"Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance

[Eridel]

I'm not going to quote Abatael, because that post is terribly long.
Your only argument is that Catholicism is the "right" religion, and other religions are "wrong," and that therefore everybody should be Catholic.
I'm Christian, and I don't force my beliefs on other people because I think it's the "right" religion.

[Neo Rome Republic]

34% of Americans support Christianity as state Religion which is a lot of people, but isn't a majority. However 47% oppose it, so you're wrong on that point.

I was talking about a majority of Americans and government officials are Christian, not that they support Christianity as a state religion. Although, where did you hear that statistic from?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/0 ... 22255.html
PS: Atheism is not a Religion.

[Abatael]

I'm not going to quote Abatael, because that post is terribly long.
Your only argument is that Catholicism is the "right" religion, and other religions are "wrong," and that therefore everybody should be Catholic.
I'm Christian, and I don't force my beliefs on other people because I think it's the "right" religion.

I wasn't making an argument. I was showing Aurora Novus how easy it is to make claims without any support.

Now, you're not answering my question: Where did you hear I am a Catholic?

I was talking about a majority of Americans and government officials are Christian, not that they support Christianity as a state religion. Although, where did you hear that statistic from?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/0 ... 22255.html
PS: Atheism is not a Religion.

Is there anything else besides Huffington Post?
Did I say it was?

[Neo Rome Republic]

I'm not going to quote Abatael, because that post is terribly long.
Your only argument is that Catholicism is the "right" religion, and other religions are "wrong," and that therefore everybody should be Catholic.
I'm Christian, and I don't force my beliefs on other people because I think it's the "right" religion.

I wasn't making an argument. I was showing Aurora Novus how easy it is to make claims without any support.

Now, you're not answering my question: Where did you hear I am a Catholic?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/0 ... 22255.html
PS: Atheism is not a Religion.

Is there anything else besides Huffington Post?
Did I say it was?

You mean other sites that talk about this? http://www.newsmax.com/US/Nearly-1-in-3 ... /id/498149

http://www.wisconsingazette.com/breakin ... igion.html

PS: Your words were ''There is no other right religion, because all other religion are false, including atheism.''

[Eridel]

I'm not going to quote Abatael, because that post is terribly long.
Your only argument is that Catholicism is the "right" religion, and other religions are "wrong," and that therefore everybody should be Catholic.
I'm Christian, and I don't force my beliefs on other people because I think it's the "right" religion.

I wasn't making an argument. I was showing Aurora Novus how easy it is to make claims without any support.

Now, you're not answering my question: Where did you hear I am a Catholic?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/0 ... 22255.html
PS: Atheism is not a Religion.

Is there anything else besides Huffington Post?
Did I say it was?

"I wasn't making an argument." So, what you're saying is, you're stating your beliefs and have no evidence, proof, or reasons behind them.
As for your question, if you trace the line of communication, it comes back to you.
And yes, you did say atheism was a religion.

[Aurora Novus]

1. As defined by me. You can disagree.

I can and do, on the grounds that you are a poor source for truth.

2. I am an anti-intellectual barbarian, so I wouldn't exactly call myself a proponent of democracy.

Fix'd.

3. "There is no other right religion, because all other religion are false, including atheism. You are deluded." See? It's not that hard to say the opposite.

The difference of course being that I am right, and have evidence to support my case.

Whereas yours is based on dogmatic nonsense and a lack of critical thinking. Which explains your love of Fascism.

What is it exactly?

You saw what I wrote.

It's bringing people to the right religion through mottoes such as "Under God."

Motto a state should not be endorsing, because Theocratic states have always turned out horribly for humanity. States are to remain secular, as that is the only far and just way to rule a population of several different beliefs.

If you want tot bring people to your faith, you convince them that it is true. you don't brainwash them by forcing it upon them through the public discourse of the government. We are NOT a nation under God.

That's why it's good and is being kept around.

No, that's precisely why it's terrible.

Really, now. You're posts are just getting old.

Reality bites, I know. Still, doesn't change the truth of what I speak.

[Abatael]

I wasn't making an argument. I was showing Aurora Novus how easy it is to make claims without any support.

Now, you're not answering my question: Where did you hear I am a Catholic?



Is there anything else besides Huffington Post?
Did I say it was?

You mean other sites that talk about this? http://www.newsmax.com/US/Nearly-1-in-3 ... /id/498149

http://www.wisconsingazette.com/breakin ... igion.html

I mean like a another study that investigated the same thing. Huffington Post is liberal and, therefore, probably attracts liberals. So the majority of the voters were probably liberal and would be against it. (I'm assuming they did an online poll.)

[Neo Rome Republic]

You mean other sites that talk about this? http://www.newsmax.com/US/Nearly-1-in-3 ... /id/498149

http://www.wisconsingazette.com/breakin ... igion.html

I mean like a another study that investigated the same thing. Huffington Post is liberal and, therefore, probably attracts liberals. So the majority of the voters were probably liberal and would be against it. (I'm assuming they did an online poll.)

You're always welcome to try and find another statistic. Just make sure it's up to date 2012-2013.

[Eridel]

I mean like a another study that investigated the same thing. Huffington Post is liberal and, therefore, probably attracts liberals. So the majority of the voters were probably liberal and would be against it. (I'm assuming they did an online poll.)

You're always welcome to try and find another statistic.

Exactly. At least we have a statistic, even if you question its validity.

[Post War America]

It should be removed The United States is a secular nation and having a religious creedo in a pledge of allegiance to a secular state is wrong.

[Vazdania]

It should be removed The United States is a secular nation and having a religious creedo in a pledge of allegiance to a secular state is wrong.

The courts have already ruled that "under God" doesn't create an establishment of religion.

[Ifreann]

So you don't like the things that give me the freedom to believe whatever I want and do whatever legal things I want. Good to know.

I don't like the Establishment Clause in the 1st Amendment. And there are others. I won't be listing them out though.

So you don't like the founding principles of America. Yeah, really seems like you'd be better off somewhere like North Korea.

[Eranshahir]

I personally have no problem with under God being a part of the pledge of allegiance. If the majority feel it should be removed though, it should be

[Vazdania]

I don't like the Establishment Clause in the 1st Amendment. And there are others. I won't be listing them out though.

So you don't like the founding principles of America. Yeah, really seems like you'd be better off somewhere like North Korea.

or Vatican City. That'd work too.

[Abatael]

I wasn't making an argument. I was showing Aurora Novus how easy it is to make claims without any support.

Now, you're not answering my question: Where did you hear I am a Catholic?



Is there anything else besides Huffington Post?
Did I say it was?

"I wasn't making an argument." So, what you're saying is, you're stating your beliefs and have no evidence, proof, or reasons behind them.
As for your question, if you trace the line of communication, it comes back to you.
And yes, you did say atheism was a religion.

Yes. As I all ready said, I did that intentionally to show Aurora Novus how easy it is to make claims without any evidence or proof. Perhaps you should read my posts in their entirety.
Are you keeping tabs on what I post?
As I said all ready, I did that intentionally to show Aurora Novus how easy it is to make claims without any evidence or proof.

[Ifreann]

So you don't like the founding principles of America. Yeah, really seems like you'd be better off somewhere like North Korea.

or Vatican City. That'd work too.

The Vatican doesn't seem totalitarian enough.

---

I personally have no problem with under God being a part of the pledge of allegiance. If the majority feel it should be removed though, it should be

Why don't you have a problem with something so obviously unconstitutional?

[Lost heros]

It should be removed The United States is a secular nation and having a religious creedo in a pledge of allegiance to a secular state is wrong.

The courts have already ruled that "under God" doesn't create an establishment of religion.

Source?

[Eridel]

"I wasn't making an argument." So, what you're saying is, you're stating your beliefs and have no evidence, proof, or reasons behind them.
As for your question, if you trace the line of communication, it comes back to you.
And yes, you did say atheism was a religion.

Yes. As I all ready said, I did that intentionally to show Aurora Novus how easy it is to make claims without any evidence or proof. Perhaps you should read my posts in their entirety.
Are you keeping tabs on what I post?
As I said all ready, I did that intentionally to show Aurora Novus how easy it is to make claims without any evidence or proof.

Okay then, so what is your argument?

[Abatael]

I mean like a another study that investigated the same thing. Huffington Post is liberal and, therefore, probably attracts liberals. So the majority of the voters were probably liberal and would be against it. (I'm assuming they did an online poll.)

You're always welcome to try and find another statistic. Just make sure it's up to date 2012-2013.

Yeah. I was just wondering if by chance you had one.

[Eridel]

You're always welcome to try and find another statistic. Just make sure it's up to date 2012-2013.

Yeah. I was just wondering if by chance you had one.

We do have a statistic. You don't like it, so it's up to you to find another one.

[Vazdania]

The courts have already ruled that "under God" doesn't create an establishment of religion.

Source?

Newdow v. Rio Linda Union School

On March 11, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance in the case of Newdow v. Rio Linda Union School District. In a 2–1 decision, the appellate court ruled that the words were of a "ceremonial and patriotic nature" and did not constitute an establishment of religion.

On November 12, 2010, in a unanimous decision the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Boston affirmed a ruling by a New Hampshire lower federal court which found that the pledge's reference to God does not violate non-pledging students' rights if student participation in the pledge is voluntary

[Neo Rome Republic]

You're always welcome to try and find another statistic. Just make sure it's up to date 2012-2013.

Yeah. I was just wondering if by chance you had one.

Every site I search, when it comes to the percents supporting state Religion, uses the statistic I showed you. Perhaps you'd have better luck, searching on your own.

[Tekania]

I see no reason to continue the error of its inclusion. It does nothing to the pledge but intentionally nullifying it by adding words which are divisive to it. So, I say take it back out of it.

[Lost heros]

Source?

Newdow v. Rio Linda Union School

On March 11, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance in the case of Newdow v. Rio Linda Union School District. In a 2–1 decision, the appellate court ruled that the words were of a "ceremonial and patriotic nature" and did not constitute an establishment of religion.

On November 12, 2010, in a unanimous decision the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Boston affirmed a ruling by a New Hampshire lower federal court which found that the pledge's reference to God does not violate non-pledging students' rights if student participation in the pledge is voluntary

Those courts need to reread the first amendment.
"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion."
US flag code is a law that acknowledges Christianity and other monotheistic religions.
Is that too hard to understand?

[Vazdania]

I see no reason to continue the error of its inclusion. It does nothing to the pledge but intentionally nullifying it by adding words which are divisive to it. So, I say take it back out of it.

why exactly are the words "under God" divisive to the pledge?