Quote:
|
in this argument, "Under God" IMHO expresses a specific religion, but in the cases of the boy bowing his head before eating his lunch at the cafeteria, it does not apply.
|
Agreed. And I hope as hell somebody takes the 'you can't bow your head' case to the supreme court, and it gets thrown out.
One might think that "under God" doesn't say what religion: but it is a statement that assumes the existance of God. To some, that is one big religion with lots of unimportant differences.
Quote:
|
If you are an atheist and (as far i i understand) dont believe in god, why are you offended by the name being mentioned?
|
"The United States of America is guarded and protected by Kali. All those who oppose the USA also oppose Kali."
Now, many christians consider Kali to be something that doesn't exist. Do you think any of them would be offended by that being the pledge of allegance?
Quote:
|
No longer does it say we are a christian country, but that we are a religious country.
|
There exist religions that do not believe in some higher personifiable power.
Some do not believe in a single god. Some believe in a godess, and referring to her as a god is as bad as having 'satan' in the pledge of allegance. Some believe in the universe as one, with no personification. Some believe that all is illusion, and there is nothing besides you. Some are satanists, who believe that the rebellion of JHVH against Lucifer was partially successful.
But, they live in a Nation, under God.
The "under god" portion of the pledge was inserted into the pledge of allegance in order to attack godless communism. It was meant to exclude those who do not believe in god.
The pledge isn't unconstitutional.
The change made post WWII is.