RE: Fed. Judge Declares "Pledge of Allegiance" Unconstitutional

[Daniel Kronemann <kron4155@uidaho.edu>]

It is unconstitutional because it demands that you submit to a God even
when you don't believe in one.  You infringe on the rights of those who
wish not to do that.  And students are not just allowed to abstain from
this.  If they didn't "respect" the flag students were punished.

Atheists don't fall apart in with the mention of any God.  They just
refuse to acknowledge one.  Many atheists will talk about religion and
theology, but they shouldn't have to recite a pledge that demands they
acknowledge one.  How are atheists weak in their convictions?  No one said
anyone was going to jail.  But they don't want to be forced to do it
either, nor suffer any consequence.

How does striking "indivisible" follow taking out "under God."
Personally, as a self proclaimed citizen of the world, I have a problem
with the entire pledge.  And I happily refuse to say it.  The pledge is
not American Patriotism.  Patriots don't force someone to say something
they don't believe.  It is an expression of American Nationalism.  However
I must say I believe in every letter of the last line "Liberty and Justice
for ALL!"  Notice, not just for those who believe in a God.  I'm sorry you
don't believe the court should be concerned about such an important
statement that apparently has gotten a lot of people riled up.  If it
wasn't so important why is everyone so angry?  Then who cares if they take
it out or not?  Point is, that it is important.

Love

Daniel

On Sun, 30 Jun 2002, Scott Dredge wrote:

> I don't believe "Under God" is unconstitutional and I would expect
> that the Supreme Court would overturn the 9th circuit's ruling.
> Further, even if the decision were upheld by the Supreme Court, how
> long would it take for a Constitutional Amendment to sail through
> Congress making it constitutional?  Congress is united on this issue.
>
> Atheists are pretty weak in their convictions if the mere mention of
> God in their presence causes them to go to pieces.  No one will be
> sent to jail for remaining silent for the "Under God" phrase when
> reciting the pledge.  In fact, students can choose to remain silent
> during the entire pledge, if they and/or their parents are so offended
> by this exercise in American patriotism.
>
> Remove "Under God" from the pledge and you might as well toss out the
> word "indivisible".  Don't our courts have anything better to do with
> their time?
>
> -SD
>
>
> --- Daniel Kronemann <kron4155@uidaho.edu> wrote:
> >
> > To all
> >
> > Well I guess I must say "Finally someone struck it
> > down" if only the
> > "under God" part.  Personally I find the entire
> > pledge problematic.  I
> > wouldn't want my kid taught to "pledge an
> > allegiance" to any country over
> > another.  Another example of the our hypermasculine
> > culture and how it is
> > trying to create this "us versus them" mentality.
> >
> -- SNIP --
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
>