Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional?

Do you feel that the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance violates the First Amendment? How or why do you feel this way? The First Amendment does not say that religious terminology cannot exist in the Pledge of Allegiance it simply states that Congress shall not make any law "respecting" an establishment of religion. So, based on that criterion how does the Pledge of Allegiance violate the First Amendment clause, and thus the Constitution?

The Pledge of Allegiance is not a law that has been made by Congress or is it?

Anyone concerned with this phrase (and other's like it) is on one extreme or the other when it comes to the religious spectrum. For the vast majority of us, the sane ones, it doesn't matter at all. The phrase isn't threatening, offensive, etc. unless we allow it to be.

I suppose JIA's all for it, but I'm not going to be the idiot who tries to argue otherwise, because it's really a non-issue.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
[B]Congress shall not make any law "respecting" an establishment of religion. [/B]

Why is the word respecting in quotes?

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Anyone concerned with this phrase (and other's like it) is on one extreme or the other when it comes to the religious spectrum. For the vast majority of us, the sane ones, it doesn't matter at all. The phrase isn't threatening, offensive, etc. unless we allow it to be.

I suppose JIA's all for it, but I'm not going to be the idiot who tries to argue otherwise, because it's really a non-issue.

Congress and Michael Newdow have a problem with the phrase "under God" because they feel that it violates the "establishment of religion" clause in the Constitution. But there is no such animal. The phrase "establishment of religion" is not a stand alone phrase that can be used to decide whether something is unconstitutional or not because it is a dependent phrase. It is dependent on the phrase that precedes it for proper contextual interpretation and understanding.

why the blue text? its annoying

Reading this thread reminded me of a time while I was a Girl Scout leader. One of our sister troops had a little girl who's father didnt want her participating in the Girl Scout Law because it says..

On my honor
I will try to
serve God,
and my country,
to help people
at all times,
and to live
by the Girl Scout Law.

He felt this was 'unconstitutional'.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Why is the word respecting in quotes?

For emphasis. But actually the quotes should be on the phrase "make no law."

Originally posted by Shelbert Lemon
Reading this thread reminded me of a time while I was a Girl Scout leader. One of our sister troops had a little girl who's father didnt want her participating in the Girl Scout Law because it says..

On my honor
I will try to
[b]serve God,
and my country,
to help people
at all times,
and to live
by the Girl Scout Law.

He felt this was 'unconstitutional'. [/B]

Why? How?

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Congress and Michael Newdow have a problem with the phrase "under God" because they feel that it violates the "establishment of religion" clause in the Constitution. But there is no such animal. The phrase "establishment of religion" is not a stand alone phrase that can be used to decide whether something is unconstitutional or not because it is a dependent phrase. It is dependent on the phrase that precedes it for proper contextual interpretation and understanding.

Right. Like I said, I'm pretty apathetic about it, though I'm not surprised you "countered" with your opinion anyway.

Well, yeah, it's probably unconstitutional. But even worse the idea of it is extreme bullshit.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, yeah, it's probably unconstitutional. But even worse the idea of it is extreme bullshit.

How? Why? Can you explain why you feel this way?

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
How? Why? Can you explain why you feel this way?

Yeah. You make little children repeat a pledge to your country every day...a pledge they probably don't understand at all. You hammer that believe in their head from an early age, it's just idiotic. A free country that thinks it is the greatest in the world doesn't need to do it. If it is actually the greatest you will realize without being indoctrinated and brought (forced) to pledge allegiance before you even know what allegiance is.

Free, my ass.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Congress and Michael Newdow have a problem with the phrase "under God" because they feel that it violates the "establishment of religion" clause in the Constitution. But there is no such animal. The phrase "establishment of religion" is not a stand alone phrase that can be used to decide whether something is unconstitutional or not because it is a dependent phrase. It is dependent on the phrase that precedes it for proper contextual interpretation and understanding.

Precidence is used in order to interpret the constitution. While the strict seperation of church and state is not explicitly written out in the letter of the constitution, it has been adopted by the supreme court as being the way that the ammendment is interpreted. This is how the judical system works as a check and balance on the other systems of government in a democracy.

I feel the way Digi does about the issue as well, but that is the plain and simple answer to why "seperation of church and state" is upheld by your constitution

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Do you feel that the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance violates the First Amendment? How or why do you feel this way? The First Amendment does not say that religious terminology cannot exist in the Pledge of Allegiance it simply states that [B]Congress shall not make any law "respecting" an establishment of religion. So, based on that criterion how does the Pledge of Allegiance violate the First Amendment clause, and thus the Constitution?

The Pledge of Allegiance is not a law that has been made by Congress or is it? [/B]

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Why? How?

That is certainly his constitutional right... though the 'God' part of that Law... is whatever 'God' you believe in...

His case, he didnt believe there is a God and didnt want his daughter saying she would serve something that didnt exist.

As far as the Pledge goes...

Originally posted by Bardock42
A free country that thinks it is the greatest in the world doesn't need to do it. If it is actually the greatest you will realize without being indoctrinated and brought (forced) to pledge allegiance before you even know what allegiance is.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Do you feel that the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance violates the First Amendment? How or why do you feel this way? The First Amendment does not say that religious terminology cannot exist in the Pledge of Allegiance it simply states that [B]Congress shall not make any law "respecting" an establishment of religion. So, based on that criterion how does the Pledge of Allegiance violate the First Amendment clause, and thus the Constitution?

The Pledge of Allegiance is not a law that has been made by Congress or is it? [/B]

Because you're mixing religion directly in with Government.

Would you not get your panties in a bunch if the Pledge was suddenly changed to "One Nation under Allah, who's one true prophet is Mohammad"? Yeah, I think you would; you'd also be crying about "Freedom of Religion".

"~Save Earth.. Its the only planet with chocolate!~" 😆

The phrase doesn't bother me

Originally posted by Da Pittman
For one you can omit this in the pledge if you choose so and it is not required, as it doesn’t specify any religion and the term god is all encompassing and is not referring to the Christian god as you would like it to be.

I am not in favor of the Pledge of Allegiance mentioning God or not I am simply asking what you feel about this controversial subject. I am indifferent on the issue.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Do you feel that the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance violates the First Amendment? How or why do you feel this way? The First Amendment does not say that religious terminology cannot exist in the Pledge of Allegiance it simply states that [B]Congress shall not make any law "respecting" an establishment of religion. So, based on that criterion how does the Pledge of Allegiance violate the First Amendment clause, and thus the Constitution?

The Pledge of Allegiance is not a law that has been made by Congress or is it? [/B]

It all depends on what is meant by the word God. If I say the Pledge of Allegiance, I am not talking about the bible god. Therefore, it doesn't matter to me. In America we have the right to view the word God in any way we wish too. The word God can even be viewed from an Atheistic point of view as meaning the laws of nature or science.