Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: "Under God" On Trial
America's Debate > Archive > Assorted Issues Archive > [A] Big Trials and Legal Cases
Pages: 1, 2
Google
phaedrus
QUOTE(Sleeper @ Mar 24 2004, 12:42 PM)
QUOTE
With only 8 justices, there is the possibility of a tie? What would happen then?


I would like to see a national vote on this from the entire population of the United States. Let the will of the people decide.

The will of the people has been expressed from the Declaration of Independence to the Congresional reaction to the lower courts ruling.

" Shortly after a federal appeals court ruled the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional, the Senate Wednesday approved a resolution "expressing support for the Pledge of Allegiance" and asking Senate counsel to "seek to intervene in the case."

The resolution passed 99-0. "

Senators call pledge ruling stupid

I am convinced that the Supreme Court would have definatly upheld the ban on the phase 'under God' had they not been confronted by this. This was never about parenting rights, this was pure politics. Let them try to say that the Congress, in an almost unanamous descision, was unconstitutional and then you have a big case.
Google
FargoUT
So it wasn't a parenting issue? Big deal. The issue is not that Michael Newdow's child was forced to recite the Pledge, but that a pledge of allegiance to our country should not contain divisive wording, particularly with reference to religious phrases. The Supreme Court took the cowardly way out by finding a technicality on which to dismiss the case. This means it will only take someone else to sue and it will start all over again.

The issue is not whether the pledge should be recited, but should it be recited with the divisive phrase "under God" (ironically preceding the word indivisible). The correct answer is no. God has no place in government. Our nation was created by those fleeing a country run by the Church of England. Of course, all these reasons have already been addresses, haven't they? smile.gif

I also think this is probably the first time a man is claiming responsibility for his child and being ridiculed for it.
ryansp86
QUOTE(FargoUT @ Jun 17 2004, 07:12 PM)
So it wasn't a parenting issue?  Big deal.  The issue is not that Michael Newdow's child was forced to recite the Pledge, but that a pledge of allegiance to our country should not contain divisive wording, particularly with reference to religious phrases.  The Supreme Court took the cowardly way out by finding a technicality on which to dismiss the case.  This means it will only take someone else to sue and it will start all over again.

The issue is not whether the pledge should be recited, but should it be recited with the divisive phrase "under God" (ironically preceding the word indivisible).  The correct answer is no.  God has no place in government.  Our nation was created by those fleeing a country run by the Church of England.  Of course, all these reasons have already been addresses, haven't they? smile.gif

I also think this is probably the first time a man is claiming responsibility for his child and being ridiculed for it.

The problem is that Newdow approached it wrong. He said the problem was that his daughter (actually she's not) had to recite the pledge. It failed on a damn technicality although, the case is not closed, it is just postponed. The girl's real parents can take the case back up and continue where Newdow left off. Good thing is that he has talked to the parents and they are willing to continue. At least thats as of yesterday, so... let's hope that this stuff gets taken care of.

Oh yeah... I love how people try to portray this as part of our nations culture and all that, but the funny thing is, "under God" was added sometime in the 50s. hmmm.gif
JPFPC
This issue is back, us.gif so I thought I would bring the debate up again to see what everyone thinks will happen with it.

hmmm.gif
Jaime
CLOSED. Welcome, JPFPC. We prefer members start fresh debates instead of reviving 'dead' threads (meaning no responses in the last 3 months or so). You'll have to participate a bit before you may start a new thread. Details here.
Google
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2008 Invision Power Services, Inc.