Quote:
Originally posted by Zeld2.0
Eh I'd like to believe thats true Mojo but as pointed out by nanofever, its original intent was pretty clear...
As to the actual ruling, I don't really care either way, it seems too trivial to matterbut I'm dissapointed it was waffled in the Supreme Court... seems like on one hand they didn't like it and on the other weren't sure if they should remove or keep it
|
Original intent though again only holds value if that intent is still there. If one believes in a polytheistic religion then they can say "GODS".
Again, by taking the word "GOD" out is prohibitting free speech and as Dwayne pointed out inhibitting religion. You are not forced to say "GOD" or to have any value behind the word if you do say it.
I see the argument on both sides and to be quite honest , I truly don't see the issue.
Those who fight against saying the word have put a self imposed value on the word themselves. The fact that the government does not force one to even say the word is another point in which one has to scratch their head and ask what the issue is over then?
Just as I can see how the question why is it important to be in the pledge to begin with? One surely does not need to say GOD in the pledge to a country to affirm their belief in GOD.
A true atheist would not have any value on the word and therefore it would mean nothing to them and hold the same value as QWRAHGVKHFD to anyone else.