I believe god should be removed from the Pledge and from money.
Also....Why should you have to swear on a bible in court?
Remove "under god" from the Pledge of Allegiance?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Also....Why should you have to swear on a bible in court?
Videodogg
Now that is an issue worth addresing
You do not have to swear on the Bible in court: you may take an affirmation.I believe god should be removed from the Pledge and from money.
Also....Why should you have to swear on a bible in court?
Videodogg
[QUOTE="jlh47"]it was jointly written. Thomas Jefferson just narrated it.
The_Ish
But the Declaration is not the law of the land. The Constitution is = and it mentions no God or gods, and makes not affiliation with any religion.
but you said the declaration of independence didn't have God in it...
[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"][QUOTE="Videodogg"]Also....Why should you have to swear on a bible in court?
jlh47
Now that is an issue worth addresing
because It stands for truth
That is obviously subjective - not everyone believes that the Bible is the truth. That's why we have this thing called an Affirmation.
No one in my first hour says the pledge. Its our homeroom and all the PE classes are in the cafeteria. I suppose its because no one pays attention to the tv when we're all spread out so far, but I still did :/
I felt like a loner being the only one who did it for a few weeks :P
[QUOTE="jlh47"][QUOTE="hamstergeddon"][QUOTE="Videodogg"]Also....Why should you have to swear on a bible in court?
The_Ish
Now that is an issue worth addresing
because It stands for truth
That is obviously subjective - not everyone believes that the Bible is the truth. That's why we have this thing called an Affirmation.
i know but i answered HIS question i didn't ask for your input...
[QUOTE="The_Ish"][QUOTE="jlh47"]it was jointly written. Thomas Jefferson just narrated it.
jlh47
But the Declaration is not the law of the land. The Constitution is = and it mentions no God or gods, and makes not affiliation with any religion.
but you said the declaration of independence didn't have God in it...
No I didn't. Stop putting words in my mouth. Read who is quoting you, and go back a few pages to make sure - otherwise you are ignoring everyone's statements and you would not be able to make any points.
[QUOTE="jlh47"]read the declaration of independence... there's refrences to God everywhere... and freedom of religion.CptJSparrowI have read it...and the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, not the Declaration of Independence. ;) Remember who wrote it? :lol:
The Constitution is a living document. Switching to ad hominem now?and the bigots are the ones who keep making amendments to the constitution.
I asked you to show me every set of laws in the world and show how they are BASED on the commandments, and you have failed to do so. I suppose that this is because you know damn well that there are secular countries in the world, such as The United States of America.and BASED doesn't mean word for word that's why it's called BASED OK? like saving private ryan is BASED on a true story.
i did not fail to do so. do not murder do not lie do not cheat, do not covet, those are things we all can live by.
Aren't you forgetting some? ;)i did not fail to do so. do not murder do not lie do not cheat, do not covet, those are things we all can live by.
jlh47
You are not forced to say the Pledge. When you are, then it has to be removed. DracargenThe change itself is unconstitutional.
and all countries do have in their law. jlh47Therefore they are derived from the Ten Commandments? :lol:
under god should stay in because its true. And most schools or heck maybe all of them dont teach about christian religion only muslim religion and more crap like that so we should at least have something christian related in the pledge right? of course thats rightswoblade
Wow you actually believe this?
[QUOTE="Dracargen"]You are not forced to say the Pledge. When you are, then it has to be removed. CptJSparrowThe change itself is unconstitutional.
Congress shall make no law respecting or forbidding the establishment of religion.
It is not a law to say the Pledge.
Therefore they are derived from the Ten Commandments? :lol:[QUOTE="CptJSparrow"][QUOTE="jlh47"]and all countries do have in their law. jlh47
they are...
And the cultures where these ideals were present, yet had not ever heard of them? -- You might as well say that the Ten Commandments were derived from our laws and not the other way around.The change itself is unconstitutional.[QUOTE="CptJSparrow"][QUOTE="Dracargen"]You are not forced to say the Pledge. When you are, then it has to be removed. Dracargen
Congress shall make no law respecting or forbidding the establishment of religion.
It is not a law to say the Pledge.
Actually, it is "Congress shall make now law respecting an establishment of religion, nor inhibiting the free exercise thereof." It says RESPECTING, not ORDAINING, therefore it is not the establishment of a church. For the third time, I must dig up the Supreme Court cases again: Walz v. Tax Commission, 397 U.S. 664, 668 (1970) No sponsorship, financial support, or active involvement of the sovereign in religious activity. Board of Education v. Allen, 392 U.S. 236, 243 (Upheld second prong of the Lemon Test found in Lemon v. Kurtzman) Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577 Constitution guarantees, "at a minimum," the government -- including the state and public schools -- may not coerce anyone to support or participate in religion or act in a way that establishes a state relilgion or state faith, or "tends to do so." (C.f. Establishment clause: "respects an establishment..." as opposed to "ordains a state church") Board of Regents... v. Southworth, 529 U.S. Minority candidates will not ever prevail if a majoritarian vote is held to try and avoid conflict with the establishment clause. Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962) "Government-directed prayer in public schools, even if it is denominationally neutral and non-mandatory, violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment." Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia, 515 U.S. 819 (1995) "The University's denying funds available to other student publications, but not to a publication produced from a religious viewpoint, violates the First Amendment's guaratee of free speech. The University's assertion that the exclusion was necessary to avoid violating the Establishment Clause lacked merit because the funds were apportioned neutrally to any group meeting certain criteria that requested the funds." (C.f. Santa Fe Independent School District's medium was not in the public forum) Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296 (1940) Connecticut statue requiring licenses for religious solicitation violated the Free Exercise Clause of the 1st Amendment, applicable to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment. Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe 530 U.S., 290 (2000) C.f. Lee v. Weisman (This case involved a school board having students vote on whether or not there should be prayer before sports events, and then to vote on who should lead the prayer. The Court deemed that minority religions would never win, upheld the previous decision that it was a coercion, forcing students such as team players and cheer leaders to inter an "unacceptable position of either proclaiming religious beliefs they don't share or publicly protesting.") - coerces, as it the arguments presented by the School District that their decision was constitutional due to the student body voting failed because they are not unanimous and minorities would never win. - had the purpose of respecting an establishment of religionThe change itself is unconstitutional.[QUOTE="CptJSparrow"][QUOTE="Dracargen"]You are not forced to say the Pledge. When you are, then it has to be removed. jlh47
it was amended... constitutional.
Wait a minute...did you not say that people who amend the Constitution are bigots?[QUOTE="jlh47"]The change itself is unconstitutional.[QUOTE="CptJSparrow"][QUOTE="Dracargen"]You are not forced to say the Pledge. When you are, then it has to be removed. CptJSparrow
it was amended... constitutional.
Wait a minute...did you not say that people who amend the Constitution are bigots?just playing your devils advocate here.
you said it's unconstitutional i'm saying it is...
[QUOTE="jlh47"]Therefore they are derived from the Ten Commandments? :lol:[QUOTE="CptJSparrow"][QUOTE="jlh47"]and all countries do have in their law. CptJSparrow
they are...
And the cultures where these ideals were present, yet had not ever heard of them? -- You might as well say that the Ten Commandments were derived from our laws and not the other way around.The change itself is unconstitutional.[QUOTE="CptJSparrow"][QUOTE="Dracargen"]You are not forced to say the Pledge. When you are, then it has to be removed. Dracargen
Congress shall make no law respecting or forbidding the establishment of religion.
It is not a law to say the Pledge.
Actually, it is "Congress shall make now law respecting an establishment of religion, nor inhibiting the free exercise thereof." It says RESPECTING, not ORDAINING, therefore it is not the establishment of a church. For the third time, I must dig up the Supreme Court cases again: Walz v. Tax Commission, 397 U.S. 664, 668 (1970) No sponsorship, financial support, or active involvement of the sovereign in religious activity. Board of Education v. Allen, 392 U.S. 236, 243 (Upheld second prong of the Lemon Test found in Lemon v. Kurtzman) Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577 Constitution guarantees, "at a minimum," the government -- including the state and public schools -- may not coerce anyone to support or participate in religion or act in a way that establishes a state relilgion or state faith, or "tends to do so." (C.f. Establishment clause: "respects an establishment..." as opposed to "ordains a state church") Board of Regents... v. Southworth, 529 U.S. Minority candidates will not ever prevail if a majoritarian vote is held to try and avoid conflict with the establishment clause. Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962) "Government-directed prayer in public schools, even if it is denominationally neutral and non-mandatory, violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment." Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia, 515 U.S. 819 (1995) "The University's denying funds available to other student publications, but not to a publication produced from a religious viewpoint, violates the First Amendment's guaratee of free speech. The University's assertion that the exclusion was necessary to avoid violating the Establishment Clause lacked merit because the funds were apportioned neutrally to any group meeting certain criteria that requested the funds." (C.f. Santa Fe Independent School District's medium was not in the public forum) Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296 (1940) Connecticut statue requiring licenses for religious solicitation violated the Free Exercise Clause of the 1st Amendment, applicable to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment. Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe 530 U.S., 290 (2000) C.f. Lee v. Weisman (This case involved a school board having students vote on whether or not there should be prayer before sports events, and then to vote on who should lead the prayer. The Court deemed that minority religions would never win, upheld the previous decision that it was a coercion, forcing students such as team players and cheer leaders to inter an "unacceptable position of either proclaiming religious beliefs they don't share or publicly protesting.") - coerces, as it the arguments presented by the School District that their decision was constitutional due to the student body voting failed because they are not unanimous and minorities would never win. - had the purpose of respecting an establishment of religionYes, but it is not a law to say the Pledge. You are not punished for not saying it. If it were so, then I would be on your side.
In addition, if we are to remove every mention of God from our government, we would have a very large amount of work to do.
1.Education - Strengthening and Improvement of Elementary and Secondary Schools: "Boy Scouts of America Equal Access Act"20 USC Sec. 7905Jan. 8, 2002"(b)(1) Equal Access - Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no public elementary school, public secondary school, local educational agency, or State educational agency that has a designated open forum or a limited public forum and that receives funds made available through the Department shall deny equal access or a fair opportunity to meet to, or discriminate against, any group officially affiliated with the Boy Scouts of America, or any other youth group listed in title 36 (as a patriotic society), that wishes to conduct a meeting within that designated open forum or limited public forum, including denying such access or opportunity or discriminating for reasons based on the membership or leadership criteria or oath of allegiance to God and country..."As of Aug. 2006, the United States Code contained 68 mentions of "God." 46 of these references were in shipping and environmental codes that discussed "acts of God." The 22 other references to "God" are presented below in the order of most recently amended.
2.Armed Forces: Rules of Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces - Qualifications to Practices10 USC Append.Oct. 22, 2001"(e) Each applicant shall take or subscribe the following oath or affirmation:
'I ***, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and that I will conduct myself, as an attorney and counselor of this Court, uprightly and according to law. So help me God.'"
3.Money and Finance: Coins and Currency31 USC Sec. 5112Nov. 6, 2000"(d)(1) United States coins shall have the inscription 'In God We Trust.' The obverse side of each coin shall have the inscription 'Liberty'. The reverse side of each coin shall have the inscription 'United States of America' and 'E Pluribus Unum' and a designation of the value of the coin."
4.Patriotic and National Observances, Ceremonies, and Organizations - National Day of Prayer36 USC Sec. 119Aug. 12, 1998"The President shall issue each year a proclamation designating the first Thursday in May as a National Day of Prayer on which the people of the United States may turn to God in prayer and meditation at churches, in groups, and as individuals." [First effective Apr. 17, 1952]
5.Patriotic and National Observances, Ceremonies, and Organizations - National Motto36 USC Sec. 302Aug. 12, 1998"'In God we trust' is the national motto." [First effective July 30, 1956]
6.Patriotic and National Observances, Ceremonies, and Organizations - Army and Navy Union of the U.S.A.36 USC Sec. 22903Aug. 12, 1998"The purposes of the corporation are as provided in the articles of incorporation and include -
(2) serving our Nation under God in peace as well as in war by fostering the ideals and faith of patriotism, loyalty, justice, and liberty, by inculcating in the hearts of young and old, through percept and practice, the spirit of true Americanism, and by participating in civic activities for the good of our country and community..."
7.Patriotic and National Observances, Ceremonies, and Organizations - Catholic War Veterans of the U.S.A., Inc.36 USC Sec. 40103Aug. 12, 1998"The purposes of the corporation are as provided in the articles of incorporation and include a continuing commitment, on a national basis, to -
(12) increase our love, honor, and service to God and to our fellow man without regard to race, creed, color, or national origin..."
8.Flag and Seal, Seat of Government, and the States4 USC Sec. 4Aug. 12, 1998"The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag: '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.', should be rendered by standing at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart." [First effective June 22, 1942]
9.Judiciary and Judicial Procedure: Rules of The United States Court of International Trade - Attorneys; Admission to Practice28 USC Append.July 1, 1998"(b)(2) The applicant shall be admitted either (A) upon oral motion by a members of the bar of this court or of the Supreme Court of the United States, before a judge of this court who will administer the following oath: 'I, ______, do solemnly swear (or affirm)...so help me God.'"
10.Judiciary and Judicial Procedure: The U.S. Court of Federal Claims - Attorneys28 USC Append.Dec. 4, 1992"...may be admitted to practice in this court upon oral motion or by verified application, as provided in this rule, and upon taking or subscribing to the following oath: 'I, _______, do solemnly swear (or affirm),...so help me God.'"
11.Judiciary and Judicial Procedure: Oaths of justices and judges28 USC Sec. 453Dec. 1, 1990"Each justice or judge of the United States shall take the following oath or affirm before performing the duties of his office: 'I, _______, do solemnly swear (or affirm),...So help me God.'"
12.Armed Forces - Personnel; Enlistmentss10 USC Sec. 502Nov. 29, 1989"Each person enlisting in an armed force shall take the following oath:
"...So help me God.'"
13.National Guard - Personnel; Enlistment Oath32 USC Sec. 304Sept. 29, 1988"Each person enlisting in the National Guard shall sign an enlistment contract and subscribe to the following oath:
'...So help me God."'
14.Armed Forces: Personnel - Uniform Code of Military Justice10 USC Sec. 802Mar. 28, 1988"If I become a prisoner of war...I will never forget that I am an American, fighting for freedom, responsible for my actions, and dedicated to the principles which made my country free. I will trust my God and in the United States of America."
15.Patriotic and National Observances, Ceremonies, and Organizations - National Floral Emblem36 USC Sec. 303Nov. 20, 1986"The flower commonly known as the rose is the national floral emblem." Proc. No. 5574, 11/20/86, by President Ronald Reagan: "Americans have always loved the flowers with which God decorates our land. More often than any other flower, we hold the rose dear as the symbol of life and love and devotion, of beauty and eternity. For the love of man and woman, for the love of mankind and God, for the love of country, Americans who would speak the language of the heart do so with a rose.The American people have long held a special place in their hearts for roses. Let us continue to cherish them, to honor the love and devotion they represent, and to bestow them on all we love just as God has bestowed them on us."
16.Money and Finance: Coins and Currency31 USC Sec. 5114Sept. 13, 1982"(b) United States currency has the inscription 'In God We Trust' in a place the Secretary [of the Treasury] decides is appropriate."
17.Government Organization and Employees - Oath of Office5 USC Sec. 3331Sept. 6, 1966"An individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services, shall take the following oath, 'I, ...So help me God.'"
18.Armed Forces - Navy and Marine Corps: Personnel - Administration; Chaplains: divine services10 USC Sec. 6031Aug. 7, 1959"(b) The commanders of vessels and naval activities to which chaplains are attached shall cause divine service to be performed on Sunday, whenever the weather and other circumstances allow it to be done; and it is earnestly recommended to all officers, seamen, and others in the naval service diligently to attend at every performance of the worship of Almighty God."
19.National Guard - Personnel - Appointment Oath32 USC Sec. 312Aug. 10, 1956"Each person who is appointed as an officer of the National Guard shall subscribe to the following oath: '...so help me God.'"
20.War and National Defense Proc. No. 2914 - National Emergency, 195050 USC App.Dec. 16, 1950"WHEREAS, if the goal of communist imperialism were to be achieved, the people of this country would no longer enjoy the full and rich life they have with God's help built for themselves and their children...NOW, THEREFORE, I, HARRY S. TRUMAN, President of the United States of America, do proclaim the existence of a national emergency, which requires that the military, naval, air, and civilian defenses of this country be strengthened as speedily as possible to the end that we may be able to repeal any and all threats against our national security..."
21.Territories and Insular Possessions: Guam - The Legislature - Oath of Office48 USC Sec. 1423dAug. 1, 1950"Every member of the legislature and all officers of the government of Guam shall take the following oath or affirmation:
'I solemnly swear (or affirm) in the presence of Almighty God..."
22.Judiciary and Judicial Procedure: Court Officers and Employees - Oath of Office of clerks and deputies28 USC Sec. 951June 25, 1948"Each clerk of court and his deputies shall take the following oath or affirmation before entering upon their duties: 'I, ...So help me God.'"
Lisa Shaw Roy, J.D., Assistant Professor at the University of Mississippi School of Law, in her article entitled "The Establishment Clause and the Concept of Inclusion" published in the Spring 2004 Oregon Law Review, wrote:
"Many unfamiliar with the Supreme Court's Establishment Clause doctrine would not have supposed that being required to listen to a phrase such as 'under God' would amount to a constitutional harm. And those same persons, when posed with the question of whether they believed the Pledge of Allegiance to be a religious exercise, would have probably answered 'no.' Thus Michael Newdow's claim can be seen as doubly anomalous, resting on the feelings of a religious outsider when required to passively listen to a marginally religious message...
[T]he Establishment Clause should not be interpreted as requiring elimination of every religious message or practice. Demanding inclusion merely inverts the ****fications of judicial winners and losers, but does little to promote the overall well-being of society's members."
2004 Lisa Shaw Roy
The Center For Individual Freedom, in their Dec. 19, 2003 amicus brief for the case Elk Grove v. Newdow, wrote:
"Thus, one who voluntarily recites the Pledge does not affirm his or her belief in 'God' or even his or her belief that the United States is and will be 'one Nation under God,' rather the adherent affirms his allegiance 'to the Republic,' which is then described as constituting a single indivisible nation, historically founded upon a belief and by those who believed in God, and for the purpose of promoting and securing liberty and justice for all. Such an affirmation is, no doubt, an exceptionally powerful statement of patriotism, but remains wholly secular, and hence consistent with the Establishment Clause, because the adherent is swearing his or her allegiance to this country and its primary symbol, not to any religion or Supreme Being."
Dec. 19, 2003 Center for Individual Freedom
Rod Paige, Ph.D., Former Secretary of Education, in a Department of Education press release on June 27, 2002, wrote:
"While I am confident this opinion [Newdow v. Elk Grove] will be overturned, it is more than a little disturbing that our nation's Constitution could be read this way. It stretches the First Amendment beyond credulity, and it places the opinion of unelected judges above the plain meaning of the Constitution and the nation's history, let alone common sense."
June 27, 2002 Rod Paige
Noah Feldman, J.D., Ph.D., Assistant Professor at New York University School of Law, wrote in his article, "Intellectual Origins of the Establishment Clause," published May 2002 in the N.Y.U. Law Review:
"...[T]he Establishment Clause only bars the government from doing things that violate the conscience in a way that could be understood to fall within the model that the Framers would have thought of as establishing religion.
...To the eighteenth-century mind, liberty of conscience meant that the individual must not be coerced into performing religious actions or subscribing to religious beliefs that he believed were sinful in the eyes of God and that could therefore endanger his salvation. Indeed, it was, following Locke, literally absurd, to speak of allowing Atheists Liberty of Conscience, because conscience necessarily related to one's salvation, in which atheists presumably disbelieved altogether."
May 2002 Noah Feldman
William Rehnquist, then Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, in his June 4, 1985 dissent in the case of Wallace v. Jaffree, wrote:
"It would seem...that the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment had acquired a well-accepted meaning: it forbade establishment of a national religion, and forbade preference among religious sects or denominations...The Establishment Clause did not require neutrality between religion and irreligion nor did it prohibit the federal government from providing non-discriminatory aid to religion."
June 4, 1985 William Rehnquist
[QUOTE="CptJSparrow"][QUOTE="jlh47"]The change itself is unconstitutional.[QUOTE="CptJSparrow"][QUOTE="Dracargen"]You are not forced to say the Pledge. When you are, then it has to be removed. jlh47
it was amended... constitutional.
Wait a minute...did you not say that people who amend the Constitution are bigots?just playing your devils advocate here.
you said it's unconstitutional i'm saying it is...
I provided evidence that it is unconstitutional... you have not provided evidence to the contrary -- moreover, you are wrong: it was not an amendment. There are 27 amendments, and none of them have to do with the pledge. [quote="Dracargen"]Yes, but it is not a law to say the Pledge. You are not punished for not saying it. If it were so, then I would be on your side. In addition, if we are to remove every mention of God from our government, we would have a very large amount of work to do. It is not law to say it, however the pledge itself is a law just as procedures in the Congress are laws. It is just as subject to the Lemon Test as other legislation, and it fails.You can take an oath OR an affirmation. ;)2.Armed Forces: Rules of Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces - Qualifications to Practices10 USC Append.Oct. 22, 2001"(e) Each applicant shall take or subscribe the following oath or affirmation: 'I ***, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and that I will conduct myself, as an attorney and counselor of this Court, uprightly and according to law. So help me God.'"
Unconstitutional.3.Money and Finance: Coins and Currency31 USC Sec. 5112Nov. 6, 2000"(d)(1) United States coins shall have the inscription 'In God We Trust.' The obverse side of each coin shall have the inscription 'Liberty'. The reverse side of each coin shall have the inscription 'United States of America' and 'E Pluribus Unum' and a designation of the value of the coin."
Hey, look, another law made during the Red Scare and Eisenhower's administration! :shock:4.Patriotic and National Observances, Ceremonies, and Organizations - National Day of Prayer36 USC Sec. 119Aug. 12, 1998"The President shall issue each year a proclamation designating the first Thursday in May as a National Day of Prayer on which the people of the United States may turn to God in prayer and meditation at churches, in groups, and as individuals." [First effective Apr. 17, 1952]
Unconstitutional.5.Patriotic and National Observances, Ceremonies, and Organizations - National Motto36 USC Sec. 302Aug. 12, 1998"'In God we trust' is the national motto." [First effective July 30, 1956]
Unconstitutional.7.Patriotic and National Observances, Ceremonies, and Organizations - Catholic War Veterans of the U.S.A., Inc.36 USC Sec. 40103Aug. 12, 1998"The purposes of the corporation are as provided in the articles of incorporation and include a continuing commitment, on a national basis, to - (12) increase our love, honor, and service to God and to our fellow man without regard to race, creed, color, or national origin..."
That version of the pledge did not exist until 1954, so whoever added the comments in brackets is now dubious.8.Flag and Seal, Seat of Government, and the States4 USC Sec. 4Aug. 12, 1998"The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag: '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.', should be rendered by standing at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart." [First effective June 22, 1942]
Unconstitutional.12.Armed Forces - Personnel; Enlistmentss10 USC Sec. 502Nov. 29, 1989"Each person enlisting in an armed force shall take the following oath: "...So help me God.'" 13.National Guard - Personnel; Enlistment Oath32 USC Sec. 304Sept. 29, 1988"Each person enlisting in the National Guard shall sign an enlistment contract and subscribe to the following oath: '...So help me God."'
[QUOTE="jlh47"][QUOTE="CptJSparrow"][QUOTE="jlh47"]The change itself is unconstitutional.[QUOTE="CptJSparrow"][QUOTE="Dracargen"]You are not forced to say the Pledge. When you are, then it has to be removed. CptJSparrow
it was amended... constitutional.
Wait a minute...did you not say that people who amend the Constitution are bigots?just playing your devils advocate here.
you said it's unconstitutional i'm saying it is...
I provided evidence that it is unconstitutional... you have not provided evidence to the contrary -- moreover, you are wrong: it was not an amendment. There are 27 amendments, and none of them have to do with the pledge.Yes, but it is not a law to say the Pledge. You are not punished for not saying it. If it were so, then I would be on your side. In addition, if we are to remove every mention of God from our government, we would have a very large amount of work to do.DracargenIt is not law to say it, however the pledge itself is a law just as procedures in the Congress are laws. It is just as subject to the Lemon Test as other legislation, and it fails.
You can take an oath OR an affirmation. ;)2.Armed Forces: Rules of Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces - Qualifications to Practices10 USC Append.Oct. 22, 2001"(e) Each applicant shall take or subscribe the following oath or affirmation: 'I ***, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and that I will conduct myself, as an attorney and counselor of this Court, uprightly and according to law. So help me God.'"
Unconstitutional.3.Money and Finance: Coins and Currency31 USC Sec. 5112Nov. 6, 2000"(d)(1) United States coins shall have the inscription 'In God We Trust.' The obverse side of each coin shall have the inscription 'Liberty'. The reverse side of each coin shall have the inscription 'United States of America' and 'E Pluribus Unum' and a designation of the value of the coin."
Hey, look, another law made during the Red Scare and Eisenhower's administration! :shock:4.Patriotic and National Observances, Ceremonies, and Organizations - National Day of Prayer36 USC Sec. 119Aug. 12, 1998"The President shall issue each year a proclamation designating the first Thursday in May as a National Day of Prayer on which the people of the United States may turn to God in prayer and meditation at churches, in groups, and as individuals." [First effective Apr. 17, 1952]
Unconstitutional.5.Patriotic and National Observances, Ceremonies, and Organizations - National Motto36 USC Sec. 302Aug. 12, 1998"'In God we trust' is the national motto." [First effective July 30, 1956]
Unconstitutional.7.Patriotic and National Observances, Ceremonies, and Organizations - Catholic War Veterans of the U.S.A., Inc.36 USC Sec. 40103Aug. 12, 1998"The purposes of the corporation are as provided in the articles of incorporation and include a continuing commitment, on a national basis, to - (12) increase our love, honor, and service to God and to our fellow man without regard to race, creed, color, or national origin..."
That version of the pledge did not exist until 1954, so whoever added the comments in brackets is now dubious.8.Flag and Seal, Seat of Government, and the States4 USC Sec. 4Aug. 12, 1998"The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag: '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.', should be rendered by standing at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart." [First effective June 22, 1942]
Unconstitutional.12.Armed Forces - Personnel; Enlistmentss10 USC Sec. 502Nov. 29, 1989"Each person enlisting in an armed force shall take the following oath: "...So help me God.'" 13.National Guard - Personnel; Enlistment Oath32 USC Sec. 304Sept. 29, 1988"Each person enlisting in the National Guard shall sign an enlistment contract and subscribe to the following oath: '...So help me God."'
it's in an amendment so therefore it's constitutional....
It does not seek to eliminate religious practice -- see the Free Exercise Clause, Roy.[T]he Establishment Clause should not be interpreted as requiring elimination of every religious message or practice. Demanding inclusion merely inverts the ****fications of judicial winners and losers, but does little to promote the overall well-being of society's members." 2004 Lisa Shaw Roy
See Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe."Thus, one who voluntarily recites the Pledge does not affirm his or her belief in 'God' or even his or her belief that the United States is and will be 'one Nation under God,' rather the adherent affirms his allegiance 'to the Republic,' which is then described as constituting a single indivisible nation, historically founded upon a belief and by those who believed in God, and for the purpose of promoting and securing liberty and justice for all. Such an affirmation is, no doubt, an exceptionally powerful statement of patriotism, but remains wholly secular, and hence consistent with the Establishment Clause, because the adherent is swearing his or her allegiance to this country and its primary symbol, not to any religion or Supreme Being." Dec. 19, 2003 Center for Individual Freedom
Plain meaning? What would that be? :lol:"While I am confident this opinion [Newdow v. Elk Grove] will be overturned, it is more than a little disturbing that our nation's Constitution could be read this way. It stretches the First Amendment beyond credulity, and it places the opinion of unelected judges above the plain meaning of the Constitution and the nation's history, let alone common sense." June 27, 2002 Rod Paige
"Respecting an establishment of religion...""...[T]he Establishment Clause only bars the government from doing things that violate the conscience in a way that could be understood to fall within the model that the Framers would have thought of as establishing religion. ...To the eighteenth-century mind, liberty of conscience meant that the individual must not be coerced into performing religious actions or subscribing to religious beliefs that he believed were sinful in the eyes of God and that could therefore endanger his salvation. Indeed, it was, following Locke, literally absurd, to speak of allowing Atheists Liberty of Conscience, because conscience necessarily related to one's salvation, in which atheists presumably disbelieved altogether." May 2002 Noah Feldman
I do not dispute the non-discriminatory aid part, however for the rest, this is another guy who has not read the Establishment Clause carefully.William Rehnquist, then Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, in his June 4, 1985 dissent in the case of Wallace v. Jaffree, wrote: "It would seem...that the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment had acquired a well-accepted meaning: it forbade establishment of a national religion, and forbade preference among religious sects or denominations...The Establishment Clause did not require neutrality between religion and irreligion nor did it prohibit the federal government from providing non-discriminatory aid to religion." June 4, 1985 William Rehnquist
God damn you do not pay attention. I will post ALL of the amendments, and you can tell me which one you are talking about... Amendment I fn2 [ Annotations ] Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Amendment II [ Annotations ] A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Amendment III [ Annotations ] No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. Amendment IV [ Annotations ] The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Amendment V [ Annotations ] No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. Amendment VI [ Annotations ] In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence. Amendment VII [ Annotations ] In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. Amendment VIII [ Annotations ] Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. Amendment IX [ Annotations ] The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Amendment X [ Annotations ] The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Amendment XI fn3 [ Annotations ] The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State. Amendment XII fn4 [ Annotations ] The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice- President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;--The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;--The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice- President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President--The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States. Amendment XIII. fn5 [ Annotations ] Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. Amendment XIV. fn6 [ Annotations ] Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Section. 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State. Section. 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability. Section. 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void. Section. 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. Amendment XV. fn7 [ Annotations ] Section. 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. Section. 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. Amendment XVI. fn8 [ Annotations ] The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration. Amendment XVII fn9 [ Annotations ] The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures. When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct. This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution. Amendment XVIII fn10 [ Annotations ] Section. 1. After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited. Sec. 2. The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. Sec. 3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress. Amendment XIX fn11 [ Annotations ] The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. Amendment XX fn12 [ Annotations ] Section. 1. The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin. Sec. 2. The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day. Sec. 3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified. Sec. 4. The Congress may by law provide for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the House of Representatives may choose a President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them, and for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the Senate may choose a Vice President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them. Sec. 5. Sections 1 and 2 shall take effect on the 15th day of October following the ratification of this article. Sec. 6. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission. Amendment XXI fn13 [ Annotations ] Section. 1. The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed. Sec. 2. The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited. Sec. 3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress. Amendment XXII fn14 [ Annotations ] Section. 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President, when this Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term. Sec. 2. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress. Amendment XXIII fn15 [ Annotations ] Section. 1. The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct: A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a State, but in no event more than the least populous State; they shall be in addition to those appointed by the States, but they shall be considered, for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a State; and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment. Sec. 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. Amendment XXIV fn16 [ Annotations ] Section. 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax. Section. 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. Amendment XXV fn17 [ Annotations ] Section. 1. In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President. Section. 2. Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress. Section. 3. Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives has written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President. Section. 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President. Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives has written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office. Amendment XXVI fn18 [ Annotations ] Section. 1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age. Section. 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. Amendment XXVII fn19 [ Annotations ] No law varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.it's in an amendment so therefore it's constitutional....
jlh47
*insert big-ass wall of text here*CptJSparrow
The Lemon Test is but one of several tests that the Court can use. Here are others:
Coercion Test: Support for the adoption of a test outlined by Justice Anthony Kennedy in his 1989 dissent in County of Allegheny v. ACLU. Believes the government does not violate the establishment clause unless it...
- provides direct aid to religion in a way that would tend to establish a state church, or
- coerces people to support or participate in religion against their will.
The Pledge violates niether of these.
Neutrality Test: Cited first as a guiding principle in Everson v. Board of Education, neutrality meant government was neither the ally nor adversary of religion. The government would treat religious groups the same as other similarly situated groups.
In addition, the Lemon Test was redone in 1997:
Lemon Test redux: From the 1997 Supreme Court decision in Agostini v. Felton, in which the Court held that allowing public school teachers to teach in parochial schools does not violate the Establishment Clause. The Court identified three primary criteria for determining that government aid has a primary effect of advancing religion:
- The aid results in governmental indoctrination
- The aid program defines its recipients by reference to religion
- The aid creates an excessive entanglement between government and religion
The only one of these that might be violated is the third, and even then, it is not an excessive entanglement because it is not against the law to not say "Under God" or even to not say the Pledge!
And for a country that holds it's Constitution in as high a regard as the Bible, it sure has a lot of things that are unconstitutional.:|
It does not seek to eliminate religious practice -- see the Free Exercise Clause, Roy.[T]he Establishment Clause should not be interpreted as requiring elimination of every religious message or practice. Demanding inclusion merely inverts the ****fications of judicial winners and losers, but does little to promote the overall well-being of society's members." 2004 Lisa Shaw RoyCptJSparrow
See Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe."Thus, one who voluntarily recites the Pledge does not affirm his or her belief in 'God' or even his or her belief that the United States is and will be 'one Nation under God,' rather the adherent affirms his allegiance 'to the Republic,' which is then described as constituting a single indivisible nation, historically founded upon a belief and by those who believed in God, and for the purpose of promoting and securing liberty and justice for all. Such an affirmation is, no doubt, an exceptionally powerful statement of patriotism, but remains wholly secular, and hence consistent with the Establishment Clause, because the adherent is swearing his or her allegiance to this country and its primary symbol, not to any religion or Supreme Being." Dec. 19, 2003 Center for Individual Freedom
Plain meaning? What would that be? :lol:"While I am confident this opinion [Newdow v. Elk Grove] will be overturned, it is more than a little disturbing that our nation's Constitution could be read this way. It stretches the First Amendment beyond credulity, and it places the opinion of unelected judges above the plain meaning of the Constitution and the nation's history, let alone common sense." June 27, 2002 Rod Paige
"Respecting an establishment of religion...""...[T]he Establishment Clause only bars the government from doing things that violate the conscience in a way that could be understood to fall within the model that the Framers would have thought of as establishing religion. ...To the eighteenth-century mind, liberty of conscience meant that the individual must not be coerced into performing religious actions or subscribing to religious beliefs that he believed were sinful in the eyes of God and that could therefore endanger his salvation. Indeed, it was, following Locke, literally absurd, to speak of allowing Atheists Liberty of Conscience, because conscience necessarily related to one's salvation, in which atheists presumably disbelieved altogether." May 2002 Noah Feldman
I do not dispute the non-discriminatory aid part, however for the rest, this is another guy who has not read the Establishment Clause carefully.William Rehnquist, then Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, in his June 4, 1985 dissent in the case of Wallace v. Jaffree, wrote: "It would seem...that the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment had acquired a well-accepted meaning: it forbade establishment of a national religion, and forbade preference among religious sects or denominations...The Establishment Clause did not require neutrality between religion and irreligion nor did it prohibit the federal government from providing non-discriminatory aid to religion." June 4, 1985 William Rehnquist
Establishment Clause: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." Congress is permitted to add the words "under God" to government materials because the phrase does not "establish" any specific religion.
Free Exercise Clause: "...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." Americans are permitted to Pledge to a nation under any "God" they choose, or to not use any such words at all.
From the dark days of the Revolution, the Continental Congress wrote these words:
Mr. W[illiam] Livingston, pursuant to leave granted, brought in a resolution for appointing a fast, which (being taken into consideration) was agreed to as follows:In times of impending calamity and distress; when the liberties of America are imminently endangered by the secret machinations and open assaults of an insidious and vindictive administration, it becomes the indispensable duty of these hitherto free and happy colonies, with true penitence of heart, and the most reverent devotion, publickly to acknowledge the over ruling providence of God; to confess and deplore our offences against him; and to supplicate his interposition for averting the threatened danger, and prospering our strenuous efforts in the cause of freedom, virtue, and posterity.
The Congress, therefore, considering the warlike preparations of the British Ministry to subvert our invaluable rights and priviledges, and to reduce us by fire and sword, by the savages of the wilderness, and our own domestics, to the most abject and ignominious bondage: Desirous, at the same time, to have people of all ranks and degrees duly impressed with a solemn sense of God's superintending providence, and of their duty, devoutly to rely, in all their lawful enterprizes, on his aid and direction, Do earnestly recommend, that Friday, the Seventeenth day of May next, be observed by the said colonies as a day of humiliation, fasting, and prayer; that we may, with united hearts, confess and bewail our manifold sins and transgressions, and, by a sincere repentance and amendment of life, appease his righteous displeasure, and, through the merits and mediation of Jesus Christ, obtain his pardon and forgiveness; humbly imploring his assistance to frustrate the cruel purposes of our unnatural enemies; and by inclining their hearts to justice and benevolence, prevent the further effusion of kindred blood. But if, continuing deaf to the voice of reason and humanity, and inflexibly bent, on desolation and war, they constrain us to repel their hostile invasions by open resistance, that it may please the Lord of Hosts, the God of Armies, to animate our officers and soldiers with invincible fortitude, to guard and protect them in the day of battle, and to crown the continental arms, by sea and land, with victory and success: Earnestly beseeching him to bless our civil rulers, and the representatives of the people, in their several assemblies and conventions; to preserve and strengthen their union, to inspire them with an ardent, disinterested love of their country; to give wisdom and stability to their counsels; and direct them to the most efficacious measures for establishing the rights of America on the most honourable and permanent basis--That he would be graciously pleased to bless all his people in these colonies with health and plenty, and grant that a spirit of incorruptible patriotism, and of pure undefiled religion, may universally prevail; and this continent be speedily restored to the blessings of peace and liberty, and enabled to transmit them inviolate to the latest posterity. And it is recommended to Christians of all denominations, to assemble for public worship, and abstain from servile labour on the said day.[Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774-1789, Saturday, March 16, 1776, pp. 208-209]
Forasmuch as it is the indispensable duty of all men to adore the superintending providence of Almighty God; to acknowledge with gratitude their obligation to him for benefits received, and to implore such farther blessings as they stand in need of; and it having pleased him in his abundant mercy not only to continue to us the innumerable bounties of his common providence, but also to smile upon us in the prosecution of a just and necessary war, for the defence and establishment of our unalienable rights and liberties; particularly in that he hath been pleased in so great a measure to prosper the means used for the support of our troops and to crown our arms with most signal success: It is therefore recommended to the legislative or executive powers of these United States, to set apart Thursday, the eighteenth day of December next, for solemn thanksgiving and praise; that with one heart and one voice the good people may express the grateful feelings of their hearts, and consecrate themselves to the service of their divine benefactor; and that together with their sincere acknowledgments and offerings, they may join the penitent confession of their manifold sins, whereby they had forfeited every favour, and their humble and earnest supplication that it may please God, through the merits of Jesus Christ, mercifully to forgive and blot them out of remembrance; that it may please him graciously to afford his blessing on the governments of these states respectively, and prosper the public council of the whole; to inspire our commanders both by land and sea, and all under them, with that wisdom and fortitude which may render them fit instruments, under the providence of Almighty God, to secure for these United States the greatest of all human blessings, independence and peace; that it may please him to prosper the trade and manufactures of the people and the labour of the husbandman, that our land may yet yield its increase; to take schools and seminaries of education, so necessary for cultivating the principles of true liberty, virtue and piety, under his nurturing hand, and to prosper the means of religion for the promotion and enlargement of that kingdom which consisteth "in righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Ghost."[Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774-1789, Saturday, November 1, 1777, pp. 854-855]
Resolve, That the form of the oath to be taken by the members of this Houses, as required by the third clause of the sixth article of the Constitution of Government of the United States, be as followeth, to wit: "I, A B a Representative of the United "States in the Congress thereof, do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be) in "the presence of Almighty GOD, that I will support the Constitution of the United "States. So help me GOD."[Journal of the House of Representatives of the United States, 1789-1793, Monday, April 6, p. 7]
No person who acknowledges the being of a God and a future state of rewards and punishments shall, on account of his religious sentiments, be disqualified to hold any office or place of trust or profit under this Commonwealth.
XXXVIII. That all persons and religious societies who acknowledge that there is one God, and a future state of rewards and punishments, and that God is publicly to be worshipped, shall be freely tolerated. The Christian Protestant religion shall be deemed, and is hereby constituted and declared to be, the established religion of this State. That all denominations of Christian Protestants in this State, demeaning themselves peaceably and faithfully, shall enjoy equal religious and civil privileges.
The Coercion Test only refers to the second prong of the Lemon Test -- and I cannot find a test for it, only a case opinion.Coercion Test: Support for the adoption of a test outlined by Justice Anthony Kennedy in his 1989 dissent in County of Allegheny v. ACLU. Believes the government does not violate the establishment clause unless it... 1. provides direct aid to religion in a way that would tend to establish a state church, or 2. coerces people to support or participate in religion against their will.
Treating religious groups just as any other group means that we are one nation under God?Neutrality Test: Cited first as a guiding principle in Everson v. Board of Education, neutrality meant government was neither the ally nor adversary of religion. The government would treat religious groups the same as other similarly situated groups.
...Lemon Test redux: From the 1997 Supreme Court decision in Agostini v. Felton, in which the Court held that allowing public school teachers to teach in parochial schools does not violate the Establishment Clause. The Court identified three primary criteria for determining that government aid has a primary effect of advancing religion: 1. The aid results in governmental indoctrination 2. The aid program defines its recipients by reference to religion 3. The aid creates an excessive entanglement between government and religion The only one of these that might be violated is the third, and even then, it is not an excessive entanglement because it is not against the law to not say "Under God" or even to not say the Pledge!
You have ignored the word 'respect' for the second time, and further this contradicts the tests that you have posted, true or otherwise, as they all imply that ordaining a state church is not the sole thing the clause forbids. I am running out of patience.Establishment Clause: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." Congress is permitted to add the words "under God" to government materials because the phrase does not "establish" any specific religion.
Dracargen
The current Pennsylvania Consitution, Art. I, sec. 4, still says:Okay...that says you can't be disqualified due to being religious. The Constitution of the United States itself says that. :|No person who acknowledges the being of a God and a future state of rewards and punishments shall, on account of his religious sentiments, be disqualified to hold any office or place of trust or profit under this Commonwealth.jlh47
Article 38 does establish a religion--but not a particular denomination:Ergo it is unconstitutional.XXXVIII. That all persons and religious societies who acknowledge that there is one God, and a future state of rewards and punishments, and that God is publicly to be worshipped, shall be freely tolerated. The Christian Protestant religion shall be deemed, and is hereby constituted and declared to be, the established religion of this State. That all denominations of Christian Protestants in this State, demeaning themselves peaceably and faithfully, shall enjoy equal religious and civil privileges.jlh47
[QUOTE="jlh47"]The current Pennsylvania Consitution, Art. I, sec. 4, still says:Okay...that says you can't be disqualified due to being religious. The Constitution of the United States itself says that. :|No person who acknowledges the being of a God and a future state of rewards and punishments shall, on account of his religious sentiments, be disqualified to hold any office or place of trust or profit under this Commonwealth.CptJSparrow
Article 38 does establish a religion--but not a particular denomination:Ergo it is unconstitutional.XXXVIII. That all persons and religious societies who acknowledge that there is one God, and a future state of rewards and punishments, and that God is publicly to be worshipped, shall be freely tolerated. The Christian Protestant religion shall be deemed, and is hereby constituted and declared to be, the established religion of this State. That all denominations of Christian Protestants in this State, demeaning themselves peaceably and faithfully, shall enjoy equal religious and civil privileges.jlh47
I agree with your stance, but it seems like the Constitution is only invoked when it supports a person's platform nowadays. It has become almost irrelevant if it contradicts what a politician has set out to accomplish. I guess the problem is that most politicians have a solid Christian constituency that will never allow them to remove this phrase from the pledge, so even if they are cognizant of its un-constitutionality, they are very constricted in what they can do. Besides, nobody really cares enough.
[QUOTE="jlh47"]The current Pennsylvania Consitution, Art. I, sec. 4, still says:Okay...that says you can't be disqualified due to being religious. The Constitution of the United States itself says that. :|No person who acknowledges the being of a God and a future state of rewards and punishments shall, on account of his religious sentiments, be disqualified to hold any office or place of trust or profit under this Commonwealth.CptJSparrow
Article 38 does establish a religion--but not a particular denomination:Ergo it is unconstitutional.XXXVIII. That all persons and religious societies who acknowledge that there is one God, and a future state of rewards and punishments, and that God is publicly to be worshipped, shall be freely tolerated. The Christian Protestant religion shall be deemed, and is hereby constituted and declared to be, the established religion of this State. That all denominations of Christian Protestants in this State, demeaning themselves peaceably and faithfully, shall enjoy equal religious and civil privileges.jlh47
how is it unconstitutional if it says it isn't unconstitutional? i don't get your reasoning?
The Supremacy Clause of the Constitution of the United States of America establishes it as the supreme law of the land; all lower laws must be in agreement with constitutional law, including that of the states. For example: the Constitution promises the states in Article 4, Section 4 that the states are promised a Republican form of government, so you cannot have a dictatorship state.how is it unconstitutional if it says it isn't unconstitutional? i don't get your reasoning?
jlh47
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment