Go to Unsolved Mystery Publications Main Index Go to Free account page
Go to frequently asked mystery questions Go to Unsolved Mystery Publications Main Index
Welcome: to Unsolved Mysteries 1 2 3
 
 New Mystery StoryNew Unsolved Mystery UserLogon to Unsolved MysteriesRead Random Mystery StoryChat on Unsolved MysteriesMystery Coffee housePsychic Advice on Unsolved MysteriesGeneral Mysterious AdviceSerious Mysterious AdviceReplies Wanted on these mystery stories
 




Show Stories by
Newest
Recently Updated
Wanting Replies
Recently Replied to
Discussions&Questions
Site Suggestions
Highest Rated
Most Rated
General Advice

Ancient Beliefs
Angels, God, Spiritual
Animals&Pets
Comedy
Conspiracy Theories
Debates
Dreams
Dream Interpretation
Embarrassing Moments
Entertainment
ESP
General Interest
Ghosts/Apparitions
Hauntings
History
Horror
Household tips
Human Interest
Humor / Jokes
In Recognition of
Lost Friends/Family
Missing Persons
Music
Mysterious Happenings
Mysterious Sounds
Near Death Experience
Ouija Mysteries
Out of Body Experience
Party Line
Philosophy
Poetry
Prayers
Predictions
Psychic Advice
Quotes
Religious / Religions
Reviews
Riddles
Science
Sci-fi
Serious Advice
Strictly Fiction
Unsolved Crimes
UFOs
Urban Legends
USM Events and People
USM Games
In Memory of
Self Help
Search Stories:


Stories By AuthorId:


Google
Web Site   

Bookmark and Share



Pledge To The Flag Unconstitutional: "Under God"-Keep it, or give it the boot?

  Author:  60080  Category:(Debate) Created:(10/19/2003 10:32:00 AM)
This post has been Viewed (1743 times)

A reply given to my in the news story inspired me to do this:

Category:(In The News) Created:(10/14/2003 1:04:00 PM) Viewed (373 times) WASHINGTON (Oct. 14) - The Supreme Court said Tuesday it will decide whether the Pledge of Allegiance recited by generations of American schoolchildren is an unconstitutional blending of church and state.

'... Under God, Indivisible...'

The case sets up an emotional showdown over God in the public schools and in public life. It will settle whether the phrase ''one nation under God'' will remain a part of the patriotic oath as it is recited in most classrooms.

The court will hear the case sometime next year.

The justices agreed to hear an appeal involving a California atheist whose 9-year-old daughter, like most elementary school children, hears the Pledge of Allegiance recited daily.

A national uproar followed a federal appeals court ruling last year that the reference to God made the pledge unconstitutional in public schools. That ruling, if allowed to stand, would strip the reference from the version of the pledge recited by about 9.6 million schoolchildren in California and other western states.

The First Amendment guarantees that government will not ''establish'' religion, wording that has come to mean a general ban on overt government sponsorship of religion in public schools and elsewhere.

The Supreme Court has already said that schoolchildren cannot be required to recite the oath that begins, ''I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.''

The court has also repeatedly barred school-sponsored prayer from classrooms, playing fields and school ceremonies.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the First Amendment and the Supreme Court's precedents make clear that tax-supported schools cannot lend their imprimatur to a declaration of fealty to ''one nation under God.''

The White House hinted that an administration-written brief in the case could be in the offing, with Scott McClellan, President Bush's spokesman, calling the Pledge of Allegiance ''an important right that ought to be upheld.''

McClellan would not say definitely whether the White House would press its position before the court but previewed what it would argue if it did. ''Keep in mind,'' he said, ''that you have a Declaration of Independence that refers to God or the creator four different times. You have sessions of Congress each day that begin with prayer and, of course, if you look on our own currency, it says ''In God We Trust.''' Activists on both sides of the church-state divide said the case is a watershed for the court and for public opinion.

''This case represents an important opportunity to put a halt to a national effort aimed at removing any religious phrase or reference from our culture,'' said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice, a law firm founded by the Rev. Pat Robertson.

The Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, called the pledge case the most controversial issue before the high court in a decade.

''Everyone's got an opinion, informed or otherwise,'' Lynn said. ''The bottom line is, will we require a daily religious loyalty oath for school children?''

The administration, the girl's school and atheist Michael Newdow all asked the Supreme Court to get involved in the case.

The court, however, agreed only to hear the appeal from the school district. The administration will be able to weigh in separately. The court also said it will consider whether Newdow had the proper legal footing to bring the case.

Justice Antonin Scalia will not take part in the case, apparently because of public remarks earlier this year critical of the lower court ruling in the pledge case. His absence sets up the possibility that the other eight justices could deadlock 4-4, a result that would allow the lower court decision to stand.

In its legal filings so far, the administration has argued that the reference to God in the pledge is more about ceremony and history than about religion.

The reference is an ''official acknowledgment of our nation's religious heritage,'' similar to the ''In God We Trust'' stamped on coins and bills, Solicitor general Theodore Olson told the court. It is far-fetched to say such references pose a real danger of imposing state-sponsored religion, Olson wrote.

The administration also claimed that Newdow cannot sue on behalf of his daughter because his custody of the girl is in question. Newdow and the child's mother, Sandra Banning, have waged a long and bitter custody battle over the child, who lives with her mother. Newdow told the court that he now has joint custody of the girl, whose name is not part of the legal papers filed with the Supreme Court.

To complicate matters, Banning has told the court she has no objection to the pledge.

Newdow holds medical and legal degrees, and is representing himself in the case.

The phrase ''under God'' was not part of the original pledge adopted by Congress as a patriotic tribute in 1942, at the height of World War II. Congress inserted the phrase more than a decade later, in 1954, when the world had moved from hot war to cold.

Supporters of the new wording said it would set the United States apart from godless communism.

The case is Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, 02-1624

In other cases Tuesday, the court:

-Turned aside an appeal of a lower court decision that upheld laws in nine states permitting doctors to give marijuana to sick patients.

-Agreed to decide whether border officers can randomly search gas tanks of vehicles coming into the country as part of stepped-up security measures that the Bush administration said are indispensable to the war on drugs and terrorism.

-Said it will take a fresh look at the complex question of how to protect children from online smut without resorting to unconstitutional censorship.

10-14-03 1407EDT...NOW THIS IS A DEBATE...lol as my recent post was turning into one anyways...

You can join Unsolved Mysteries and post your own mysteries or
interesting stories for the world to read and respond to Click here

Scroll all the way down to read replies.

Show all stories by   Author:  60080 ( Click here )

Halloween is Right around the corner.. .







 
Replies:      
Date: 10/19/2003 10:50:00 AM  From Authorid: 54987    It was changed, not because of any allegiance to a God but for political reasons. I don't think it would be a danger to christians or any other religion to have it removed. People will always believe in their God of choice. The flag is supposed to unite us as citizens of our country. If we were to keep 'God' in it it would be making out that God is only on the side of America which, of course, would be preposterous. I agree with putting it back to its original state and leave it be not to be tampered with again.  
Date: 10/19/2003 10:54:00 AM  ( From Author ) From Authorid: 60080    it was changed? you make it sound like it already happened?
  
Date: 10/19/2003 11:39:00 AM  From Authorid: 36967    I don't believe in forcing religion on anyone. I don't belive Jesus would do the samething.
  
Date: 10/19/2003 11:54:00 AM  From Authorid: 61941    I say if you want to say it say it, if you don't then don't, respet everyone for there own beliefs. Just like when takeing the oath of enlistment, at the end you can either say" so help me, God." or "so help me.". I say leave it up to the kids to decide what they want to say.  
Date: 10/19/2003 12:12:00 PM  From Authorid: 49150    D.D. is right. It would be a slap in the face to our founding Father's. They are the one's who insured our freedom of religion, and this was written by them. These men were deeply religious, if it wasn't for that one fact, our country might not even exist.  
Date: 10/19/2003 2:02:00 PM  From Authorid: 61977    I do not have to read the post in its entirity to say that it should be put to vote by all people of this nation and then decide the democratic way. I know how I feel, but others shall be heard as well just as God has intended it. HUGS,  
Date: 10/19/2003 6:33:00 PM  From Authorid: 54987    Crystal... the founding fathers didn't put 'God' in the pledge. They deliberately kept it out so that everyone could have freedom. It was put in in the 50s when there was a big fear of communists. They wanted people to think that communists were 'godless' people. Just another propaganda exercise.  
Date: 10/19/2003 7:34:00 PM  From Authorid: 3125    Francis Scott Key wrote the Star Spangled Banner in 1814. Though we usually sing the first verse, the fourth verse says, "O thus be it ever when freemen shall stand, Between their lov'd home and war's desolation. Blest with vict'ry and peace, may the Heav'n-rescued land. Praise the pow'r that hath made and preserv'd us a nation.Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just, And this be our motto, "In God is our Trust." And the Star-Spangled Banner in triumph shall wave, O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave."

Though Francis Scott Key wrote additional poetry in the years following the battle at Fort McHenry, none ever came close to the popularity of his Star Spangled Banner. He never knew that his poem would be our National Anthem. It was not officially recognized as such until 1931. However, it was immensely popular and no one objected to the words then. I can understand why some do not want a reference to God in any of our future documents, etc. There are many who are citizens of America who do not believe in God and this is their country as well as the ones who do believe. Those of us who do believe should not push a God belief upon those who do not believe. We choose God as an individual, and since this nation has many different beliefs, we must take every individual into consideration. We all have our rights. I am sure there are non believers who fight for this nation's freedom as well as believers. This is the land of the free, not the land with a God concept which it was built upon. There were many documents signed with a God concept in the days of our forefathers. Today, things have changed and I do believe things need to be changed accordingly to the growth of our nation. I don't have to like what is fair, but fair is fair regardless.
  
Date: 10/19/2003 10:33:00 PM  From Authorid: 52155    During the last 30 years we have removed God from the schools, and look where they are today. Are we really willing to remove God from the rest of the country?  
Date: 10/20/2003 6:00:00 AM  From Authorid: 3125    Eddo, I see where you are coming from and I am not saying to remove God from any place. I am saying that we all must be fair and to consider all. What would be the problem if we would feel free to discuss any or all possibilities in our schools when it comes to evolution or creation instead of promoting one or the other? I am saying that we should make the necessary changes to include all. This is what freedom is about.  
Date: 10/20/2003 8:54:00 AM  From Authorid: 52155    My comment wasn't directed at you, Rusure, just a comment to all.   
Date: 10/20/2003 9:12:00 AM  From Authorid: 13974    No muffin man what koolade is talking about is the change in which "under God" was added to the pledge. The origional text did not contain this line. In one of my favorite books on my shelf (printed in 1942) the words under God are nowhere to be seen in the pledge. This is because they were added in 1954. It has been stated by the family members of Bellamy (the author of the pledge) that he would not have agreed with this addition to the pledge. Although he had written many things discussing "divine providence" he was a staunch supporter of the seperation of church and state. His son even wrote to congress to make them aware of his fathers views on the pledge whenit wa revised. This would not be the first or last revission if "under God" were to be removed. As for my personal views, I believe it should be removed. It has no place in the pledge. I completly agree with it's removal. I hear people going on about their freedoms of religion all the time, and how it is being taken away.This is foolishness. And Eddo, we have removed asbestos too, do you have any proof that the removal of religion from schools holds any more bearing on the state of our schools? You might as well sight the introduction of teflon into school cafaterias, it can be proven just as well. Besides, prayer was removed fourty years ago (at least that is when it really got rolling.)  
Date: 10/20/2003 10:05:00 AM  From Authorid: 52155    Does asbestos tell us not to kill each other? Does teflon let us know that stealing is wrong? Does either teach us to respect our parents and those in authority above us? sorry, no. Gone along with God are the morality teachings that came with him.  
Date: 10/20/2003 10:07:00 AM  From Authorid: 52155    and my alologies on getting the number of years wrong. You are right about the 1962 comment.  
Date: 10/20/2003 10:13:00 AM  From Authorid: 13974    Does a lack of Christianity equate to a loss of reason, and ethical behavior Eddo? Do people not know that they should not kill, steal, or harm other people? Is it impossible for a person who has never studied Christianity to embrace such beliefs? Without Christ, would people still know you shouldn't kill someone? I believe so, and even with "The Word of God" for others it just doesn't matter, so where is the correlation? How would removing the word God from the pledge (considering it wasn’t supposed to be part of it in the first place) supposed to have an adverse affect on the nation?
  
Date: 10/20/2003 11:18:00 AM  From Authorid: 52155    lack of ethical teachings leads to lack of ethical behavior. Without the teachings of God, students do not get a dose of morality. Instead they get sex education at 10 years old. Without a higher authority, there is no need to follow what your teachers, parents, cops, etc. tell you. Who cares if you don't listen? Who cares if you do whatever you want, whenever you want? Who cares if you kill someone? Yeah, your parents say it is bad, but big deal, they are only people like you.......  
Date: 10/20/2003 3:10:00 PM  ( From Author ) From Authorid: 60080    A simple quote that fits in here, :"There's no justice, there's just us  
Date: 10/21/2003 7:39:00 AM  From Authorid: 13974    Again Eddo, you claim the only way people can be ethical and good, is through God. Where as if God weren't watching, people would do anything they liked, regarless of if it hurt anyone? That is foolish, and dead wrong. Just because you would run around like a lunatic if God werent there to punish you for it, does not mean the rest of us would. I see christians every day doing bad things, and people of all other sorts being fantastic people. Just because you are incapable of self control without your particular deity to keep you under control has nothing to do with the rest of us. Lack of Christianity DOES NOT equal lack of morals.  
Date: 10/21/2003 8:33:00 AM  From Authorid: 52155    YOu make a good argument Phydeux, but unfortunately society shows us just the opposite. As our country (The USA) moves father away from God and his morals, society steadily declines- crime, welfare, suicide, drug use, hate crimes, have all been on the rise in the last 10-20 years. Society proves you wrong Phydeux.  
Date: 10/21/2003 8:49:00 AM  From Authorid: 13974    How does society prove me wrong. I could just as easily blame this decline on the invention of the color television, or audio cassets. You have no evidence that this so called decline is in any way related to a move from christianity. In what way can you show the two subjects are related? And how does this show that without christianity people cannot be moral and ethical?  
Date: 10/21/2003 8:50:00 AM  From Authorid: 13974    You give no evidence, no proof, just rhetoric.  
Date: 10/21/2003 9:06:00 AM  From Authorid: 52155    Phyeux, we are going in circles now. There is no moral lessons to be learned from color television or audio cassettes. There are moral lessons that can be learned from God. Remove God and remove the lessons that come from Him, that have always come from Him, and yes, morality will decline. Once again, Society is proving that, if you will take an honest look at it.  
Date: 10/21/2003 9:32:00 AM  From Authorid: 13974    Society is not proving anything. You see two socially moral trends, and show no relation between the two. As far as God giving us morality, that is up to interpritation, and perspective. You still have yet to answer my questions Eddo, THAT is why we are going in circles. You cannot show that loss of Christianity is to blame any more than anything else in the world. It is rhetoric, not evidence. Just because you think so means nothing. You can think the moon was made of cheese, it doesn't make it so. No, about how lack of Christianity equals lack of morals, are you going to answer this or not?  
Date: 10/21/2003 9:59:00 AM  From Authorid: 52155    I have answered it Phydeux. I have shown proof in moral decay of society. You chose not to see it.  
Date: 10/21/2003 10:07:00 AM  From Authorid: 13974    WHAT PROOF?! You showed two social trends, you never showed a corolation between the two, or how a person is not capable of being moral, and ethical without Christianity.  
Date: 10/21/2003 10:28:00 AM  From Authorid: 54987    I'd like to see good citizenship classes in schools. Classes based on the book and televsion series 'Chicken Soup For The Soul' would go a long way to improving. Morality is not, and should not be dependent on religion. And it can be taught without reference to a religion. If you beleive in God, then nothing can take God away from anything.  
Date: 10/21/2003 11:27:00 AM  From Authorid: 3125    Eddo, Just something to think about. The US claims to be a Christian nation, but do we see the ethical teachings of God? Watch how many in the political world, in the entertainment fields, etc., etc., will proudly use God's name and claim that this nation is of God, but then notice the very unholy things they do. My point is, Why mock God? Why use His name? Why fight about removing God's name from any place? Why call on God and do not the things He says? This nation is not of God, though it started with a God belief. God let go of the Israelites because the people were doing the same things America is doing today. God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for the same things America is doing today. Was it pleasing to God then because some used His name? No, He called it mockery and hypocritical.  
Date: 10/21/2003 11:38:00 AM  From Authorid: 3125    America is about the citizens of America. This includes believers and non believers, etc..America claims to be the land who fights for the rights of all. Do not the non believers have the same rights as the believers? The non believers fight alongside the believers in wars to ensure America us our freedoms and rights. Why would the non believers want to fight for a nation that holds up a sign which states "One nation under God" when they don't even believe in a God? America should represent and stand for ALL of it's citizens, not just some.  
Date: 10/21/2003 6:01:00 PM  From Authorid: 54987    Way to go Rusure!!! Way to go.... as to your last reply.  

Find great Easter stories on Angels Feather
Information Privacy policy and Copyrights

Renasoft is the proud sponsor of the Unsolved Mystery Publications website.
See: www.rensoft.com Personal Site server, Power to build Personal Web Sites and Personal Web Pages
All stories are copyright protected and may not be reproduced in any form, except by specific written authorization

Pages:529 128 1483 863 1492 1596 416 859 318 1079 81 1517 1387 339 98 473 1494 1493 616 183 571 440 1235 1547 17 1488 331 1137 1418 379 1182 18 874 1310 891 178 1324 763 516 1350 1273 528 1188 1435 1513 326 643 530 1051 436 1339 556 1432 1523 1390 473 267 55 284 1517 1154 136 212 17 6 128 1391 1421 576 474 988 1124 1579 725 450 891 221 167 422 83 921 441 878 80 437 573 42 1108 592 395