saying it. I don't think that "under God" should be in the pledge, but I don't think the entire pledge should be gotten rid of. I like how Girl Scouts handle this with their promise, which contains the phrase "...to serve God and my county...". If you don't believe in God, then you omit that part of the promise. Simple.

Although the Seinfeld pledge would also work...

 

Several of us - in the thread on the Pledge issue - invited people to explain exactly what purpose the Pledge serves. No one has responded.

Repeating some words every day doesn't have any effect on anyone. The words quickly lose all meaning when you repeat them mindlessly at someone else's behest. If they had any meaning, more kids would ask why the nation is "invisible", instead of just saying it without question.

 

And if the rote repetition were found to improve Patriotism, it would have long ago been updated to include a pledge not to be involved in criminal behavior, etcetera, etcetera.

I pledge allegiance to the Flag... justice for all. And I furthermore pledge to never monger whores... and to avoid the se7en deadly sins... never to eat junk food unless corporate sponsor of today's pledge - McDonald's is serving it, never to burn the flag, raiding and pillaging is just clean out...[\i]

 

Rogue_Solo: I don't know about the Girl Scouts, but the Boy Scouts bar non-monotheists from admission. In other words, if you refuse to mention God, you run the risk of being put on trial for the "crime" of atheism and being expelled for "misbehaviour". (That applies to homosexuals as well, by the way).

 

That's why I have problems with the Boy Scouts. For an organization that's supposed to be for every boy, it seems awfully picky.

Wow, TreeCave, I've never really thought about what purpose the plegde serves. It's a good question.