Show of HandsShow of Hands

Pollcaster97 December 19th, 2016 2:08am

Is "under God" in the American Pledge of Allegiance appropriate?

11 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

myob
12/19/16 11:22 am

Say the pledge as written. It is not open to change. If you can't say it. Don't say it.

FIAT2LUX On Planet Earth
12/19/16 12:41 pm

It wasn't always written the way it currently is.

Xemanis Lawful Good
12/19/16 11:20 am

Not quite.

That would imply that we're all members of the abrahamic religions.

Xemanis Lawful Good
12/19/16 11:21 am

Then again I can go ahead and say that "under god" is referring to Eris so whatever

DallasFan
12/19/16 11:14 am

No it's not appropriate but I don't think there's a reason for people to be very upset about it. It should be be there but there's really no point in changing it.

saskiaelisabeth
12/19/16 10:39 am

POA is the stupidest thing anyway. I don't need to "pledge my allegiance" to a flag everyday to be loyal to our country. Nor does pledging your allegiance make you loyal. It's dumb to have kids do it every morning before school, by high school most don't even bother with it anymore because they've realized how idiotic it is.

Put God in it or not, I don't care. As long as no one is forced to say it, or forces them to say God, then I'm not bothered. Teachers actually had the audacity to try and give students detention for not standing. Yeah thank god that didn't slide with our principle.

Reply
ThomasPaine Writer of Common Sense
12/19/16 9:48 am

Well, it is a truth that we are all under God, whether we believe in him or not.

TomLaney1 Jesus is Lord
12/19/16 9:35 am

Yes, totally. It reflects the general view of the Founders, who certainly included God in the Declaration of Independence. And it does not violate the First Amendment in any way. The modern concept of "Separation of Church and State" is completely false, having been formulated by Progressivist Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis in the early 20th century. As the Founders intended it, that "separation" was a one-way wall which protected the Church from State interference, and NOT the other way around. In fact, the Founders were so unopposed to religion in government spaces, etc., that one of Jefferson's first official acts as President was to institute weekly religious services in the House chambers of the Capitol Building in Washington DC. It was then one of the largest meeting rooms in the city, so he thought it logical to use it for church services, and no one ever thought to object. This proves the consensus at that time about the First Amendment.

Reply
rebelfury76 No Justice, No Peace
12/19/16 6:30 am

The pledge of allegiance isn't appropriate.

You're already worshipping an idol but you get worked up about one word. Listen to the rest of the words, there's plenty to be more worried about.

rebelfury76 No Justice, No Peace
12/19/16 6:35 am

And if it bothers you, just skip that part. Easy. Next "issue" please.

Diogenes FreeMeBe
12/19/16 5:33 am

Well over God sounds a wee bit presumptuous.

Reply
TomLaney1 Jesus is Lord
12/19/16 9:37 am

Touché! Well played, my friend! :^D

kscott516 Masks fail
12/19/16 3:59 am

Very appropriate

Reply
jmw7477 Indiana
12/19/16 3:16 am

Absolutely not. Not everyone is Christian or even believes in a deity. The POA wasn't written with that phrase. It needs to be removed.

Reply
Genome Praise Poseidon
12/18/16 10:46 pm

Separation of church and state, having it is inappropriate

Reply
TomLaney1 Jesus is Lord
12/19/16 9:37 am

Historically incorrect. See my comments above.

susanr Colorado
12/18/16 9:27 pm

Not at all. And it wasn't there originally; it was inserted during the cold war. I remember when it changed.

Reply
shygal47 Florida east coast
12/18/16 9:38 pm

Me too. and I kept forgetting every morning at school.

Zach1
12/18/16 9:03 pm

I think it's abbot unnecessary but I don't think we should spend the money replacing everything

monkees19 New Jersey
12/18/16 8:49 pm

I don't think it belongs there but I don't think I'd go as far to say inappropriate. Unnecessary, perhaps, but not inappropriate. And definitely not worth any cost of printing new money and disposing of the old .

monkees19 New Jersey
12/20/16 7:53 am

Snowball effect. It starts with the pledge. If it got removed there, those who want it scrubbed from everywhere will move onto money next. There are way bigger fish to fry than this one.

rebelfury76 No Justice, No Peace
12/20/16 8:24 am

Well talk about the issue presented rather than arguing against things no one brought up

monkees19 New Jersey
12/20/16 8:45 am

Don't tell me how to live my life

DunkinFrunk Austin area, Texas
12/18/16 8:45 pm

No, it was never supposed to be there.

Reply
GlockMan1 Alabama
12/18/16 8:42 pm

Yes. It was placed there on purpose to aggravate atheists. 😀

Reply
TomLaney1 Jesus is Lord
12/19/16 9:39 am

Love it! :^D

saskiaelisabeth
12/19/16 10:28 am

And every other religion that doesn't have one god? Why would you aggravate nearly every religion but one in a country founded on religious freedom.

political Georgia
12/18/16 8:06 pm

More than appropriate

Reply
Zod Above Pugetropolis
12/18/16 7:49 pm

Not even remotely, but what are you gonna do? Lots of cowards back in the 50s, desperate for magic to save them from the big bad communists.

Reply
rebelfury76 No Justice, No Peace
12/19/16 6:32 am

Just like today with "muslims," nothing changes

Zod Above Pugetropolis
12/19/16 4:55 pm

It was "Iranians" in-between times.

Praetorianus Fair enough.
12/18/16 7:25 pm

It isn't, nor is in God we trust appropriate to be printed on our money.
Freedom of religion means you can worship as you please but church and state are separate.
For the same reason, I don't want churches to have to display the US flag.

Reply
tony1987
12/18/16 7:29 pm

This user is currently being ignored

Praetorianus Fair enough.
12/18/16 8:38 pm

I don't think it's a question of age.
I'm early generation X btw.

rebelfury76 No Justice, No Peace
12/19/16 6:32 am

Well the money is printed by private banks....


Check mate

TomLaney1 Jesus is Lord
12/19/16 9:40 am

Praet, I thought you understood "separation of Church and State." See my comments at top.

taxumrat milky way galaxy
12/18/16 7:19 pm

I dont think it's inappropriate. I just think its odd that i had to repeat it in school. Woo separation of church and state and individual thinking!

Reply
GlockMan1 Alabama
12/18/16 8:44 pm

Separation of church and state is NOT in the Constitution.

Zach1
12/18/16 9:03 pm

You don't have to

Tekaishi Average Joe
12/18/16 9:40 pm

What's the first Amendment then??

taxumrat milky way galaxy
12/18/16 10:47 pm

@tekaishi please dont debate for me. I was not bringing up the 1st amendment. From here on out im not part of this.

GlockMan1 Alabama
12/19/16 6:20 am

First Amendment - Religion and Expression. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;......there is nothing here about prayer in schools or a Bible in the courtroom or the display of the 10 Commandments in a government building. What you have are liberal judges who use "judicial creativity" to go beyond what is in the 1st Amendment....including the separation of church and state.

TomLaney1 Jesus is Lord
12/19/16 9:43 am

Exactly, Glock! See my comments at top to learn who the real culprit was.

Malekithe Hades
12/18/16 7:13 pm

Who does it harm

Reply
FIAT2LUX On Planet Earth
12/19/16 7:59 am

Non-theists who feel like they are intentionally being made social outcasts by the wording.

Malekithe Hades
12/19/16 9:41 am

So no one

TomLaney1 Jesus is Lord
12/19/16 9:44 am

Not non-theists. Only anti-theists.

Malekithe Hades
12/19/16 10:31 am

They make themselves social outcasts. It does not harm them or exclude them from participating in seasonal activities even if they don't believe

FIAT2LUX On Planet Earth
12/19/16 12:46 pm

@malekithe I disagree on the idea that it affects no-one. As of a poll in 2012, up to 20% of the US public had no significant religious identity and self-identified agnostics and atheists made up an estimated 13 million people in the US, which as of 2013 was half the population of Texas. www.pewforum.org/2012/10/09/nones-on-the-rise/

FIAT2LUX On Planet Earth
12/19/16 1:01 pm

As for making themselves social outcasts, what precisely do you mean and how do they do so?

TomLaney1 Jesus is Lord
12/19/16 1:36 pm

Lux, please, please don't send all the agnostics and atheists here to Texas! I'm begging you! We already have far too many of them in Austin. :^D

Malekithe Hades
12/19/16 2:52 pm

I hurts no one.
I am not religious at all and am not bothered in the least by those who do.
Words like In god we trust or Christmas displays in public locations do not bother me at all.
No one has tried to force a religion on me. We cannot be threatened by someone else expressing their faith. I have been to Christmas parties, Jewish holiday events and Muslim holiday events. I enjoy the company and the atmosphere without it effecting or changing my non beliefs.
At worst someone may ask you to go to their place of worship. Oh the horrors! Just say no thanks.
Don't like a nativity scene? Don't look at it. I find them kind of festive and i look at the spirit and good will that is being expressed this tine of year as a positive.

FIAT2LUX On Planet Earth
12/19/16 3:05 pm

@malekithe as private displays, I agree, but when it becomes codified in something government endorsed, it starts to cross borders.

FIAT2LUX On Planet Earth
12/19/16 3:06 pm

@tlaney1 😂

Malekithe Hades
12/19/16 3:29 pm

@Fiat. It doesn't cross anything at all. A Government building with a Christmas Tree, a Menorah, or a Festivus pole doesn't impose a religion on me or anyone else.

FIAT2LUX On Planet Earth
12/19/16 3:39 pm

While having only one of those present instead of say the top ten in the area is indeed a breach of church/state separation, having an oath of office explicitly invoking a deity (religious test for office) when a sizable portion of the population doesn't believe in any would present a far more problematic imposed breach the same way invoking a deity in an oath of allegiance does.

Malekithe Hades
12/19/16 3:42 pm

It is not a breach of separation of church and state at all.

Malekithe Hades
12/19/16 3:46 pm

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
A religious symbol, prayer or mention of god in no way equates to establishing a state religion or prohibits anyone from free exercise of a different religion or no religion.

TomLaney1 Jesus is Lord
12/19/16 10:52 pm

Lux, remember that one of Jefferson's first acts as President was to establish religious services in the House chamber of the Capitol Building in Washington DC. No one objected, and the services continue their throughout his presidency. He chose the House chamber because it was one of the largest meeting rooms in the city, with no thought to any conflict with the First Amendment as the Founders intended it. This is because they intended the "wall of separation between Church and State," as Jefferson called it in his Letter to the Danbury Baptists, to be a one-way wall which protected the Church from State interference, not the other way around. You have probably never heard this, because Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis (early 20th c.) twisted and misinterpreted the doctrine of Church and State separation to mean something entirely different: a YUGE forty-foot wall (which he undoubtedly intended to make the Church pay for) to keep the Church out of State property/ceremonies.