NY Times article links to the Boneyard

[meyers7]

Tradition!

Ah yes, Tradition!

 

[Icebear]

Ok and again, where does it say we pledge allegiance to any god or religion? Somebody please just show me.

It is not a pledge to a God but is containing confessional content about a God authority over the nation. "One Nation under God" that is a statement of confession.

 

[spoop]

Ok and again, where does it say we pledge allegiance to any god or religion? Somebody please just show me.

You quote this statement, "It is a pledge that states specifically that this nation is under God", as if it is wrong, but the pledge specifically states "one nation, under God". I cannot see how in the world you could possibly have a problem with that line that IceBear wrote.

As far as I can tell, while you are correct that the pledge isn't "I pledge allegiance to God", it still seems to be an affirmation of religion. You are pledging to a nation, which is under God. If you are not religious or a not religious in a way that believes in a single God, i.e. not Christian, Jewish, Muslim, etc. this makes no sense for you. It only makes sense for those who believe in "God" to say and is hence an affirmation of your religion, which has no place in the pledge.

Pledging to a nation that is under God seems obviously transitive. One's recital of the pledge, in order to make sense, requires belief in "God", so recital of the pledge affirms your belief in God.

 

[meyers7]

You quote this statement, "It is a pledge that states specifically that this nation is under God", as if it is wrong, but the pledge specifically states "one nation, under God". I cannot see how in the world you could possibly have a problem with that line that IceBear wrote.

As far as I can tell, while you are correct that the pledge isn't "I pledge allegiance to God", it still seems to be an affirmation of religion. You are pledging to a nation, which is under God. If you are not religious or a not religious in a way that believes in a single God, i.e. not Christian, Jewish, Muslim, etc. this makes no sense for you. It only makes sense for those who believe in "God" to say and is hence an affirmation of your religion, which has no place in the pledge.

Pledging to a nation that is under God seems obviously transitive. One's recital of the pledge, in order to make sense, requires belief in "God", so recital of the pledge affirms your belief in God.

You're a little late to the party. They have been saying that we shouldn't force people to pledge allegiance to God or religion. I've been trying to get them to show me where the pledge does that (besides the obvious incorrect assumption that anyone is being forced). As yet they have not.

Here's another look at it. If someone says "Oh My God" (OMG), is that considered a religious statement? Does that mean one believes in God? Cause I hear people say that who are not religious nor believe in any god.

Do people believe we have justice and liberty for all? Then why don't people have a problem with saying that?

 

[spoop]

You're a little late to the party. They have been saying that we shouldn't force people to pledge allegiance to God or religion. I've been trying to get them to show me where the pledge does that (besides the obvious incorrect assumption that anyone is being forced). As yet they have not.

I've been reading this whole thread. This is precisely what I'm trying to show you.

Here's another look at it. If someone says "Oh My God" (OMG), is that considered a religious statement? Does that mean one believes in God? Cause I hear people say that who are not religious nor believe in any god.

Of course not, it's just a saying, it hardly has any meaning. Pledge allegiance to a country which is under God is far more of a serious statement. Like I said, pledging allegiance to a nation under God is definitely religious.

Do people believe we have justice and liberty for all? Then why don't people have a problem with saying that?

We don't, but it's a goal to work toward. Everyone understands that literally having 100% justice and liberty for all is not something that can be attained. No one has a problem with it because it's something that is worth getting 99% right even if we can't get to 100%. It's a giant grey area, not black and white at all. Under God is pretty black and white, it's religious. Whether or not you ignore the intended meaning and decide that it isn't endorsing the Christian God specifically, it's still religious. And IMO dangerously theocratic.

 

[Bestiarius]

The thought occurred to me that God should be permitted the luxury of enjoying the game(s) without being interrupted by customer service calls.

Seems to me that we need another revision of the Pledge wording: ..Under God, or not (your choice) with liberty....

 

[meyers7]

I've been reading this whole thread. This is precisely what I'm trying to show you.

That the pledge somehow forcing people to pledge allegiance to a god or a religion?

Sorry, it just doesn't. Still waiting for someone to show me where it pledges allegiance to a god or religion.

Of course not, it's just a saying, it hardly has any meaning. Pledge allegiance to a country which is under God is far more of a serious statement. Like I said, pledging allegiance to a nation under God is definitely religious.

Ohhh, soooo basically using the word God doesn't make something religious? But wait, you guys said it does. I guess only if certain people say it does. (and I guess you get to be one of the people who decides......pretty convenient.)

We don't, but it's a goal to work toward. Everyone understands that literally having 100% justice and liberty for all is not something that can be attained. No one has a problem with it because it's something that is worth getting 99% right even if we can't get to 100%. It's a giant grey area, not black and white at all. Under God is pretty black and white, it's religious. Whether or not you ignore the intended meaning and decide that it isn't endorsing the Christian God specifically, it's still religious. And IMO dangerously theocratic.

Keep on dancin'.

 

[spoop]

Is one really reciting the pledge if "under god" is left out? Is the constitution minus the bill of rights the constitution still? Is Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban the same book with ever other chapter removed? I don't think so. To recite the pledge is to say "one nation, under god", which is to affirm religion. Hence reciting the pledge by definition is to affirm your religion. If you can pull "under god" out of the pledge and still have it be the pledge, why stop there? Why not just say "I pledge allegiance to the United States of America". If the pledge minus under god is still the pledge, so is "I pledge flag America", so is "indivisible stands", so is "allegiance to god", so is "I pledge to the and to the one under and for all".

 

[spoop]

Sorry, it just doesn't.

Great argument.

Ohhh, soooo basically using the word God doesn't make something religious? But wait, you guys said it does. I guess only if certain people say it does. (and I guess you get to be one of the people who decides......pretty convenient.)

"Oh my god" is something you say without thinking. It's in the same league as "break a leg". What the hell does that mean? I don't know, but people say it all the time and 99% of them don't think about what it means either. Nobody is saying that the word god by itself makes something religious. "I just pooped my pants, also GOD" and "Wamma damma ding dong god" aren't religious. Judging by your posts, you agree. Those lack something that the pledge has, context and actual sentence structure. In the PoA you pledge to one nation, under god. If one is saying their nation is under God, that person has to be religious, they have to believe in God, otherwise they just lied. Can't you see that?

Keep on dancin'.

LOL. I don't even understand what you mean by this. When you said "Do people believe we have justice and liberty for all? Then why don't people have a problem with saying that?" you clearly meant people don't believe we have justice and liberty for all. I explained why people don't have a problem with it. I guess your response makes sense to you. Then this is probably a sensible response:

Do people believe we have justice and liberty for all? Then why don't people have a problem with saying that?

Keep on dancin'.

 

[Icebear]

Oh my God is sacrilegious. It is use of the Lord's name in vain.

 

[RoyDodger]

I posted this in the other thread. It's a quote by then-President Eisenhower on adding the "under God" phrase to the pledge:

Three days later, Senator Homer Ferguson, (R-MI), sponsored a bill to add God to the Pledge. It was approved as a joint resolution 1954-JUN-8. It was signed into law on Flag Day, JUN-14. President Eisenhower said at the time:​

"From this day forward, the millions of our schoolchildren will daily proclaim in every city and town, every village and rural schoolhouse, the dedication of our nation and our people to the Almighty."​

Affirming faith in God was the exact reason the phrase was added.

It's important to remember the context. It was the era of Sen. Joe McCarthy.

 

[ThisJustIn]

Things to add to the pot: Would people's perception change if it said, "One nation, under Allah," or "One nation, under Buddah," or any other religions and non-religious name I could think of?

Consider the CURRENT reactions when any group has the temerity to suggest that "Under God" be removed from the pledge. As I've mentioned, Geno would call those folks wackos. Others identify them as attacking Christianity. Still others forget history and think the pledge was written as such when it originated. Words are subject to interpretation and misinterpretation.

And just because I'm unwilling to re-read both threads on this subject, where does anyone (or perhaps better stated, the "majority" of posters) state that the Pledge is a pledge to God? It seems to me it's pretty obvious that it is not, but it IS a spoke acknowledgment of the existence and believe in of an entity that supervises and what, protects or legitimizes?, this country.

 

[DaddyChoc]

this is exactly why some think it shouldnt be recited at sporting events... the disagreements it bring with it... but today, where is the right place to say it or anything else without someone disagreeing with it!

Play ball...

 

[Icebear]

DC, our Lions and Rotary Clubs use it. Individual churches may or may not choose to use it. It's use was far easier before the government intrusion into altering it.

 

[RoyDodger]

The 7th Inning Stretch was/is a tradition. That Yankee Stadium rite is a contrivance of Yankee management that is a weak impersonation of the National Anthem as dugouts are emptied and the congregants follow the script by removing their hats and placing their hands on their hearts to remind the viewing audience that Yankee fans are the very most patriotic fans in captivity.
The ultimate level of silliness occurred a couple years ago when a cop cited a guy who had the temerity (or necessity) to leave his seat and head for the men's room as this ritual took place.

One of the ironies of the song "God Bless America" is that Irving Berlin, according to his daughter, was an agnostic.

http://ffrf.org/legacy/fttoday/2004/may/?ft=barker

 

[Icebear]

People write spiritual music for contract all the time. Most are, also, religious, but far from all.