In Iraq, and other predominantly Muslim countries, they feel as we do, that they WANT God in their government, they WANT the laws to reflect their religeous beliefs, and they WANT those who are opposed to this religeous government to respect the religeous authority of the government to require adherance to the law.

The USA is the same as far as the sentiment goes...its just a question of degree, and the majority feel that the dissenting minorities should just realize that they live in a Christian society, and that Christmas and other public displays of the religeon, etc...are an important part of their lives, and to say that they can't have a Christmas Party is just being spiteful...

...And atheists are in the weird position of being opposed to their children being taught things that the parents do not believe in...

Much like as some religeous people are opposed to their children being taught evolution rather than biblical creation in the same situation.

Same situation, opposite sides of the fence.

I say take the UG out.

That, however, will not end the fight. The extreme left will try to eliminate the pledge completely.

Since the extreme left is for all intent the voice of the democratic party, this will serve to alienate the majority of voters against them even further.

I'm an Athiest, yet I grew up Christian, Married into a Cathloic family and am now studying Judaism at a Jewish temple. Just because you don't believe in God, doesn't mean that you shouldn't learn other peoples beliefs. If your kids go around not learning about religion just because their folks are Athiest, they'll be a real dumbass in real life and not understand others beliefs. A well rounded education simply has to contain some religion.

So religion in education should be required?

It's not the same. Not the same at all.

There are problems in Muslim countries because Islam is not only a religion. It is also a political system.

The guy's name is Michael Newdow. He is a guy with both a Medical and a Law degree (maybe he did that so he could handle his own malpractice suits).

Anyway... He doesn't really practice medicine anymore. He is a professional litigant. For years he has been filing lawsuits about the Pledge and other atheist related things against the government. His wife left him years ago because of his professional full time activism. His daughter whom he uses in these suits is not an atheist. He doesn't even have custody of her.

In this suit he uses two unnamed people because he cannot use his daughter anymore because he doesn't have the right to sue on her behalf.

I wouldn't get too upset about this case. It is doomed. The Jimmy Carter appointed judge based his decision and cited judicial precedent on a 9th Circuit case that was struck down and dismissed by SCOTUS. This automatically gives a higher court a reason to dismiss this case. It will either happen in the appeals court or at the SCOTUS level again. It could however make it past the 9th Circuit again. It's an activist court, but SCOTUS will not ignore the reasons for this federal judge's decision and will use any excuse to throw it out.

That will leave Newdow back to square one again. He will file another lawsuit after he loses this one. You can count on it.

The Supreme Court has already decided in past cases that the pledge passes constitutional muster. Even Justice William Brennan agreed and he was a big liberal.

Because it is San Francisco....I have said it a thousand times, that place is its own country.

With all the political crap kids have to deal with in schools, mixed with the derision and travesties of pedagogy and junk food and violence and peer pressure and sex too soon and assorted other bullshit, I think I'll just home school the little fucker.

"Okay, Jack, here's the part where Daddy's supposed to teach you math, but since Daddy sucks at math.....you'll be reading......what is this.....Bukowski. Mmmm'kay?"

The 9th Circuit is NOT just San Francisco. It barely is, other than the main office being there. Nearly all the judges are from outside of the San Francisco area.

Only 3 active are in San Francisco (21 are outside the area).

Only 3 senior Judges are in San Francisco (20 are outside the area).

No - Not required as in schools 'Must' teach it. But a teacher shouldn't lose their job for telling school kids a Jesus story!

When I was in school, I sat through the Pledge, Not so Much that I was at the time an Atheist, just that I though it stupid to repeat something over and over and over and over..... I do think that "Under God" is totally unnecessary. Though I would not have gone so far as to sue to remove it, I agree with the merit of the case. Religion belongs in your own home, or your own church. God, though Non denominational, is a product of religion, and has not business in schools, in and way. When I played Football we were told to take a knee ( something Jews do not do, ever) and bow our heads when a prayer to Christ was offered up, to keep us safe... I was not offended by it though I did not participate in it, and I got no flak from the team, Probably because I was 6'3" and 178 as a freshman... I must say I am more concerned about the erosion of science classes and the "intelligent design" debate raging in the south now. I look at this case and it think it acts as a check to the Religious right who has gotten very active and bold in the Bush era, to say, the Constitution protects us ALL regardless of faith creed color culture, or Hopefully someday sexual orientation.

That's right...learning about other cultures and beliefs helps every one understand each other, and where each is coming from, etc...and allows tolerance.

Of course, making a catholic get bar mitzfa'd, or baptising a jew might be a bit different, as would making one say they believed in the other's religeon even if the beliefs conflicted their own...is different than learning about them.

Immersion techniques are proven to be effective teaching strategies, but the application in this case might be a problem...getting your nose pierced or a plate in your lip, etc...can be a bit much for a school system to try.



Teaching about each other is good...and should happen, as is teaching tolerence for the beliefs of others...and the fighting is over what that teaching should consist of...as some parents do not want their childen taught beliefs that conflict with their own...easier example...

Many teachers are democrats, many parents are republicans ...(This can be reversed if you wish...it works either way...)...kids come home from a current events discussion at school...with their teachers' political opinion...and the parents explode in a rage...

So some are upset the kid WAS told about the stork or santa claus being frauds, and some are upset that the kids were NOT told they were frauds.

Agreed. Is there any teacher that actually has been fired because of it? (Verifiable, that is).

I <3 you.

I think my POINT was that Islam WAS the political system...because that's the way the populationed there WANTED IT....



So - Its the same as US wanting OUR religeon to be part of our system...we want laws that allow religeon as part of our public lives...and we want those that DON'T want religeon as part of THEIR public lives to just accept that majority rules, and get over it.

Jesus H Fucking Christ people!

With all the shit hitting the fan in the world today, isn't there something better to argue about than whether or not somebody says god in the pledge of allegience. Ask the damn kids,I bet they don't give a crap, hell most of them make up different words anyways, just like we all did when we were kids

Sheesh.....

What exactly is the point of posting this? If you don't want to discuss it move on. Most of us here can handle thinking about more than one thing from day to day.

Fuckin Blow me, OK?

I got an opinion, I'll state it, If you don't like it, don't read it and move on...

Oh noes! He said blow me!

Of course I guess you weren't really asking a question when you said this:

Can some one let me know how to know if I want to read something, before I read it, so I'll know whether I want to read it?

I forget....what's "our" religion again?

I think the thing that people forget, a fundamental part of "our" political philosophy as Americans, is that our constitution is based on a respect and reverence for the rights of the individual, not the majority. Mob rule is not democracy. Although the "Under God" argument is a divisive non-issue to me, I must take exception to the reasoning that, because there are more Christians than non-Christians in this country (if there are), the rest of the nation should "just get over it." There have been lots of instances of injustice, far more disgusting and dishonorable that were widely practiced in this country, and this country would be a terrible place to live had the courts said, "Well, people like slavery, so I guess you have to be slaves. Sorry. Majority rules."
Constitutionality is not based on "hey, there's more of us than you, so shut the fuck up."

If you are really against this, then you are not a true aethiest. Enough said. Move on.

All hail the allmighty DOLLAR

"One nation , under Canada..."