IS the Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional?

Well, I'm sure you've all heard that the California's 9th District of Judges has found that the Pledge of Allegiance, is "unconstitutional".

What do you guys think? This all goes back to religion, and whether or not you get offended when you say "...one nation, under God".

Don't turn this into an all out war against those that are not affiliated with any religion, just discuss what you think of the whole matter..

So, sound off MoFo's..

__________________
"I was walking down the street with my friend and he said, "I hear music", as if there is any other way you can take it in. You're not special, that's how I receive it too. I tried to taste it but it did not work." - Mitch Hedberg

If the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional, then so is the Declaration of Independence and the money we use each day. This is not the big deal people are making it out to be, because this decision will be nullified in one way or another very shortly.

Is it really surprising to anyone that such a decision came out of San Francisco?

I can't imagine how The Pledge of Allegiance would be un-constitutional, unless they were forcing kids to say it at gunpoint...I'm hardly a conservative type of guy, but I can't believe some of the weird stuff some people spit out. If they were making the kids say prayers at school, then that would be unconstitutional. If you don't wanna say the "Under God" part, don't. Don't go banning the tradition from school all together.

__________________
"You, me, everyone...we are all made of star stuff." - Neil Degrasse Tyson

https://shawnsmovienight.blogspot.com/

They're not talking about JUST in schools, they're talking about in all instances when the Pledge is used.

Now that's just nutty.

Just change the damn thing to what it was before 1954.

It is NOT the same thing as "In God We Trust" on money. Yes, those words should be taken off of our currency, but it is not the same thing. You don't really have much of a choice; you pretty much have to use the money. That you use it in no way suggests that you believe in everything that is written on it. However, if you blurt out the words of the current Pledge of Allegiance, you are pretty clearly suggesting a belief in a deity, whether you actually believe in it or not. When I use money, I am suggesting nothing.

__________________
One of the biggest myths told is that being intelligent is the absence of the ability to do stupid things.

Two things:

1 - They're not fighting for the right NOT to say the Allegiance (I don't believe you have to)...they're fighting to have the whole damn thing abolished, basically. No one's holding a gun to anyone's head.

2 - Whether or not you believe in God, this has certainly been a nation built primarily under the notion of God...therefore I think it's reasonable to say that "under God" merely implies the way this nation was brought up: as if God exists...whether or not He's real is another matter entirely.

3 - You address money (a reasonable point...but I still think it matters), but not the Declaration of Independence. What of that?

They should NOT, and very likely WILL NOT change it back.

Who said otherwise? I don't think the ruling was that any form of the Pledge of Allegiance is abolished. I think the ruling is only about the religious statement, which didn't exist until 1954. Why not use the old version, which is the same thing without the mention of a god?


The Declaration of Independence was written before our country was created. Besides, I don't have any problem at all changing old documents that don't fit the times.

Because "under God" is true. If someone doesn't want to say it, I've got no beef with that.

Well, yes, but it was designed to jump-start things. It's an important document and the fact that such a crucial declaration is "unconstitutional" speaks volumes of how twisted our idea of the Constitution has become.

Well, it doesn't say THE God, it simply says God. So it's not like us "evil" Christians are trying to force America into our religion by adding that little statement into the pledge.

Well, I don't know if it is unconstitutional or not; I never made that claim. What I claimed is that there is a pretty big difference between using money that has something you disagree with on it, and making a pledge that you disagree with.

Edited

How often do you look at your money with disgust because you have to use it?

As Chris said earlier, the Declaration, Congress, Money, et., all use God, Lord, Creator. They might not use all three, but they're all apart of daily life for every American whether they know it or not.

Yeah, In God We Trust is on your money, if you don't feel comfortable with that, throw your money out. Write checks for everything.

They're goal with using Religion in Government isn't in anyway breaking the seperation between Church and State. There are many many things in there that uphold the fact that Religion is used.

BUT, let me clarify again, they're not using it to force you into religion. Atheist or not, if you don't belive in A God, and want the whole smash changed because YOU feel uncomfortable, well, that's nothing more than throwing a fit. Firegod, I'm making no reference to YOU in general, I'm talking about ALL Atheist's.

They had a guy that is Atheist interviewed yesterday and he said that it makes his family feel uncomfortable when they have to say the pledge.

Ok, money not be something you can change for your own pleasure, but if you don't feel comfortable saying "One Nation, Under God" then take out that part. It's not like you're being forced (and I know this has been said before) to say it.

You are really funny.

i have no opinion either way. but i don't say the pledge of allegiance at school, i don't stand, and no one ever says anything to me about it. it's not as enforced in my school as it is in other places - and school is one of the only environments where it's a part of everyday life.

__________________
**** the Lakers!

This is funny.
I was at the mall with my sister today, and we were laughing at all the friggin' patriotism. Nordstroms had just about everything with the stars and stripes business; shoes, clothes, handbags, towels, jewlery, EVERYTHING. It was midly disgusting.
We get bombed by terrorists, Calven Klein makes shoes. Crazy logic.

On to the pledge.
I say keep it.
I like it.

Phoney patriotism rocks. It's a huge cash cow. Take a look at how much of the "America YAY!" stuff is made in other countries. It's a laugh and a half. I'm such a cynic now, it scares me.

Keep the Pledge, drop the Under God part. It was only added in the fifties to weed out "communists." They figured that anyone who was offended by it HAD to be a commie, since commies were "Godless Heathens," and they used it to railroad a lot of innocent people. The fifties were wacky. So are the 2000's. But neither in a good way.

Should we modify the Declaration of Independence and all of our money, too? No one's being forced to say the Pledge, mind you...and, in my opinion, it's not even necessarily endorsing the concept of God...just the concept of a country built on a belief in God. There's a difference.

I really don't think it is all THAT big a deal, but if people choose not to say the Pledge, they will get some pretty negative reaction in most places. It is something that we pretty much force on our kids; I don't remember feeling like I had a choice when I was in school.

Edit: Correction. I did stop saying the God part at about age 12, so I did have somewhat of a choice. Although I don't know how many people noticed.

Not too many people are going to attack a 12 year old either.

Yes, especially after all this. I'm just waitin' for the decision to be nullified at this point, really. It shouldn't be too long, I don't think.