Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
acludem said:Inserting "Under God" into a pledge of allegience to the United States doesn't create a theocracy per se, but it certainly creates the appearance thereof. The clear signal is, if you want to be a real American, you have to believe in God.
acludem
The ClayTaurus said:This issue is one big
It was voted on? By the majority? Nahhh..dont think so, we didnt put it in there. President Dwight D. Eisenhower approved adding the words "under God", in 1954.ScreamingEagle said:No, the clear signal is we, the people - the majority - are expressing ourselves as real Americans who believe in God because we have the RIGHT to express that under the first amendment. Also we are expressing that we are against communist/totalitarian rule which was why the "under God" phrase was added in the first place.
The radical left in this country is against "under God" because the left is part and parcel of the communist/totalitarian movement. Of course it is of major importance for them to stamp out God. :dev1:
"In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country's most powerful resource in peace and war."
That One nation under God stuff is too complex, which God?I pledge allegiance to the Flag
of the United States of America,
and to the Republic for which it stands:
one Nation indivisible,
With Liberty and Justice for all.
Mr. P said:It was voted on? By the majority? Nahhh..dont think so, we didnt put it in there. President Dwight D. Eisenhower approved adding the words "under God", in 1954.
And said:
Nothing about communist/totalitarian rule in there.
Lets go back to the 1924 version
That One nation under God stuff is too complex, which God?
Mmmm the extrusion argument. Keep applying pressure.ScreamingEagle said:To continue being an American you may want to concern yourself.
Or do you think 9 people should run America absolutely? Hmm...isn't that basically how a totalitarian/communist state is run?
Under the bed? Hell, sometimes I have the witch IN THE BED right beside me!jillian said:It was added because of the McCarthy Era...you know, the witchhunts for those commies under every bed. :halo:
Mr. P said:Under the bed? Hell, sometimes I have the witch IN THE BED right beside me!
You should have em print, " And an Attorney" on the back!:rotflmao:jillian said:Heh! I hear ya.
I saw a T-shirt the other day that said "My Middle Name is 'Bitch'." I really liked that shirt
Mr. P said:You should have em print, " And an Attorney" on the back!:rotflmao:
jillian said:It was added because of the McCarthy Era...you know, the witchhunts for those commies under every bed. :halo:
The Clay Taurus said:Mmmm the extrusion argument. Keep applying pressure.
acludem said:The 1924 version which was written by a Baptist minister, a man of God, who according to his children would've been infuriated by the insertion of the words "Under God". He wrote it, shouldn't we respect his wishes?
I am a religious person, but my religion does not involve "God" - I'm Buddhist. So why, when I want to pledge allegience to my country, a country I love, should I have to say or even be asked to say "Under God"?
acludem
ScreamingEagle said:You mean those commies that were entrenched smack dab in our State Department?
Americans were smarter back then before the revisionists took over.
Have you read Ann Coulter's book "Treason"? Quite enlightening.
Or maybe you should take a look at the Venona cables...
Problem is no one is asking. It's more of a forcing of. Say it this way or don't say it kinda thing. We (the people) should just vote on it, and that will decide what we want.ScreamingEagle said:What's wrong with someone asking you to say "under God"? Isn't it a free country to ask something?
....
Fixed that for ya.Mr. P said:Problem is no one is asking. It's more of a forcing of. Say it this way or don't say it kinda thing. We (the people) should just vote on it, and that will decide what we want.
Personally I dont care which way it goes and wouldnt make a special trip to the polls to vote on this one issue. I might however, say a prayer and thank GOD we have such a process to remedy such STUPID disagreements.
The ClayTaurus said:Fixed that for ya.
I dunno. It's pretty stupid for them to be so pissy about a word that in all reality should offend Christians as those who don't believe yet say it are patronizing.ScreamingEagle said:In a sense I have to agree with you that this is a "stupid" argument. However, keep in mind that it is the left that brought up the "stupid" argument in the first place. Why is the left so "stupid"?
jillian said:No...like the non-commies who were blacklisted and who couldn't work?
Okie dokie....
If you approve of people spewing hatred of anyone who doesn't agree with their narrow pov...
Personally, I think Annie already has too much of a forum, so there ya go.
And? You're surprised the KGB had tried to develop assets in the U.S. We certainly had plenty there during the cold war.
The Venona Cables are, actually, interesting. But more interesting, at least from my pov, was the transcript of the Rosenberg trial, which I had the opportunity to review and study in it's entirety at the Federal Archives. What was, painfully, apparent, is that the Rosenberg's were probably doing something, but since much of the testimony was unreliable, they probably shouldn't have been put to death. In particular, the Court allowed testimony about a desk with secret compartments, ostensibly found in the Rosenberg's home, but which "disappeared" before trial and was never produced to the jury. Judge Kaufman should have prohibited any testimony on the subject as prejudicial and not probative. Unfortunately, the hysteria of the time didn't make allowances for lack of evidence or for mere innuendo substituting for fact, which probably caused the judge to feel that he would be called a "commie sympathizer" if he made any favorable rulings. See a pattern?
