Another California battle over “In God We Trust;” Update: Secular extremism loses!
Update 11/6: Score one for the side of sanity. The Bakersfield Californian reports that the measure to display our founding documents and “In God We Trust” in the classroom passed at Kern High:
After a seemingly contradictory and confounding string of motions and amendments, the Kern High School District board agreed to put the phrase “In God We Trust” in every Kern High School District classroom.
Four members of the five-man board agreed to an amended version of trustee Chad Vegas’ proposal to hang posters of the national motto with founding documents in all KHSD classrooms using a locally designed format. Board President Bob Hampton, who has said that spirituality should remain in the home and church and out of the public education system, opposed the measure.
…Dozens of citizens spoke on both sides of the issue to the board in front of about 140 people in the board room and an overflow area receiving live feeds of the meeting.
“This is our history,” said Weston White, a student pastor in support of posting the motto. “God help us if we rewrite our history.”
***
There’s a showdown tonight in Bakersfield, Calif., over whether the public schools can display posters of the national motto, the Bill of Rights, and the US Constitution in every classroom:
The Kern High School District is expecting a big turnout at its meeting tonight when trustees are expected to vote on whether posters carrying the phrase: “In God We Trust” should be posted in classrooms along with the constitution and the bill of rights.
The idea was presented by trustee Chad Vegas who claims the plan promotes patriotism at schools, but some say, the phrase pushes religion into public schools.
Two members, on the five person board, have said they do not support the proposal. Board member Bryan Batey says his “no” vote would defeat trustee Chad Vegas’ effort to post the national motto, along with the bill of rights and the constitution in all classrooms.
The KHSD Board will meet at 7 p.m. at 5801 Sundale Avenue in Bakersfield. The district is making accomodations for a big turnout before the trustees vote on the issue.
You’ll recall that the last big battle over “In God We Trust” in California was waged by atheist publicity hound Michael Newdow:
A federal judge on Monday rejected a lawsuit from an atheist who said having the phrase “In God We Trust” on U.S. coins and dollar bills violated his First Amendment rights.
U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said the minted words amounted to a secular national slogan that did not trample on Michael Newdow’s avowed religious views.
Newdow’s fellow travelers in the California public schools are really something else. The mere display of historical documents and the national motto has them in a state of apoplexy, yet these same zealots have no objection to lesson plans forcing students to adopt Muslim names and recite Islamic prayers.
A federal judge says a Contra Costa County school was merely teaching seventh-graders about Islam, not indoctrinating them, in role-playing sessions of a history class that called for students to adopt Muslim names and recite language from prayers.
In a ruling announced Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton dismissed a suit by two Christian students and their parents who claimed the use of role-playing at Excelsior School in Byron during the 2001-02 school year amounted to an unconstitutional endorsement of Islam.
During the course at the middle school, teacher Brooke Carlin, using an instructional guide, told her students that they would adopt roles as Muslims for three weeks. She said she stressed that the exercise was only a role- playing game to teach them what Muslims believe.
She encouraged them to use Muslim names, recited prayers in class, required students to recite a line from a prayer and made them give up something for a day, such as television or candy, to simulate fasting during Ramadan. On the final exam, students were asked for a critique of elements of Muslim culture.
That was all within constitutional bounds, Hamilton said, because the purpose was educational, not religious, and students engaged in no actual religious exercises or demonstrated “any devotional or religious intent.”
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Education
Riehl World View
» Bet: Ratings Fail - Oprah/Obama Christmas Special
Mudville Gazette
» The five-year planNewsBusters.org
» Oprah To Do Primetime Christmas Special With The ObamasRiehl World View
» Dowd: Dem Elites Displeased With Obama As Palin RisesStop The ACLU
» SEALs Charged With Assault for Arresting Top TerroristPundit & Pundette
» How much did that "tent" cost?
National Motto. Deal with it. Our friends in Planet California need to realize that the 60s were ended forty years ago. They need to grow up — for a change.
(Shameless plug alert!) Here’s some good reading: Honor the veteran.
Thanks for the link, AC! Nice work.
They really don’t have time left in the day for your imperialistic indoctrination after banana condom class and Washington owned slaves class anyway.
To tell you the truth, I am pretty surprised this is in Bakersfield and not farther up North. Bakersfield is fairly red.
This Vargas guy needs to lay off the Kool-Aid. Poop disturber!
The atheists have been getting bolder lately. They’re everywhere!
You need to re-read the news article. Chad Vegas wants to display the motto and the documents in the classrooms. It’s his opponents who need to lay off the Kool-Aid.
I’ll be happy to take their money if they don’t like it. Send it on over.
SHHHH but don’t tell them, if they sent me their money I’d redirect it to our Troops. Hush Hush, though. Don’t want them to think twice about sending it.
Yeah, I was always confused about why they have Muslim classes in California, but take every opportunity to expel God. This has been going on since the early 90’s.
If it’s just the motto on the walls, I’ll be fine with it. If he wants to parlay this into some type of daily discussion and references to his God then, there’s no way Jose.
It is obvious that the U.S. Flag and Constitution already demostrate a level of patriotism. Vegas seems a little agenda driven to me, and a “I’m gonna make a point” kind of guy. What’s the point?
“Uh, yeah, there it is In God We Trust, just like on our money…uh yeah, when’s recess”
Stuff like this going on and ABC has to provoke response for PDA.
sickening.
Welcome to Bizarro World.
We-who have been engageing the left here in CA for a very long time could sure use the help of Christians from the rest of the nation. The saying “as California goes-so goes the rest of the nation” is true. Flooding the phone banks of CA Congress people would be helpful. Boycotting ALL anti-Christian and anti-American movies and other media avenues would be another.
In God we Trust (except for a few).
Yo, ACHefty,
Our 40yrs in the wilderness is about over.
Can you feel it?
I’ve never understood the logic of the anti-athiests. “In God We Trust” sure seems to endorse a religious belief over theirs. Michelle correctly notes a hypocricy about allowing/forcing Islamic teachings, but isn’t the logical answer to take them all out rather than let them all in? And isn’t having one and banning the other hypocritical regardless of which is “in” and which is “out”?
Ha – where does that leave Yoga?
I’d like to see the people who wrote the “exercise” where students had to “role-play” as Muslims do that for Israeli Jews. Oh, wait…that would be politically incorrect!
It seems to me here in the Uk that what a lot of Americans are missing is that the bill of rights guarantees a “freedom of religion” AND NOT a “freedom from religion”!!
Sometimes I’m so embarrassed to be from this state. Wait…not sometimes, but MOST of the time.
Isn’t America’s national motto “E Pluribus Unum” (From Many Comes One)?
Why do members of the California teachers association think interpreting the U.S. Constitution is part of their job description? They are experts on socialism, not democracy, no?
rhetorically speaking
Where are Arnold the Rhino, Nancy(stretch Pelosi), Dianne Franestein)
when one needs them..
Speaking of cavemen…Uhhh, what?
GOD Bless them.
Only a fool says in his heart, there is no GOD.
Yep, keeping GOD out of schools has done sooooooo much good.
No pledge, no prayer.
Thorw out the Bible, bring in the condoms.
Your great, great, great great grand dad was an ape you you were a decision not to abort and you were nothing more than a lump of material until air filled your lungs.
GOD Bless us every one!
P.S. I am NOT PC in case you missed it!
redog70-glad you made that point
I am so mad, my head is exploding. I came to this country to get away from this pc c**p. If you don’t like how the constitution was written, go to Europe. There are any number of countries that will equivocate for you any which way you like. I wish these idiots would stop trying to recreate this great country into the wimpy, pc, ineffectual mass of land that europe has become.
Sorry folks, it’s almost bedtime
There’s nothing wrong with atheism per se – after all, when you look at things scientifically, there is no evidence to support the existence of God, but these rabid attempts to cull God from the culture only alienate people.
Nevertheless, the national motto has always been, and still is, E Pluribus Unum!
Where are the atheists when the footbaths are installed in airports and Moslem schools are being built with tax dollars in order to teach their religion?
Is it only Christianity they cannot abide? That’s not a
true atheist. I don’t think you can be a true atheist if
you pick and choose the God(s) that offends you. A true atheist is going to have absolutely no use for any
God. The loonies in CA have it all wrong again, as usual! I don’t expect anything less from lala land! Look
into a Californian’s ear and count the cobwebs!
Give me a break. Next it will be the American flag. Then white people will be sent to re-education camps. Wait. That already has happened. Univ. of Delaware.
Fine just say
“In allah and Al Gore we trust”
that should be sufficient for California
and if they want to go the extra mile then change the motto from E Plurbus Unum (sp?) to “From the cradle to the grave, it takes the village and its tax revenues”
EXACTLY! Unfortunately, this is no longer taught in government schools or any university.
Simple solution. It’s an educational solution.
The Declaration of Indpendence uses the phrase “all men are created equal.”
It is a *fact of the document* written in the context of the times.
Use of the phrases “In God We Trust” and “One Nation Under God”, can be taught as facts in the context of the times in which they were written.
The history of the country must be taught with factual accuracy in the context of the times in which it was founded, nurtured, and developed.
The same holds for the onset of marxist influences such as contemporary atheism and the history of states that forbade any religious worship.
Our students are not “free” from history. This nation is not free from history. Nor is Islam.
If a school trustee cannot make the educational case for using the Nation’s history for teaching civics, government, and political science, how is he going to pull off teaching “patriotism”, which is such a useless piece of jargon tainted by the usual Left vs. Right polemical derby.
What has become controversy is easily resolved by elevating the history of the country above all of the contemporary myopia and shortsightedness.
Why do conservatives constantly choose frustration by pitching to the strengths of the leftist rabble?
Put Lefties in their place- set boundaries that make them look bad if they cross them.
Educating American youth using the facts as they have been verified by scholars is a choice teachers need to make in order to do it correctly. Canned texts and videos wont cut it. Setting the standard higher than the crap used in schools now, raises the bar for everybody.
Who will step forward and do what needs to be done? School by school. And teach the truth about Islam and the history of the world- as it has been verified by scholars. School by school.
There is a vacuum that allows this nonsense to fill it. And teachers and trustees alike need to educate themselves and step up.
I’d like to remind everyone that the Elk Grove Unified School District fought Newdow all the way to the Supreme Court–tooth and nail as it were. The majority of the community did not support him either.
Please don’t bash the school district on that one, because most of us objected most vehemently to his suit.
And what makes you think that because there is a “boundary” that will change anything? Pull your head out of the sand, Sir. Boundary or no boundary, fact or fiction, if it says God, the liberals want it out. That is the boundary they operate in.
Then:
The vital acknowledgment of Christian morals as an indispensable part of the American foundation which has played such an integral part in the survival of America these two hundred and thirty one years; that Christian morals go far beyond just religious significance and are essential to the continued survival of the United States.
Should be accepted and promoted as history and necessary education.
If cultural differences are important, the basis for our modern morals system is ten times more so.
“patriotism”, which is such a useless piece of jargon tainted by the usual Left vs. Right polemical derby.
Patriotism does not equate to jingoism.
And the definition of “polemic” (Websters 2nd, secondarily being, “…2. a person who argues in opposition to another; controversialist”, does not equate to a diatribe. Anything that allows for reasoned and thoughtful debate is welcome.
It’s an easy fix– Teachers should just stand their ground, continue teaching, and refuse to omit it. Make the troublemakers sue them for teaching FACTS in schools. Demand equal protection from the ACLU publicly and loudly. Let’s get it all out in the open on a national scale.
I know, getting educators to take a principled stand and run in opposition to the herd (techer’s union) is asking a lot, but I have faith there are enough teachers that really care about TRUTH and the 1st amendment to make it happen.
(ooooh. once again I expose my optimistic side. Can’t help it folks.)
Atheism, or a-theism, is just one of many possible positions on God. In the public sphere, why is this one particular form of theism, a-theism, privileged over all the others?
Can somebody explain to me how reciting Islamic prayers is educational but hanging up Historical Documents “pushes religion into public schools”?
When I was in school we had “New math” (And no calculators) but that I understood! This? I am just confused!
Sad
Cripes. I have a lot of kin in CA (my uncle used to be Police Chief in Oakland, IIRC, or maybe it was Concord), but I’d be all for figuring out a way to lure all the illegals out there and expelling that disgusting state from the union. Give the real Americans out there time to pack up and come to the real world, then wall out the rest-as well as Mexico. They can have their atheism, depravity, anti-military attitude, and their Maoism…and we can withdraw from that hopeless quagmire known as California. It may be the world’s 6th largest economy as they claim, but if the federal government (including especially military bases) wasn’t in the mix…any guesses?
Heh-well, it’s late…to dream, perchance to sleep.
This being my first comment on a ‘regular’ post, I will say this once, as it’s really redundant…Great post, Michelle, as always! Not that I won’t ever praise you again, but I’m making a point of it-you’re truly a class act, and I’m grateful to be here.
No, because atheism is itself a religion.
While it’s true that marxists are pretty much always atheist, it’s wrong to think that atheism is marxist. Marxism is, I would say, a religion itself.
Rather, the rise of atheism in modern times is simply a sign of people emerging into the light of rational thought, from the shadows of beliefs that have been taught to them through the centuries, but are unsupported by reason or science.
But I have to stand corrected – I claimed above that e pluribus unum was still the national motto – legally, that’s not true. “In God We Trust” was legally created the national motto in the 50’s. God, what damage was done to this republic by such acts in the McCarthy era!
Can somebody explain to me how reciting Islamic prayers is educational but hanging up Historical Documents “pushes religion into public schools”?
Because they apparently take the “separation of CHURCH and state” literally.
EXACTLY, pgtips. By the definition of “religion” (a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith), atheism IS a religion because it has faith that there is no God.
I think one could make a strong, reasoned argument that atheism is in violation of the First Amendment – since it’s being endorsed so heartily by many government bodies (schools, etc.)…
I don’t have the time or space to get into it here, but anyone who can study history (from unbiased, non-liberal sources) will see that the Christian church and Christian faith had A LOT to do with establishing and preserving democracy and Western culture.
More than any liberal or atheist cares to think, as they systematically work to outlaw Christianity.
Um, no.
There is plenty of reason and historical evidence to support religious beliefs. And, forgive me, but I’ve known many atheists who are anything BUT rational.
As above, I cannot get into why religion (some religions) are verifiable and rational because it’s too long for the comboxes. But I’d be glad to explain it to you.
For example, we have evidence that Jesus was actually a person (regardless of whether or not you believe he was the Son of God), we (Catholics) can also trace our history and our lineage of Popes all the way back to the apostles, over 2,000-plus years of history.
That sounds like some pretty darn strong evidence if you ask me.
Atheism is on the rise because people think life is all about them and doing what they want and what makes THEM happy.
Again, I’d be glad to share counterpoints to your above statement if you wish. Contact me.
Michelle, just sent you an update on this story, forgot to put tip in subject line look for “bakersfield passes”.
according to the foxnews website the board passed the resolution by a vote of 4-1 and the posters will be going up in all classrooms and some other places such as the board meeting chambers.
Onseca:
Your views are very antiquated. While it is true that some Christians shied away from science as they felt science attempted to explain away God’s existence this is no longer the case.
You can pick up any book on Christian Apologetics and can view for yourself that Christianity can stand up to any scrutiny and come out unscathed.
Science tries to explain how the world began but not why. Science attempts to explain the process of life but not its purpose. Science strives to lengthen life with medicine but cannot deepen life.
Additionally, many skeptics assume that faith and reason are mutually exclusive. Personally, I agree with Norman Geisler when he said “it takes faith to be an atheist.” You have to believe that the Big Bang happened spontaneously. You must have faith that science will eventually discover proof for the evolutionary hypothesis.
I, as a Christian believe in micro-evolution but anything on the macro level – you’ve lost me.
Although, no substantial proof exists to support evolution, scientists and skeptics alike continue to assert that it is true.
Conversely, biblical faith acknowledges the legitimacy of human discovery through scientific research. Christians believe that the world operates on reasonable laws of nature that were originally established by a reasonable Gd. Both nature and human beings reveal God’s handiwork. Christians don’t ignore the truth revealed by science, but we aren’t foolish enough to think that science is all we need to know.
“In God we trust, all others pay cash”
More to the point, the left seems not to be against religion expression so much, as against religious expression by the right. It’s like their views on free speech and racism.
They could not live under the same rules that they want for everyone else.
You have to take a bunch of drugs to understand this, just like the justices who did this ruling must have done.
…because everybody knows and is sick and tired of the religion; Christianity. It is time for something new and exciting; Islam! Oh what fun it will be to tell the little boys and girls about how US was responsible to the attacks on 9/11. After all we wouldn’t want to turn that into something sacred. Allah Akbar!
/rant
The Bible does say that there will be a falling away from God. We are certainly seeing that. There are more militant atheists who are not simply non-religious, but are actually anti-religion.
More cowardly politicians are attempting to remove all aspects of religion from pubic lives. No prayer in school, no Christ in Christmas. However, honoring Islam, Kwanza, and anything non-Christian is okay.
I feel Jesus will be returning for His followers soon.
Well-said tre. Indeed He will!
#49 30 pcs… almost made me dribble my coffee. brat. lol
I think this guy is asking for trouble.
I believe people are voicing their opposition to “Under God” and “In God We Trust” because of things like this. Is it really necessary to have the phrase posted in every classroom? As much as it is a historical artifact of American life, it can be and IS offensive to some Americans. One can be a great American and not believe in God.
Many people today speak about how others should assimilate into American culture, yet this creates an artificial separation between those that are already American. It obviously doesn’t speak for anyone, and is very much antiquated. It’s an unneeded wedge issue that alienates some Americans when we should not be arguing about some relatively petty thing.
I say it’s petty because no one (rational) expects every American to trust in God. So already people accept that the statement is not very accurate.
It reminds me of a couple of years ago after someone pushed to get the “Under God” removed from the Pledge of Allegiance. Congress was saying it before a session and everyone opposed practically yelled the “Under God” part while saying the rest in a regular voice. I thought that was pretty ridiculous. Libery, Justice, ah passe’. “But don’t you forget that we’re UNDER GOD. The other stuff is expendable”.
I think this guy is asking for trouble.
I believe people are voicing their opposition to “Under God” and “In God We Trust” because of things like this. Is it really necessary to have the phrase posted in every classroom? As much as it is a historical artifact of American life, it can be and IS offensive to some Americans. One can be a great American and not believe in God.
Many people today speak about how others should assimilate into American culture, yet this creates an artificial separation between those that are already American. It obviously doesn’t speak for anyone, and is very much antiquated. It’s an unneeded wedge issue that alienates some Americans when we should not be arguing about some relatively petty thing.
I say it’s petty because no one (rational) expects every American to trust in God. So already people accept that the statement is not very accurate.
It reminds me of a couple of years ago after someone pushed to get the “Under God” removed from the Pledge of Allegiance. Congress was saying it before a session and everyone opposed practically yelled the “Under God” part while saying the rest in a regular voice. I thought that was pretty ridiculous. Libery, Justice, ah passe’. “But don’t you forget that we’re UNDER GOD. The other stuff is expendable”.
Today, is not a good day. I’m mood for huntin’ some terrorists. I saw that on a bumper sticker here in NJ (yes NJ) and loved it.
Oh Thank God that was passed!! I’m happy for the moment to be a Californian!
and they could probly find coveys of them within driving distance 30 pcs.
ConsrHmSchlr,
No kidding, first feistein with mukasey, then schuler, now this! holy carp! 3 feel goods from our state, hopefully its an epidemic.
From that article:
Too bad the schools do not teach him exactly what this means and maybe with these posters he will start to learn this does not mean there is no God allowed in anything the government does.
Just as you wish for us (Christians) to acquiesce (sure, remove all references to God because someone is offended by it, we don’t mind. In fact we don’t even matter. Most of the populace is Christian or admit to believing in God) and accept that not every American believes in God (not a problem). The same can be said to those who wish to see these references to God removed. Why does this bother you?…no other religion offends like Christianity, I guess.
Please elaborate on the artificial divide?
Why stir the pot then?
You believe it to be petty and I do not. We are at an impasse. So, I guess we should just take it away so that you won’t be offended but what about me?
Exactly.
I agree with your points. However, there are some evangelicals who take the Bible very literally to the point of believing the earth is 6,000 years old.
Most non-believers I know would say that on balance Islam is practiced in a manner that is much more offensive. And much more inconsistent with the values of liberal democracy that informed the founders.
Yes. We Christians don’t always agree on everything…
I agree dedalus. That was my attempt at being sarcastic.
I still don’t know why Christianity is so offensive. Or maybe I do but I just don’t understand how it could be. To each his own…
30 pcs,
What exactly would you have been offended about if the vote did not past? Do you think the statement accurately describes the United States of America, or should be used as a description of this country?
30 pcs,
What exactly would you have been offended about if the vote did not past? Do you think the statement accurately describes the United States of America, or should be used as a description of this country?
I have no idea things keep posting twice. My apologies.
But 30pcs, it’s not Christianity that’s offensive. If Islam were more popular, it would be Islam. If Judiasm was more popular, it would be judiasm. What’s offensive about the motto is that if you do not believe in it, by definition, you are less of an American. By definition. You do see why some would be opposed to that, yes?
I have no idea things keep posting twice. My apologies.
But 30pcs, it’s not Christianity that’s offensive. If Islam were more popular, it would be Islam. If Judiasm was more popular, it would be judiasm. What’s offensive about the motto is that if you do not believe in it, by definition, you are less of an American. By definition. You do see why some would be opposed to that, yes?
I’m more saddened by the current state of affairs than I am offended. This particular measure doesn’t offend me; however, I question why it offends others. If these are the principles in which this country was founded, why be offended?
All of these things were in schools and in government prior to and that didn’t seem hinder anyone from turning to Atheism or any other religion for that matter. So, I am confused by the need to change things like this that are deemed petty and ridiculous on the face of it.
I think “Under God” defines the whole world…but that’s my two cents.
I’ve been wondering why, if we live in a democratic republic and all of our elections are decided on the will of the majority, the courts seem to think the majority needs to bend to the will of one?
Instead of having some left wing judge decide this stuff, hold a local election and let the will of the people decide.
In this case, next time this school board is up for reelection, this vote should be foremost in the minds of the voters.
mpChops…what does that name mean? I’m very curious.
I wish you didn’t feel like you were less of an American. I don’t know your religion of choice but I would hope that it could fill whatever void you have. If it helps at all (and hopefully you do not fit this description), my definition of someone who is a lesser American is someone who denigrates America, our troops, etc… Someone who chooses to believe differently than I do is not a lesser American. This country is great and anyone who is willing to admit that, is ok with me.
I do know that no one likes to feel like they are in the minority. And if this is how you feel, there isn’t much I can say to change that. I do understand your position, however, I respectfully disagree with it, if you are opposing it for the sake of opposing it.
One reason is the founders were very suspect of government, even a democratically elected government, stepping on the liberty of citizens and amassing power for itself. The 3 branches are important for checks and balances.
The court may overreach, but its role is to make sure the “Constitutional” part of the “Constitutional Democracy” is supported.
30 pcs,
I think you’re being a bit disingenuous. I believe that you do know why people might be offended, but you either don’t agree with that reason or feel that should just suck it up, both legitimate positions. But you definitely know why people may be offended.
Regarding my handle, it’s simply two randomly picked letters followed by the first word I thought of that sounded good with it. M-P-Chops. What’d you think it meant?
And what’s all this talk about filling some void? Where the hell did that come from? I think you’re completely missing my point.
My point is that the phrase alienates a segment of the citizenship. The country was founded on the principle of majority control and minority rights(in principle. Practice has been completely different). I, as an American, have a right not to trust in God. So when the motto of my country is “In God We Trust”, that motto may not speake for me and I may not be able defend that motto(or pledge allegiance to it). It causes an unneeded division since it’s really not a principle of the country and merely a description of the times during its founding.
You’re basically defending it by appealing to tradition, which is a pretty weak defense.
And can we please stop the ad hominem attacks. I believe in God. The Dr. Phil routine is cute but off base.
If it is one that I have tried to do in my responses to you is be completely upfront about what I believe. If that hasn’t come across then I will have to look into that for some other time. Disingenuous, never.
Apparently this discussion has taken a turn that I neither expected nor intended to bring forth.
I didn’t know what your handle meant…
You said it yourself that the issue you have is with any religion being a focal point:
So, Christianity isn’t the only religion in your rhetorical crosshairs… How then are we to find common ground? You say take it out and I say keep it.
I don’t see the divisiveness of it. Not being disengenuous, just my opinion.
Let’s be honest here no matter which angle or position I take, I don’t think we are going to agree…
Ad hominen attacks, what?
30pcs,
Do you believe that a loyal American would not be able to repeat that motto because they truly do not believe in God?
If you feel that that situation may happen, than it is in fact divisive because you would also have to agree that believing in God is not what makes an American an American.
It is divisive because it splits loyal Americans into a group that supports the statement and a group that does not. Earlier you said that someone who believes differently than you is not a lesser American, but if their beliefs make them unable to, in good faith, repeat the national motto or pledge of allegance, what exactly does that make them?
If you feel that the above situation can never happen, well, I guess you’re right. We are never going to agree.
I believe that a loyal American would not take issue with this. I believe you mentioned before that it was petty.
One has become super-sensitive to anything with God in it. And quite frankly, what I think doesn’t really matter in the grand scheme of things. Revenge is mine sayeth the Lord.
I guess, if someone thinks its divisive I should agree and go about my way.
Divisiveness is an issue in this country and we have a long way to go before we are all singing Kum Ba Yah. However, I for one believe that the very thing that can bring us all together is the very thing that you nad others claim is tearing us apart.
There was a time, when secularism and religious belief coexisted.
I’m very secular. Extremely so. I don’t believe religion should play any part in the motivation of our government. I think our government exists to serve us as a whole people, not to serve the interests of a particular subset over those of another.
As secular as I am, I recognize the origins of my nation, its heritage and traditions. I take pride in them.
ACHefty put it well with his opening statement in comment #1.
englishqueen01:
Haha – you’re not serious!? The fact that we have a record of who the Popes were is a reason to believe in God?
Perhaps because the Politburo has a record of past Party Chairmen right back to the founding of the Party, maybe that’s “pretty darn strong evidence” too of the essential Truth of their doctrines as well?
Hey, I really appreciate the obviously sincere offer to get proselytized one on one, but I’m going to pass for now.