It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

I don't believe in "God" so why shouldn't God be taken out of the pledge?

page: 14
10
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Titen-Sxull
 


Having a pledge violates the constitution.




posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
reply to post by freedish
 




i said:
They were christian.
They formed the US.
Thus, it is UNDER GOD.


you said:
From this quote I gather that you are in favor of keeping Under God in the pledge.

Having Under God in the official government certified Pledge directly violates the first amendment as it puts a stamp of approval on a Monotheistic capital G God alienating polytheists and atheists.


No it doesn't lol.
The amendment prohibits the making of any law "respecting an establishment of religion", impeding the free exercise of religion, infringing on the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.


putting "under god" in the pledge ISN'T making a law. it's making a PLEDGE. NOT a law. and you AREN'T being forced to say the pledge either....
and atheism IS NOT a religion...so it's not impeding your exercise of religion.
have you ever actually read the first amendment?



you said:
You back up having the Under God in the pledge by saying the first settlers here were religious. Indeed they were religious, they were seeking religious FREEDOM.


No- I back up the 'under god' part of the the pledge because the majority of people in America believe in god (roughly 92%). (Majority rules, doesn't it?)
If 92% of our population believed in Santa Clause I would support that too..I wouldn't say the pledge if it was 'under santa clause' but i would support it.....because I support majority rule.
And no- they weren't seeking religious freedom, they were seeking freedom from religious PERSECUTION. but that's aside the point.
you assumed that i think "under god" in the pledge is okay because our founding fathers were christian, and you were wrong in that assumption. someone else in this thread made a claim that we were never a christian nation and i was simply providing evidence to the contrary. (a whole lot of it too) that's all.



you said:
In America religious freedom is protected by the first amendment which clearly is meant to set up a wall of separation to prevent state sponsored religion and to stop the government from at all establishing an affiliation with a religion. There are only a few religions with a capital G monotheistic God and I'm guessing the folks who put Under God the pledge back in the 50s weren't thinking of Allah or the Old Testament God. I'd say its a clear and obvious violation of the first amendment.


again you are wrong because a PLEDGE is not a LAW. You are NOT being FORCED to do ANYTHING.
Even kids in school are allowed to keep their mouths shut while the pledge is being said. But those that wish to say it may shout it out loud boldly.




I said:
Just because YOU don't believe in God doesn't mean it should be taken out.



you said:
This has a total of nothing to do with what you or I believe or what you or I want, it's about Constitutionality. Personally I don't care if the pledge has the words Under God in it UNLESS that pledge is made official by the government (which is has). Theist or atheist anyone who cares about freedom of religion should want it removed.

Given the fact that the pledge is a pledge, and not a law would give reason to think that it is not unconstitutional.

edit on 27-6-2011 by freedish because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by freedish because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by freedish because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 09:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by freedish


Btw I will agree with part of your statement. You ARE right that we aren't a Christian nation anymore. However when this nation was first started until about 50 years ago we definitely were.


You can go read the linked thread and get the full truth. Try reading all sides - - not just those who support the Christian version. "The United States was not founded in Christianity? I beg to differ.," www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Annee
 


The idea of a pledge is not for the purposes of obiding what everyone believes. The point of a pledge is basically a majority rule.


The pledge was written to increase subscriptions to a magazine.

However - since the US chose to adopt it - - and change it at will - - I still stand strongly - - no citizen should be excluded. Putting God in the pledge excludes American Atheists. And that is wrong.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 10:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 



I've read differing opinions on the matter. I will stick to mine, thanks.
edit on 27-6-2011 by freedish because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Q:1984A:1776
reply to post by newcovenant
 


My parents militantly believed in God. They were Jehovah's Witnesses. They didn't think that it was appropriate to put "one nation, under God" in the pledge, as this nation is not united in being "under God". There are plenty of people who would swear their allegiance to this nation, but they don't believe in your "God" or they don't believe in any god. The pledge totally goes against the intention our founding fathers had in giving us freedom of religion.
edit on 26-6-2011 by Q:1984A:1776 because: (no reason given)


Actually, I think your confused about what freedom of religion is. YOu don't seem to have a strong grasp of the concept. The failure to provide a "Bill of Rights" for the people of this nation against any abuse of the new government actually was what was responsible for holding up the Constitution's ratification, hence, Mr. Franklin's speech and the promise that the first work of this new government would be those first ten amendments.

And while freedom of religion was the intent in order to prevent what had occurred in England between the Catholics and the Protestants for centuries and then establishment of the state-wide Church of England, it is clear from the text of Mr. Franklin's speech that the provision was intended to protect the freedom of the states on this issue, and also so that no "sect" of the Christian faith was declared the "official" U.S. religion nationwide.

The provisions also with respect to the exclusion of "religious tests" for holding office were actually meant to protect religion also since the requirement of the British people to swear allegiance to the sovereign over the Pope or God was the cause of much of the religious strife in their homeland whose entire belief system was based on biblical foundations above man-made or "sovereign" law.

The typical ACLU approach of banning all religion and religious reference from all public venue has nothing to do with the founding fathers intentions.

"Mr. President,

I confess that there are several parts of this constitution which I do not at present approve, but I am not sure I shall never approve them: For having lived long, I have experienced many instances of being obliged by better information, or fuller consideration, to change opinions even on important subjects, which I once thought right, but found to be otherwise.

It is therefore that the older I grow, the more apt I am to doubt my own judgment, and to pay more respect to the judgment of others. Most men indeed as well as most sects in Religion, think themselves in possession of all truth, and that wherever others differ from them it is so far error. Steele a Protestant in a Dedication tells the Pope, that the only difference between our Churches in their opinions of the certainty of their doctrines is, the Church of Rome is infallible and the Church of England is never in the wrong.

But though many private persons think almost as highly of their own infallibility as of that of their sect, few express it so naturally as a certain french lady, who in a dispute with her sister, said "I don't know how it happens, Sister but I meet with no body but myself, that's always in the right -

In these sentiments, Sir, I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered, and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other. I doubt too whether any other Convention we can obtain, may be able to make a better Constitution.

For when you assemble a number of men to have the advantage of their joint wisdom, you inevitably assemble with those men, all their prejudices, their passions, their errors of opinion, their local interests, and their selfish views. From such an assembly can a perfect production be expected? It therefore astonishes me, Sir, to find this system approaching so near to perfection as it does; and I think it will astonish our enemies, who are waiting with confidence to hear that our councils are confounded like those of the Builders of Babel; and that our States are on the point of separation, only to meet hereafter for the purpose of cutting one throats.

Thus I consent, Sir, to this Constitution because I expect no better, and because I am not sure, that it is not the best. The opinions I have had of its errors, I sacrifice to the public good. I have never whispered a syllable of them abroad. Within these walls they were born, and here they shall die.

If every one of us in returning to our Constituents were to report the objections he has had to it, and endeavor to gain in support of them, we might prevent its being generally received, and thereby lose all the salutary effects; great advantages resulting naturally in our favor among foreign Nations as well as among ourselves, from our real or apparent unanimity. Much of the strength; efficiency of any Government in procuring and securing happiness to the people, depends, on opinion, on the general opinion of the goodness of the Government, as well as of the wisdom and integrity of its Governors.

I hope therefore that for our own sakes as a part of the people, and for the sake of posterity, we shall act heartily and unanimously in recommending this Constitution (if approved by Congress and confirmed by the Conventions) wherever our influence may extend, and turn our future thoughts & endeavors to the means of having it well administred.

On the whole, Sir, I can not help expressing a wish that every member of the Convention who may still have objections to it, would with me, on this occasion doubt a little of his own infallibility, and to make manifest our unanimity, put his name to this instrument." (Benjamin Franklin, Constitutional Convention at Philadelphia)

And while the "separation of church and state" will continue to be debated and misconstrued, mostly by the ACLU and the atheists, what is lost is that the "separation" of church and state was actually given for the church's protection and to protect the freedom of Americans to worship at the church of their choosing, not to protect the government from the "interference" of the Christian faith at all.

The entire concept of providing for freedom of religion in this country as an individual right in and of itself as primarily Christian or deists themselves, but who abhorred the positions many were placed in during their lives in England having to swear allegiance to king and country when the sovereigns edicts were against their moral and religious principles and beliefs.

The government of the founder's acknowledged religion and religious beliefs and provided for it in our national culture, with the specific provision for its inclusion attempting merely to avoid the differences in the scriptural teachings with respect to the Protestant and Catholic sectarian differences having application at a governmental level nationwide, since the federal government actually was intended to have few and limited powers over the states and people over-all.

Historically in its origins, the Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu or Muslim beliefs and their wars were primarily due to intolerance of other faiths, each desiring a "country" of their own where their faith was clearly "nationwide," while the Christian wars were fought over sectarian differences between Catholics and Protestants and the various denominations, scriptural interpretations, rituals and practices within them in their former country of England.

Thus this is what the founders were intending to avoid, and also placing the government as accountable to the people and not above it, so that religious tests and fealty to government over the "supreme" Nature's God's laws in the event of moral conflict when the federal government overstepped itself in any respect would then be lessened or avoided.

Tolerance of other religions practices and beliefs is actually uniquely Christian in it's origins in its scriptural provisions, as Christ himself taught in the Golden Rule and parable of the Good Samaritan in loving one's neighbor or enemy AS oneself, and doing unto another as you would have them do unto you - allowing them their freedom to worship God in the manner that you yourself enjoy, whether affiliated with a specific church or not, so long as it does not impinge upon the rights of other of his children to worship in the manner they see fit.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 10:06 PM
link   
I don't understand why any self-respecting Christian (or any person of faith) would want their god associated with a governmental institution that makes its wealth through immoral loan practices and unholy warfare. What god would approve of using his/her name in this way.

Blasphemous if you ask me.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


And what about every other group? People who don't believe in the republic? People who don't believe in one nation? People who don't believe in fair justice. Yea they're not the best of people, down right wrong most of them, but they have a right to believe what they do don't they?

The second you make a pledge appease to all citizens, it's purpose is void. The point of a pledge is to be different and the point of a pledge to the republic is, in essence, to admit you're a minority serving the desires of the majority.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 10:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by The_Zomar

Originally posted by freedish
reply to post by Annee
 


edit on 27-6-2011 by freedish because: (no reason given)


Would you tolerate your children being taught songs about Allah? They might not believe in him but people do, so according to your logic we must sing songs about Allah.


No, but I wouldn't be living in a dominate Muslim society to begin with...

but if I was, I would move.

however I don't mind my children being taught songs about fictional characters..

So if you believe God is fictional, why do you care?



edit on 27-6-2011 by freedish because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 10:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrJay1975


Tolerance of other religions practices and beliefs is actually uniquely Christian in it's origins in its scriptural provisions, as Christ himself taught in the Golden Rule and parable of the Good Samaritan in loving one's neighbor or enemy AS oneself, and doing unto another as you would have them do unto you - allowing them their freedom to worship God in the manner that you yourself enjoy, whether affiliated with a specific church or not, so long as it does not impinge upon the rights of other of his children to worship in the manner they see fit.



No it isnt. The pagans were so tolerant of other religions they disappeared into them.

Christianity is dominant because it is NOT tolerant of other religions, and it actively seeks to root them out and eliminate them while preserving its own meme.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by jimnuggits
reply to post by freedish
 


Oh yeah?

Ask a Navajo how that worked out...

What? Can you refer to a quote or something?



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 10:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by AzureSky
Athiests just need to stop taking everything as a personal shot at what they believe in. Who gives a damn, who or what someone believes in.

Use some common sense. Let people display what they want to display, they do it for a reason other than to piss atheists off. So don't take it personally and we'll all be a lot happier.


You know the old saying...(live and let live)....people are going to believe what they choose to believe...and no one is going to change their mind...unless they want their mind changed...that is life...lets enjoy the differences.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 10:16 PM
link   
Often when I hear the word God, i think of the song Judith by A Perfect Circle.

If there is a God, he's doing a terrible job. Maybe that's why there are so many people trying to force their beliefs on the rest of us to make up for his incompetence.


edit on 27-6-2011 by DizzyDude because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 10:16 PM
link   




No it isnt. The pagans were so tolerant of other religions they disappeared into them.

Christianity is dominant because it is NOT tolerant of other religions, and it actively seeks to root them out and eliminate them while preserving its own meme.


Christianity IMO is honestly one of the MOST tolerant of ANY religion period, and to say it actively seeks to root out all other religions is not only a made up falsity, But also a non though out opinion.

There are many religion that do do as you say but christianity is not that big bad bully religion you are falsely portaying it to be period.
edit on 6/27/2011 by XJMatt because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
No it isnt. The pagans were so tolerant of other religions they disappeared into them.

Christianity is dominant because it is NOT tolerant of other religions, and it actively seeks to root them out and eliminate them while preserving its own meme.


This concept that anything of any value started with Christianity - - is really annoying.

Compared to previous older beliefs and philosophies - - - Christianity is barely a blip on the radar.

Its actually rather frightening that this particular belief took hold. And that would be attributed to someone using it for power and manipulation.

I will continue to campaign and fight not to have anything god related in the US government.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


Well to be honest, Christianity and the fall of Rome both significantly changed the course of human history. And it did significantly raise the value of human life in the eyes of the common person. Forget the church and kings, fact is the common man was not of the same mentality after Christianity, and significantly changed after the fall of Rome with nothing but their faith to lead them. Obviously like any group its leaders have been wrong, but I'd beg to question any good examples of the common man in other places before Christianity entered into them. I'll also expand that to Islam before colonialism. Abrahamic faiths significantly altered the mind set of the common person, and that cultural shift can be shown to have significantly improved the world and advanced it forward. Nobody has to think too hard to see that 10,000 years of human history is littered with horrible things, but only in the last 1000 years or so have things improved.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by newcovenant
 


Our republic was founded on Christian beliefs. Our laws, Constitution, Bill of Rights and The Declaration all Christian based.

The main reason that under god is in the pledge of allegiance. Our founding fore fathers believed the only person that has a right to take your freedom is God himself and no one else.

If you don't believe in God that's your choice. But your "FREEDOM" is based on a God given right. It doesn't say Jesus or christian. It means your God has given you freedom. If you are Atheist than your god is you. It's really that simple.

One nation under god (under the umbrella of freedom. So says your god not "the" god.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
No it isnt. The pagans were so tolerant of other religions they disappeared into them.

Christianity is dominant because it is NOT tolerant of other religions, and it actively seeks to root them out and eliminate them while preserving its own meme.


This concept that anything of any value started with Christianity - - is really annoying.

Compared to previous older beliefs and philosophies - - - Christianity is barely a blip on the radar.

Its actually rather frightening that this particular belief took hold. And that would be attributed to someone using it for power and manipulation.

I will continue to campaign and fight not to have anything god related in the US government.


God does not mean Jesus Christ or Christianity. Yes this country was founded on Christian beliefs.As our laws at least back then. Mimicked the ten commandments. Fighting how the country was found and what it was found on is the same as telling those in the south they can't fly a confederate flag. It is part of our history and heritage.

That's the problem with this country. We have no moral compass. No belief system (whatever it may be) I teach my children. Do not steal, do not lie, do not kill people, cheating on your spouse in bad. I would say these things should be followed everywhere. All of which come from the bible. If you don't think that they are good rules to follow than you need to find a compass somewhere. We were founded on Christian beliefs. And it is in short a way for Americans to say the only person that can take our freedoms away is God (your god, my god, whatever your god maybe.) Americans have the right to be free human beings, not even the Gov is supposed to be able to take those rights.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 10:31 PM
link   
reply to post by newcovenant
 
You Say....
"I do not believe in God" ...but you do..? And the pledge? to what? God?...the US? ... the PWTB?
Let me tell you a story..:
I am a cyclist. I ride many many miles every day. I look at several flags flying in the wind to help me decide my distance and ride. The flags...they move..but I cannot see what is moving them. they sometimes move slowly, and other times move as if they are being manipulated by some unseen force. I have been told it is the wind..
but I have never seen it! I can see leaves and limbs in trees moving, but I have never seen what it is that people say is causing it....that is...the wind. ... and the flags continue to move ..and move. then one day I am riding my bike on the trail; And .After perhaps 25+ miles out.. a gust of what "people call the wind" lifts me up, and throws me off the trail!! I sustain a broken nose and two broken ribs. But I have never seen this thing people talk about...this "wind". So it surely must not exist..(I conclude it must be some other thing that caused my injury)
I cannot possibly believe in something I cannot see despite the fact I was thrown off the trail by some unseen force which was undeniably ....the "invisible" wind...
If you have never seen a train would you park your car on a train track? Of course not. You can see the tracks, the crossing gates, etc..people have warned you of trains..the State includes questions on its drivers license tests about trains..but you have never seen one..so you conclude they do not exist...you ignore the law concerning trains, and your own eyes have seen that there is evidence that they do indeed exist..(tracks, and crossing gates etc.) ....but you have never seen one..so as far as you are concerned they do not exist.
And; since you have never seen a train. You do not hesitate to park your car on the tracks....And the train indeed does come. Smash!.
The fact you do not believe in trains because you have never seen them will not negate the fact that they exist. You know there are tracks and gaits..you can see the evidence of them, and you ignore the warning signs anyway...Please bear with me...I am not on a tangent to the original post..
You can see the flag of America flying in the wind, and you decide in your heart to leave God out of a pledge? Be my guest. ...I do not ally myself to a flag.
the flag is a sign. America is in dire straits. Removing God from the pledge? be my guest. But be prepared for things are about to come as a result of it. It isn't about the pledge. It is about God. Ignore him and he will ignore you. Pledge to nothing and nothing will be pledged. Atheist? Not my problem. The flag is being moved by something unseen; Remove the pledge in your own heart and what is left? pledge to what? Nothing!
So if you cannot see the wind...or God...doesn't mean that it/He does not exist..I would not remove the pledge..and as I stand and recite it invoking the name of God, you have the right not to do so. all the while knowing that indeed the wind is real even though you cannot see it.
Remove the name of God, Not a good idea at all.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by gentledissident

Originally posted by freedish where are you getting all these crazy questions and ideas
(fixed your dangling participle) I've been reading posts about this being a Christian nation, and I should accept that or leave the country. We've been referred to as murderous sub-humans. I'm just wondering where Christians stand as a group regarding atheists

Since God, I assume the Christian God, is all over the government, I would think there should be a law about respecting Christianity, being it's official and all.


(Thanks!) Oh- I'm not sure who said that you should leave the country but it wasn't I. But I do think you should grow up and realize you are living in a country where 92% of people believe in God. Things like 'under god' are just going to happen. And if you don't believe in any deity why does it bother you?

Who said atheists are murderous sub-humans? Not I.

Regarding atheists, I don't know where most "Christians" stand (i put in quotes because a lot of people call themselves christian but don't truly follow Jesus Christ). However I can tell you that in my faith we are supposed to love everyone. I think atheists are misguided because they don't have God the Holy Spirit living inside them. I want you to believe in the one and only true son of God and be saved by God. But you need to repent of your evilness as every human is inherently evil first and then give yourself to Jesus.

Concerning God and government, Jesus was once asked by the Jewish Pharicees about the taxes imposed on them by the romans who were occupying Jerusalem at that time..

22Is it lawful for us to give tribute unto Caesar, or no?

23But he perceived their craftiness, and said unto them, Why tempt ye me?

24Shew me a penny. Whose image and superscription hath it? They answered and said, Caesar's.

25And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's.

I imagine God feels similarly about government as he does taxes. He cares about where your concerns lie. In Him, or money...

I can only give you decent answers. But, if you want a great answer ask God.
edit on 27-6-2011 by freedish because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by freedish because: (no reason given)







 
10
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join