Arizona Republicans Propose Bill That Would Not Allow Atheists To Graduate High School

Arizona Republicans Propose Bill That Would Not Allow Atheists To Graduate High School

w ww.patheos.com

A group of Arizona politicians — all Republicans, of course — have proposed a law (House Bill 2467) requiring public high school students to recite the following oath in order to graduate:
"I, _______, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic,....so help me god"

(visit the link for the full news article)

Y'all are so worried about non-existent gun bans, non-existant threats to your constitutional rights, you are missing the REAL danger to the USA - religious idiots!

This is not some mealy-mothed little imagined slight or restriction on some constitutional right - this is an all out assault by christian fundamentalist, in hte guise of hte GOP, to turn american into a fundamentalist theocracy.

The obvious assalt is to the 1st Amendment, but how long befoer they start making proposals for real changes to teh 2nd?

the 2nd amendment follows a clause in the British Bill of Rights that gives PROTESTANTS the right to bear arms (as opposed to Catholics, what with the religious natuer or war & politics of the time)......I reckon it's a short hop for these guys to start proposing some religious restrictions for the 2nd too...

(Yes I know this could be in American political madness, but IMO it is also seriosuly conspiratorial - a well known conspiracy that no-one wants to talk about!)

w ww.patheos.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Well when guns are suddenly items of religion then you know the place has gone to pot, now probably this is why we Brits are happy to have you Americans thousands of miles away as most of the nutters who thought that way went on the sail boats so they're your problems now but given enough time and a strong enough conservative attitude even fire would be considered heretical thought

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


meh, the Atheists don't mind telling people they can't celebrate their Christmas traditions, so screw em!!

See how that works?

When you start bitchin about how other people live, don't belly ache and whine when things don't go your way!

Besides, if they don't believe in God, then what's the big deal?

Say it, get your diploma and be on with life......

Edit: I don't believe in the God of Abraham, but my point is that I am sick and tired of other people telling others how to live!

Do I see the Athiests complain about God being on the money they spend????

As to you OP! You have been quite vocal about taking away peoples second ammendment rights in my country, and I find the hypocracy of your post simply amazing!

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Wow, this is a case of forcing soviet style nationalistic brainwashing on kids, with religion mixed in.

Just entirely sick.

Republicans want to teach the kids to be good little statists.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

"I, _______, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic,....so help me god"

OH! I was expecting something different.

Title is just a tad misleading, don't you think?

reply to post by seeker1963

meh, the Atheists don't mind telling people they can't celebrate their Christmas traditions, so screw em!!

I've never told anyone they can't celebrate their Christmas or any other holiday/religious tradition.

Besides, if they don't believe in God, then what's the big deal? Say it, get your diploma and be on with life......

A lack in belief of God doesn't represent a lack of belief in honor, sincerity, or truth.
Some people take oaths and their word seriously, it may be hard to believe, but some of those people don't believe in God. So you promote lying and oath-breaking? Is that an example of good christian morals?

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


LOL for once I really do agree with you ATG
since I saw that the word God is decendant from the aryan Gut or Goth which refers to king Zargon and his fellow aryans the first dynasty of egypt its all become rather silly scary to me

"one nation under God" is the epithet of the aryan nation which stretched from Ireland to China circa 3700BC and produced the first set of codified laws which were written in stone...

I suspect all the royal lines claim decendancy from Zargon's line in their secret heart of hearts

if people in general only knew

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


I have a rather low opinion of atheism, but I don't approve of this development.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


R is the main threat to all of us everywhere!
We wont fix society and have a peaceful world whilst we have R division!!
The longterm future will be one without R!
Peaceful life will come when R is gone!

reply to post by seeker1963


I understand there is a minora, but no nativity stand on the whitehouse lawn in the "Holiday season"
perhaps your beef is not with "athiests"

Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

meh, the Atheists don't mind telling people they can't celebrate their Christmas traditions, so screw em!!

there's a difference between saying "I dont think god exists and I think your christmas is a meaningless holiday/celebration", and "you are not allowed to celebrate christmas".

See how that works?

Even the infamously "atheist" Soviet Union didn't actually ban Christmas. It wasn't a state holiday, but you could still celebrate it if you wanted to.

When you start bitchin about how other people live, don't belly ache and whine when things don't go your way!

Besides, if they don't believe in God, then what's the big deal?

Oh I don't know - things like freedom of speech, separation of church and state - you know - all those "constitutional values" that fundamentalist nut-jobs pretend to be in favour of when it suits them.

in support of my above post which is not ment to be construed as culturallly exclusive, just illustrative:

Due to the Jewish-run-and-funded ACLU creating a Supreme Court legal precedent allowing “cultural symbols,” that is JEWISH SYMBOLS, as “constitutional cultural displays” - but Christian symbols, as “unconstitutional religious displays” - the Jews have seized rule over religious expression in the public square]

www.judeofascism.com...

last i checked neither Jews nor the supreme court were considered athiests

Leave it to the GOP to expect individuals to be hypocritical to gain their graduation (proof of knowledge) by acknowledging an invisible, pretending friend, storybook hero (to some people, villain to others) and demonstrating the need for superstitious mumbo jumbo that is not based in knowledge but on faith and ritual

"god" help us all ha ha ha

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


You do realize the history of oaths???

Oaths were merely a formality to ensure "legally" that a person could be taken at their word for what they were saying. The concept being, that if they were swearing on a higher power or something sacred to them that they would more or less be honest in said taking of that oath?????

So therefore, the whole swearing to God, is only applicable to those who actually believe in HIM/HER/OR OTHER..........

Bottom line, if Athiests do not believe in God, then the oath is meaningless!!! Do some studying on the history of oaths before you get your panties in an uproar.

I am more offended to the fact that a State government is requiring and oath to a young adult for something they worked hard to get and already have earned, thus holding the diploma hostage over some ridiculous oath!!!

Now that is some blatantly unconstitutional garbage.

Won't go anywhere.

The title of the article (and by extension your thread) is misleading. That is the very same oath I said when I joined the military. It is the same oath that the President says before taking office. It says nothing about your religious beliefs only that you will uphold the Constitution. Should the "so help me God" part have been left out? Probably, but this article is focusing entirely on this one line like just by saying it, affirms your belief in God. This looks like political pandering to me.

Oath of Enlistment

Originally posted by Krazysh0t
The title of the article (and by extension your thread) is misleading. That is the very same oath I said when I joined the military. It is the same oath that the President says before taking office. It says nothing about your religious beliefs only that you will uphold the Constitution. Should the "so help me God" part have been left out? Probably, but this article is focusing entirely on this one line like just by saying it, affirms your belief in God. This looks like political pandering to me.

Oath of Enlistment

you missed this bit about the oath you took:

Army Regulation 601-210, Active and Reserve Components Enlistment Program provides that:

A commissioned officer of any service will administer the Oath of Enlistment in DD Form 4 orally, in English, to each application. Make a suitable arrangement to ensure that the oath is administered in a dignified manner and in proper surroundings. display the U.S. flag prominently near the officer giving the oath. The words "So help me God" may be omitted for persons who desire to affirm rather than to swear to the oath.

Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

You do realize the history of oaths???

Oaths were merely a formality to ensure "legally" that a person could be taken at their word for what they were saying. The concept being, that if they were swearing on a higher power or something sacred to them that they would more or less be honest in said taking of that oath?????

So therefore, the whole swearing to God, is only applicable to those who actually believe in HIM/HER/OR OTHER..........

Bottom line, if Athiests do not believe in God, then the oath is meaningless!!! Do some studying on the history of oaths before you get your panties in an uproar.

and your point is what??

I am more offended to the fact that a State government is requiring and oath to a young adult for something they worked hard to get and already have earned, thus holding the diploma hostage over some ridiculous oath!!!

Yes - that is what I am getting my "panties in an uproar" about - thanks for so violently agreeing with me!!

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


I see your point and raise you this update from the article in your op:

***Update***: While the bill still includes the God language, Think Progress reports that it may be revised:

As written, the bill does not exempt atheist students or those of different faiths from the requirement, though Thorpe has pledged to amend the measure. “In that we had a tight deadline for dropping our bills, I was not able to update the language,” he wrote in an e-mail to the Arizona Republic. “Even though I want to encourage all of our students to understand and respect our Constitution and constitutional form of government, I do not want to create a requirement that students or parents may feel uncomfortable with.”

So it’s possible alternative language may solve the atheist problem, but *requiring* students to take the oath still poses a host of constitutional issues. Another option would be to make the oath optional, but that would make this bill completely irrelevant.

My guess is that something similar to what you posted about the Oath of Enlistment would be implemented where they can affirm the oath instead of swear to it, that is if the legislation even passes. Which I doubt it will.