Click here to Find a Contractor in your area.
Welcome! Here are the website rules, as well as some tips for using this forum.
Need to contact us? Visit https://heatinghelp.com/contact-us/.

L.A. fed. judges say.. pledge unconstitutional - David Sutton

DanHolohan
DanHolohan Member, Moderator, Administrator Posts: 15,368
we're getting off the topic here.
Retired and loving it.

Comments

  • David Sutton
    David Sutton Member Posts: 82
    america under attack again

    la fed judges stated today that the pledge of to the flag is unconstitutional and that if thay get there way there will not be allowed in any school, bet cause it says under god, Whats next new money it say in god we trust wow thank GOD my kids home school . we need to take back our contry before its all gone,
  • Earthfire
    Earthfire Member Posts: 543


    PC correctness running amuck. Time to declare minority rule unconstitutional. No Praying No smoking No drinking No guns NO breathing And coming soon to a courtroom near you NO THINKING
  • Mark Hunt
    Mark Hunt Member Posts: 4,909
    Sounds like....

    the taliban.

    I guess the only time it is OK to pray in school is AFTER some of these "enlightened" products of our public school system gun down or stab some of their clasmates and teachers.

    "We battle not against flesh and blood, but against powers and principalities".

    There are two fronts to the war for America, and one of them is right here.

    This is another example of the Anti-religion, left wing extremists. And when you look closely, there isn't much difference between them and the taliban.

    Of course the taliban would skin each and every one of them alive, where as here in the USA they can spew their atheistic nonsense with impunity.

    The communists removed God from the nations they ruled, and where are they now?

    Imagine, the pledge of alegiance unconstituional because GOD is mentioned....

    One step closer folks, one step closer.

    Mark Hunt
  • Larry_7
    Larry_7 Member Posts: 86
    I'm out of order?

    You're out of order! THIS COURT'S OUT OF ORDER!

    Pacino, as I recall.

    I'm no lawyer but do we actually have to recognize these buffoons?

    Larry
  • David Sutton
    David Sutton Member Posts: 82
    Very well put Mark !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    .
  • Sal Santamaura1
    Sal Santamaura1 Member Posts: 31
    A few points.

    First, it was the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco that issued this ruling. I'm absolutely certain that Scalia, Thomas and Rehnquist can find two more votes to reverse it when this case reaches the U.S. Supreme Court, which it most certainly will.

    Second, the phrase "In God We Trust" was added to the Pledge and our paper money during McCarthy-era communist hysteria, 1954 and 1956 respectively. It's equally unconstitutional in both places.

    Third, we don't have minority rule, and we've never had a democracy. Since its founding our country has been a
    republic. Republics are designed to prevent tyranny of the majority over minorities. The minorities in question here are people who believe in religions other than Judaism or Christianity, as well as those who consider themselves to be "freethinkers." Freethought simply indicates a preference for basing conclusions on evidence rather than blind faith. That's the essence of atheism. Kind of like the way most folks approach other areas of their lives. Central to this government are three branches that check and balance each other. The judicial branch today corrected an error made by the legislature. It was rather late, nearly a half century so, but better late than never.

    Finally, please consider the innuendo that irreligious atheists will gun down classmates and teachers. This is a complete inversion of reality. Time after time such incidents are connected with religious circumstances and indoctrination. There has never, to my knowledge, been a school violence episode associated with students who don't believe in religion. Nor a war, nor any other kind of violent outburst. Wars with religious foundations account for more death than any other cause in history. I can't identify a single atheist who has so transgressed against others. The Taliban would very much oppose today's ruling. The Taliban favors theocracy as do those who would perpetuate violation of the U.S. Constitution's establishment clause. Only the selected religion is different.

    I considered for quite some time whether or not to post this. Many -- no, almost all -- Wallies seem to be very religious. Hopefully none of you are offended, since no offense is intended. I visit here often, learn much about your trade, and respect the work that you do. I also deeply respect your right to believe in any religion you like. The case discussed in this thread was also about respect. Respecting the opinion, beliefs or lack of beliefs of all people, not just those in the majority. Unlike the Taliban, which, while using force of an entirely different kind, stives to inflict its religion on everyone.
  • David Sutton
    David Sutton Member Posts: 82
    Thank you Sal, you right and....

    all opinions do count thats what we were set up y the founding fathers ( dan for the wall ) in the first place, i like your words you choose them wisly thanks again for your imput they all countweather we like them or not .. David
  • Sal Santamaura1
    Sal Santamaura1 Member Posts: 31
    You're welcome David

    Thanks for reading it and not getting angry. I was really concerned about climbing on the The Wall with an unpopular opinion and getting beat up. You've made it a positive experience. I hope everyone will react as thoughtfully as you did.
  • jfox
    jfox Member Posts: 44


    Well said, Sal. Damn well said. I applaud your reasoning and your courage.

    This judgement does not diminish a patriot's allegiance to the USA, nor does it diminish any religious persons' belief in God. Rather, it (correctly) leaves us free to advance our values without being like the Taliban. The Taliban is politcal correctness taken to extremes. Freedom is freedom. Let us stay free.
  • Floyd
    Floyd Member Posts: 429


    What's good for the goose is good for the gander!!!!!


    I guess I'm a bit confused here, if those of us that appreiciate our religious belief's can no longer be free to do so then how can we say that we are progressing with respect to religous freedom???? We are to take God completely out of the schools, take the ten commandments down from the courthouse walls, and take God out of the pledge of alligiance, etc... but yet the athiest, gay, or just plain angry at the establishment young person can do whatever they want in the name of religious freedom?????
    No one has ever forced a person to say the pledge, or pray in school or read the ten commandments!!!! Let's not get so reactive to these things that we restrict the freedoms of those that have been practicing these things for many years!!!! How mant times has affrimative action restricted the rights of white male, who has gotten passed over for a promotion or a job in favor of the minority that was less qualified!!!!!
    The problems we are facing are not nessecarily a religious one, but a selfish one, to many people are just out for themselves and have no longer any feelings or caring for the human being next to them!!!!
    We all have to realize that whether or not we want to endorse organized religion or recognize that there is a God, we still need the structure, morality, and caring that comes out of these things!!! Whether we like it or not this nation was built on basic, solid moral and religious principles!!! They have been and always should be the basic fabric or our society!!! If we chose to tear these things down our society will degenerate into chaos!!!!
    I hope that I am not misunderstood here, but I really feel that I have to stand up for what I believe here and that we as a nation are going to pay a heavy price for the lack of valves that we have failed to instill in the hearts and minds of our young people!!!!
    Hope that I am understood here, I'll get down off of my soap box now, had to get this off of my chest!!!!

    Floyd
  • John (jcg)
    John (jcg) Member Posts: 43
    If memory serves me

    No where in the constitution are we guaranteed freedom from religion (its freedom of religion).

    jcg

    To Learn More About This Contractor, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Contractor"
  • hr
    hr Member Posts: 6,106
    Well thought out post Sal

    The current events in the world, particularly the mid east, substantiate what you observe. Reminds me of the American student turned Taliban, then quickly cleaned up and became a concerned American again when caught practicing radical Taliban ways. Or the terrorists in our own country that gun down, or blow up doctors offices because of their unwillingness to accept others freedom of choice. Thanks for you views. We need to hear all sides in these controversial times.

    hr

    To Learn More About This Contractor, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Contractor"
  • Earthfire
    Earthfire Member Posts: 543
    freedom

    very pertinant statement by John and Floyd. Sal also is eloquent. The problem of this case is that a if I read the article correctly a doctor from florida moved to calif. (Judge shopping) in order to impose his non belief on his daughter and others. I feel for this man . In his profession, it must be a heavy burden to carry the fate of his patients on his shoulders . If there is no God then the doctor must be a failure because some of his patients die and he didn't prevent it. I was born in AMERICA because my parents fled state imposed godlessnes and persecution by the communists. They came here to be Free to BELIEVE and ACHIEVE. When the STATE denies and denounses God and the existance of God the value of every person in that society has no meaning. This country should stand for freedom of belief or none belief not the imposition of ones beliefs on society. You want me to respect you ? Respect Me. an eye for an eye, Tit for Tat. Etc.
  • Sal Santamaura1
    Sal Santamaura1 Member Posts: 31
    To all those who responded...

    Thank you very much for taking differing opinions seriously. Rather than place replies all over this thread, I've decided to address everyone here.

    As for my post being well thought out and said, as a result of it being put together in haste there is at least one error. Obviously "In God We Trust" was not added to the Pledge in 1954. The unconstitutionally inserted words were "under God."

    Floyd, I guess I'm a bit confused here too. What aspect of yesterday's ruling prevents you from appreciating your religious beliefs? What do you mean "...the atheist, gay, or just plain angry at the establishment person can do whatever they want in the name of religious freedom?" Exactly what are those groups "doing" to others? I'm a straight (married 27 years, to a religious woman, I might add) man, and can't ever recall a gang of gays attacking/killing me or other straight people in the name of religion. I've never had an atheist bother me by ringing my doorbell attempting to convert me. Teachers and administrators in some parts of the country regularly either coerce by shaming or outright force students to say the pledge, pray in school and read the (hung up on the wall) ten commandments, regardless of the unconstitutionality of doing those things. Affirmative action is a remedy for constitutional transgressions other than state imposition of religion, and therefore not relevant to this thread. Concerning selfishness, doesn't it seem selfish to you for Jews and Christians to require that a pledge of fidelity to our nation include reference to their God rather than the gods of others? I take issue with your contention that religion is necessary for morality and caring; such characteristics are born of simple respect for others and their right to conduct their lives however they see fit, as long as they don't prevent you from doing the same. Finally, this country was not built on religion. As early as 1797 we included treaty language saying that "...the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."

    John (jcg), the exact First Amendment language concerning religion is: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." Common sense and many, many court decisions lead to a conclusion that the only way to prevent establishment is to keep religion out of government. Would you like the Pledge to say: "...one nation, under Vishnu, indivisible..."?

    EARTHFIRE, I don't think Dr. Newdow (who, by the way, has courage thousands of times greater than mine) is trying to impose his non-belief on his daughter or others. Without exception the atheist parents I know present a balanced picture of arguments for and against religion, then encourage their children to decide for themselves. The point of his challenge is to not have any religion imposed on anyone. That some of the doctor's patients die despite his efforts to prevent it doesn't make him any more of a failure than religious doctors whose patients die. Death is a natural end of life, and medical science has not found a way to avoid it. The court's decision neither denies nor denounces religion, belief in a god or gods or the value of every person. Rather, it affirms the value of *every* person by protecting those with minority views from having the majority opinion imposed by government. There can be no freedom without the freedom to dissent.
  • Bill Clinton
    Bill Clinton Member Posts: 75
    My applause, Sal nm

  • John Felciano
    John Felciano Member Posts: 411
    Did you

    read your own post?In one sentence you said "I was born in AMERICA because my parents fled state imposed godlessnes and persecution by the communists. They came here to be Free to BELIEVE and ACHIEVE." Than in the next sentence you persecut the doctor for what HE choses to believe or not to believe. You even go on to call him a failure when you don't even know him.Is this freedom from persecution?

    I was hoping this thread wouldn't turn into a religion debate. There are three things that shouldn't be debated here.Politics,religion and child rearing.



    To Learn More About This Contractor, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Contractor"
  • Paul Pollets_2
    Paul Pollets_2 Member Posts: 63
    Good post, Sal

    Well said. I prefer facts rather than fiction. It seems tolerance has it's boundaries.
    I think the Wall is best served sticking to things hydronic or the biz of hydronics. Yes, there's human interest stuff that posts. It makes it all interesting. Religion and political discussion are best left to personal encounters because they can be so easily misinterprested in print. JMHO

    To Learn More About This Contractor, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Contractor"
  • Earthfire
    Earthfire Member Posts: 543
    Atheists

    Sal maybe you should read up on the history of the recently departed century and look up some "obscure names like LENIN, TROTSKY, MOLOTOV, and of course JOE STALIN and several thousand of their comrad commissars, who executed hundrdeds of thousands of people for no other crime then believing in God whether He be orthdox, catholic ,protestant, jewish,buddist ,moslem, or what ever there beliefs were.Godlessness at its best?
  • David Van Wickler_3
    David Van Wickler_3 Member Posts: 63
    The belief that

    All men are created equal - well who decided this - God? So chritians say, but it was the hand of man that wrote the bible and the inflection of opinion or influence of life or the interpretation of the word of God that created the bible. So, you see, opinion is all we have and there never really is truth, nor is there a right/wrong, more right/ more wrong answer.

    The righter answer/decision is one that accounts for all the virtues we are ALL entitled to.

    I was baptized presbyterian, confirmed in a congregational, and now attend catholic mass. Who am I?

    I'm not sure and it doesn't really matter, as long as I am treated the way I treat others. Sometimes good and poorly.

    Babble?

    No, because all religious comment should not be entwined in the fabric that binds us as americans and should be kept seperate at all cost.

    We have come to accept that recognition of God is for all when it is not. Who's going to hell? What happens to those who ave never heard of God as described by christians? Are they saved? Do the know "thou shall not kill"?

    Very intersting.

    DVW
  • David Van Wickler_3
    David Van Wickler_3 Member Posts: 63
    The belief that

    All men are created equal - well who decided this - God? So chritians say, but it was the hand of man that wrote the bible and the inflection of opinion or influence of life or the interpretation of the word of God that created the bible. So, you see, opinion is all we have and there never really is truth, nor is there a right/wrong, more right/ more wrong answer.

    The righter answer/decision is one that accounts for all the virtues we are ALL entitled to.

    I was baptized presbyterian, confirmed in a congregational, and now attend catholic mass. Who am I?

    I'm not sure and it doesn't really matter, as long as I am treated the way I treat others. Sometimes good and sometimes poorly.

    Babble?

    No, because all religious comment should not be entwined in the fabric that affects us all us and should be kept seperate at all cost.

    I agree that religous phrases should be omitted.

    But I may be wrong with my reasons.......

    I am fiercely American PRO USA, but don't press upon me your religious beliefs, unless I ask for your religious beliefs or your willing to hear mine openly too.

    We have come to accept that recognition of God is for all when it is not.

    Who's going to hell? What happens to those who ave never heard of God as described by christians? Are they saved? Do the know "thou shall not kill"?

    Very intersting.

    DVW
  • Mark Hunt
    Mark Hunt Member Posts: 4,909
    \" We hold these truths

    to be self evident. That all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights......."

    Is this unconstitutional?

    Mark H
  • Sal Santamaura1
    Sal Santamaura1 Member Posts: 31
    We are not governed by the Declaration.

    The Declaration's purpose was to "dissolve the political bonds," not set up a religious nation. Its authority was based on the idea that "governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed," which is opposite to the biblical concept of divine rule. It deals with laws, taxation, representation, war, immigration, etc., never mentioning religion. Thomas Jefferson, its author, was a Deist, opposed to orthodox Christianity.
  • kevin_5
    kevin_5 Member Posts: 308
    God doesn't believe in atheists

    The Bible says that, "the fool has said in his heart there is no God." Every painting had a painter. Every building had a builder. Every creature had a creator. Eyeglasses show intelligent design... how much more the human eyeball.

    For someone to say with authority that there is no God they would need to have absolute knowledge of everything in the entire cosmos. Let's say someone knows an incredible one percent of that. Wouldn't it be fair to say that in the ninety nine percent of knowledge they don't yet posess, that there is sufficient evidence of God's existence? So called atheists would be more intellectually honest if they referred to themselves as agnostic; meaning they simply don't know if there is a God.

    Many people don't find God for the same reason a thief doesn't find a policeman.
    If you are interested in seeing a very enlightening and friendly debate between the spokesman at the National Atheists Convention and a knowledgable Christian, look for the video at www.raycomfort.com
  • DanHolohan
    DanHolohan Member, Moderator, Administrator Posts: 15,368
    That would be a great place to go for that

    And as for this site, how about those heating systems?
    Retired and loving it.
  • greg_7
    greg_7 Member Posts: 71
    Constitution

    The "pledge" says, "I pledge allegiance to the flag...and the Republic for which it stands..." There is no republic without a constitution. Remember the First Amendment. That's what makes us unique.
  • Ex Maine Doug
    Ex Maine Doug Member Posts: 162
    The best thing that could

    happen would be for all organized religions with political agendas to lose their tax exempt status. This would quiet down the moralists and extremists that want laws to govern thinking. It would also help towns and cities that provide services to get paid for those services. Taking all the various gods out of government language in whatever country you live in does not prevent one from practicing kind and decent human behavior.
  • Duncan_2
    Duncan_2 Member Posts: 174
    Random thoughts.

    Enjoyed this one very much, Sal, good job! While I don't necessarily agree with the court's decision, or exactly what it entails, I certainly can verify and admire, and agree with your arguments on the Constitution and Declaration.

    Many of our founding fathers were deists. While they questioned things like organized religion and what was written by man in the Bible, they believed in a Creator. Tom Paine and Jefferson come to mind. After all, they lived in The Age of Reason, where almost everything was examined. Most of them certainly believed in God, they simply didn't want a state religion and its associated required taxes.

    There were plenty of different religions in the states then: Quakers, various Protestants, Jews. Oddly, in order to stir up support for an invasion of Canada to get at the English, Catholics were painted as bead-fingering, statue-worshipping Papist idolatrists.

    In other words, even though our founding fathers realized the need for freedom of religion, the people were often intolerant (the distinction between society and government). There was a great gap between the educated and uneducated in many ways. Tom Paine, who had more to do with starting the American Revolution than many more powerful men, was taunted in the streets by children, and died in shame because of an essay he wrote questioning The Bible and organized religion. Meanwhile, Salman Rushdie is in hiding.

    Seems to me, though, you don't expect to get pulled over by a traffic cop for doing 31mph in a 30mph zone.

    That's what this whole thing looks like to me... a case of nitpicking a minor issue: enforcing the letter of the law rather than the spirit of the law. Things were fine the way they were, but this creates sharp lines of distinction, leading to hard feelings. It's the same thing that has picked apart the rest of the Constitution: forgetting the Spirit of the founders of the Constutution, and focusing on making it fit to popular beliefs of the times.

    Like others have said, it seems the key to this whole thing is tolerance, by all parties involved. I am no more offended by a man's beliefs leading him to be an atheist than I am by a Christian who wants to convert me, as long as they both stay out of my face with their beliefs when I ask them to.

    Maybe that little girl felt like the pledge was in her face, but I really have trouble imagining that with something as basic as the pledge of allegiance, or imagining that she couldn't cut her classmates some slack. Did she really come home traumatized from that? I can picture a class full of thirty kids, all saying a different pledge... NOT! But if some kids want to say "...under God", they should go ahead and say it. Why not, if no-one is forcing the atheist girl to say it, and it's not made compulsory by the state?

    So is that the bottom line of the ruling? The state can't REQUIRE you to say "...under God.", but you can if you want to?

    Everyone has their own beliefs. The sooner kids learn to get along together the better. In many ways, they seem to be doing a pretty good job of it, from what I've observed.

    Sorry if I ramble too much, and thanks for playing the devil's advocate (DOH! I mean presenting the other side), it makes for interesting discussion. Well done!
  • DanHolohan
    DanHolohan Member, Moderator, Administrator Posts: 15,368
    I read in yesterday's paper

    that Robin Williams has come up with a solution to the whole thing. He thinks we should pledge, "One nation, under Canada . . ."

    Or "One nation, over Mexico . . ."

    Robin for President!
    Retired and loving it.
  • Patrick
    Patrick Member Posts: 17
    Random thoughts - Duncan

    Had to pull out the dictionary a couple of times on this post :) Do you know if that essay by Tom Paine is anywhere to be found?? Kind of interested in what he said, never knew that had happened.
This discussion has been closed.