The War on Religion in the US

Duty Honor Country

Duty Honor Country

Active member
The war on religion has been raging in the US for quite some time. The Boy Scouts of America have been enduring this fight for quite some time. Time and time again, the US courts have said the BSA is a private organization and can restrict membership on the grounds of believing in God. Then battles went to those who support the BSA. San Diego was sued for allowing the BSA to use public parks. Now the Boy Scouts cannot use public parks because of it "violates" the seperation between church and state. Then came the "Under God" incident in San Fransico. I watched as a democrat lead congess in saying the pledge of Allegiance (on the microphone) and did not say "under God."

NOW someone is suing to keep a minister from prayer at President Bush's.

"Michael Newdow -- best known for trying to remove "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance -- told U.S. District Judge John Bates that allowing an overtly Christian prayer at the Jan. 20 ceremony violates the Constitution by forcing him to accept unwanted religious beliefs."
CNN

:cen: when does all this stupid crap end!!!!

sorry for being blunt. I have kind of lost it on this matter.
 
It's just the current thing. "Look at me, I'm liberal!" when in fact they are anything but. Pleading for tolerance while being intolerant is mutually exclusive. After awhile when it's lost it's novelty this kind of thing will die down. The core of America hasn't lost their beliefs. Those that think otherwise are living in a fool's paradise.
 
Under God was added in the 40's or 50's. Not that I have a problem with it being there.

My thinking is why is the only religion singled out the Christian Denominations. Under the idea it might offend other religions?
 
Correction, fanatic psychotic religon can be turned toward terrorism, but more often than not religeon is the banner under which many terrorists pretend, so that they can carry on their terroristic actions.
 
religion can be such a contentious issues so i'll try to state my position as clearly as i can;

issue one; with the pledge of allegiance, what if the person taking the pledge doesn't believe in god...wouldn't that make the whole pledge void?

issue two; i believe a govt should remove itself from any thing to do with religion...religion is a personal believe structure, and has nothing to do with the functions of government. in an ideal world no-one should be descriminated because of their beliefs.

as an aside, the NZ boy scouts say the lords prayer etc but there is an exemption for those who do not wish to participate in this
 
As to your issues:

One) I already stated that I had no problem with people who don't believe in God not saying that part. The whole phrase is "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." So deleting the words "under God" hardly obviates the oath and as 03USMC has already pointed out, those words weren't even added until about 50 years ago. I don't think that anybody who took the oath prior to that would be seen as disloyal.

Two) Seperation of church and state is provided for in our Constitution. At what line is that drawn is the crux of the current contention about it all that's now going on. Many feel that there should be absolutely not the faintest hint of religion in our government while many more think that it gets to the point of ridiculousness what some people feel is an infringment of the church on the state. Where do we draw the line? As somebody pointed out in another thread, why am I not allowed to mention God in so many areas that apply to the state but if I'm called to court to swear an oath of testimony I must put my hand on the Bible? Why are Bibles not allowed in schools but they are in prison? We've managed to come 228 years now without the church controlling this country's government. I think it works fine as it is.
 
Charge_7 said:
As to your issues:

One) I already stated that I had no problem with people who don't believe in God not saying that part. The whole phrase is "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." So deleting the words "under God" hardly obviates the oath and as 03USMC has already pointed out, those words weren't even added until about 50 years ago. I don't think that anybody who took the oath prior to that would be seen as disloyal.

Two) Seperation of church and state is provided for in our Constitution. At what line is that drawn is the crux of the current contention about it all that's now going on. Many feel that there should be absolutely not the faintest hint of religion in our government while many more think that it gets to the point of ridiculousness what some people feel is an infringment of the church on the state. Where do we draw the line? As somebody pointed out in another thread, why am I not allowed to mention God in so many areas that apply to the state but if I'm called to court to swear an oath of testimony I must put my hand on the Bible? Why are Bibles not allowed in schools but they are in prison? We've managed to come 228 years now without the church controlling this country's government. I think it works fine as it is.
Click to expand...

very informative, and i agree with you...esp
"why am I not allowed to mention God in so many areas that apply to the state but if I'm called to court to swear an oath of testimony I must put my hand on the Bible? Why are Bibles not allowed in schools but they are in prison? We've managed to come 228 years now without the church controlling this country's government."

and this is coming from an atheist! i like to think (at least in my own experience here in NZ) that no one is descriminated by the Govt because of their religion...i know that in court you are made to swear on a bible koran or whatever is appropriate. i know some one who swore on the NZ flag
 
Nice idea. I think swearing on the flag would be quite acceptable for those who do not believe in God. Swearing on the Koran or Torah, etc. might also be acceptable for those of each particular faith.
 
Our Court does not use a Bible nor do persons sworn state "So help me God". Anymore.

" Do You. Swear or Affirm that all evidence you give in this cause is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth."


Most States have removed references to God due to Cases Won in certain jurisdictions by the ACLU. Like the 9th Federal Circus errrr Circuit Court. Whether they were part of a judgement or not.
 
Didn't know that 03USMC. Knowing your background, I'm sure you're right on top of that he he. Thanks for the info. What do you think btw? Affirming seems less demanding than swearing on the flag or your particular religious book to me. Taking it all away seems to be a loosening of it all in my opinion.
 
Charge_7 said:
Two) Seperation of church and state is provided for in our Constitution. At what line is that drawn is the crux of the current contention about it all that's now going on. Many feel that there should be absolutely not the faintest hint of religion in our government while many more think that it gets to the point of ridiculousness what some people feel is an infringment of the church on the state. Where do we draw the line? As somebody pointed out in another thread, why am I not allowed to mention God in so many areas that apply to the state but if I'm called to court to swear an oath of testimony I must put my hand on the Bible? Why are Bibles not allowed in schools but they are in prison? We've managed to come 228 years now without the church controlling this country's government. I think it works fine as it is.
Click to expand...

Do you think that a governing body mentioning God infringes on the separation of church and state?

Reading about the Revolution really shows the founding fathers had no problems with mentioning God in government. Only Jefferson (I think) seemed to want to expel any mention of religion with the new American government. I believe the whole idea of separation of church and state was more along the lines for keeping governments from forcing a religion on its citizens. Having "in God we trust" on legal tender, saying "under God" or having the 10 Commandments on the outside of a court house does not force anyone to conform to any one religion.
 
I'm with you Doody on what was the Founding Fathers' intent. And as I pointed out already, 228 years seems like proof enough that things work as they are.
 
Charge_7 said:
Didn't know that 03USMC. Knowing your background, I'm sure you're right on top of that he he. Thanks for the info. What do you think btw? Affirming seems less demanding than swearing on the flag or your particular religious book to me. Taking it all away seems to be a loosening of it all in my opinion.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with it. I also think it loosens it up. But thats what the Courts have ruled so thats what we do. Swear or Affirm you lie you still get nailed with Perjury :lol: .

I had to swear in a Catholic Bishop (as a character witness) once and was instructed by the Judge to leave out the Swear or Affrim part. As he had taken an oath during his Ordination. Didn't understand the logic but apparently his Honor did.
 
I love how everyone avoided my comment .....which makes sense, you can't reliably argue a position of faith in a logical sense, regardless of which side your on... :D
 
if you would explain your position, I will comment.

I rarely comment on statements that could be offensive and are not explained rationally.
 
03USMC said:
Charge_7 said:
Didn't know that 03USMC. Knowing your background, I'm sure you're right on top of that he he. Thanks for the info. What do you think btw? Affirming seems less demanding than swearing on the flag or your particular religious book to me. Taking it all away seems to be a loosening of it all in my opinion.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with it. I also think it loosens it up. But thats what the Courts have ruled so thats what we do. Swear or Affirm you lie you still get nailed with Perjury :lol: .

I had to swear in a Catholic Bishop (as a character witness) once and was instructed by the Judge to leave out the Swear or Affrim part. As he had taken an oath during his Ordination. Didn't understand the logic but apparently his Honor did.
Click to expand...

Most Christian denominations do not believe in swearing an oath in God's name. I don't see anything wrong with agreeing to tell the truth before God and man. Someone in another post mentioned an atheist having to swear in God's name might nullify the oath. It's about like calling a Judge "the right honorable" if you know he's not, I don't want to be the first to mention that to Hizzoner.
 
On the contrary, I think religion in the US is doing very well. The Baptists and Evangelical Christians are getting stronger economically and politically as time rolls on. Some of the US Christian groups are making oodles of cash in South America.

Don't worry about religion in the US. Business couldn't be better!

They have even got George Dubya in their pockets!
 
Nice Rhetoric. :roll: Too bad many of us don't see our religion as a business. :roll: The generalization might work better if applied to something that is not so personal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top