Grrrr, the f---s in CA have made it illegal for me to...

[force95]

FYI: I have coins dating back to 1916 and they all have IN GO WE TRUST.

God was added to the pledge of allegiance in 1954.

Benny

This message has been edited by force95 on 06-30-2002 at 09:51 PM

[Deang]

That's certainly interesting. I wonder how old The Motto is?"f>s>

------------------

Deanf>s>

AE-25 Super Amp DJH * S F Line 1 * S9000ES * HSU x-over * SVS CS+ * Klipsch RF7s f>s>

Metal drivers make metal music shinef>c>s>

[HornEd]

The National Motto was signed into law in 1954 by President Eisenhower after being rammed through a Joint Session of the 84th Congress, deang. The idea was to show the world that the U.S. was a "Godly" nation and Communist countries were not. This was an era when the U.N. was in a "Police Action" in Korea to stop Communist aggression... while the composition of the U.N. was shifting toward more Communist members and third world sympathizers. While the permanent Security Council members had the veto power to conduct what was later labeled as a "War", Ike played the "God card" in the beginning of the "Cold War" like Lincoln did in the end of the "Civil War" to stir up international and home front support when things were not going well.

Thus, as mentioned in an earlier post on this thread, in 1864 as a reaction to religious aspects highlighted by the Civil War, a two-cent coin was minted with "In God We Trust" without Congressional authority. That's the coin that started the phrase, "That's my two-cents worth!" Additional "non-conforming" coins were minted with the phrase... but currency (paper money} was not printed until after the phrase was made into the official National Motto in 1954 when the Pledge was turned into a religious prayer... by Ike's own proud admission.

Ike was another staunch Christian president (with a long time driver/mistress since WWII) who believed that a great Good vs. Evil battle for men's minds was being waged on a global scale... and putting America on "God's Team" was more important than the Constitutional provision for the separation of church and state. As I recall, this shift of American Heritage focus was not at all well received by third world nations who saw it as a ploy at the expense of America's vaunted religious freedom... which it was.

I believe that a return to a Pledge and Motto that conforms legally to the First Amendment would strengthen our country at a time when religious fervor is again dividing the world. No one doubts America's strong Christian Heritage... but, today, the Muslim faith is the world's fastest growing religion... and the official National Motto that does not conform to the Constitution is another "proof" that terrorist/opportunists like Osama, Saddam, et al have used to gain support and blow up Americans... and anyone else who just happens to be nearby.

I hope that makes things a bit more clear... and explains why my concern on this issue is so high. I have lived in other countries were "In God We Trust" is looked upon as an elitist slogan by a country posing as a haven for religious freedom. Not my opinion, but one held by many in the world community on which we now rely for oil and economic stability. Think about it. -HornED

This message has been edited by HornEd on 07-01-2002 at 01:13 PM

[maxg]

Seems I am very late to this discussion and that is probably as it should be.

I am not an American.

I am not Christian.

So I am hardly qualified to express an opinion other than this:

What you are going through is what I would term an ´Only in America´ topic.

Most countries have a ´default religion´ that is used in a variety of government, legal and fiscal declarations.

For those not of the ´default´ set of beliefs it is generally not an issue - just a part of being in that country.

It does not imply a differentiation on the basis of worth with those of other beliefs - it merely reflects the belief structure of the majority of the people in that country at the time the phrase or saying came into being.

As an outsider I see an American obsession with trying to re-invent itself constantly to cope with the breadth and variety of its populace. This may not be a bad thing persay - but I cant help feeling that this way lies madness.

To the outside world it is your actions, rather than your words, that are watched. America is the most powerful nation on Earth, and stands unchallenged.

How about leaving God in your pledge of allegance and cutting down on consumption instead. A little less Gas, a little less water, a little less polution.....

Just a thought.

------------------

My System: http://aca.gr/pop_maxg.htm

[HornEd]

Welcome aboard this thread, maxg... religion and national origin is not a requirement on the Klipsch Forum so far as I know. And since we live in a world community in which few nation's can afford isolationist policies... your opinion is of great potential value here.

Certainly, the massive consumption of goods and services produced outside its borders makes the U.S.A. the principal supplier of funds to countries that, in turn, fund terrorism and human rights exploitation. Where would Bin Laden be without money from Arab oil sold to the U.S.? How could a "godless" Communist China so rapidly fund its massive modernization without favored nation trading status and the "In God We Trust" bucks that go with it?

And since we all ride this planet in our uncertain journey though space... without regard to religion or national origin... massive pollution affects us all... particularly when pollution rates are so high in the countries that manufacture goods consumed by the U.S. but made without EPA regulations.

And you are so correct... as long as American consumers vote with their dollars to satisfy their voracious appetite with goods and services made outside its borders... many of the world's evils from drugs to terrorism will have ample funding. But a large part of who we are and who we are perceived to be as a nation stems from our image. And when that image is not consistent with the Constitution that drives our legitimacy in the family of nations... we should do something about it.

There is something inherently wrong when a nation that prides itself on religious freedom and diversity... that preserves Johnnie-come-lately, two-faced National Motto (Judeo-Christian orientation in word choice/Constitutional Heritage of keeping Religion from Official endorsement), IMHO. -HornED

PS: Yes, buying U.S. made Klipsch products help... and would help more if many ingredients were cost effectively available from U.S. originated sources. Thanks maxg for buying Klipsch and encouraging Klipsch product use in the Athens Audiophile Club. Any help on our "balance of payments" issues is good for American taxpayers.

This message has been edited by HornEd on 07-01-2002 at 07:46 AM

[Deang]

I hate to sound insensitive but the production and utilization of goods and services, the trading of those goods and services with other countries -- is what keeps everyone employed and makes the world go around.

A little less of all these things and most of the civilized world is in serious trouble.

f>s>

------------------

Deanf>s>

AE-25 Super Amp DJH * S F Line 1 * S9000ES * HSU x-over * SVS CS+ * Klipsch RF7s f>s>

Metal drivers make metal music shinef>c>s>

This message has been edited by deang on 07-01-2002 at 10:29 AM

[Eric D]

Good weekend - sorry I wasn't around. Hope in my hurry through catching-up and through memory lapses that I haven't misread or misinterpreted something - feel free to correct. Anyway, here were a couple of my random weekend thoughts:

A point argued originally in this thread and by several letters to the editors over the weekend stated that removing "under God" favors atheism over other religions. I don't consider atheism a religion in the sense of the word, rather an absence therof. But based on our discussions last week it makes sense to me that it should be treated as such legally. I always felt at a gut level that the original/newly-proposed wording was neutral. The continued use of that argument over the weekend got me to thinking, and I would have to believe that it would take words such as "without a God" to *favor* atheism.

I chose to say "original/newly-proposed" because, while I can be conservative in my approach to change (suspect it!), I believe there are definitely changes always to be made. Our constitution was a product of a period in time, and times change.

So just because the two words weren't in the Pledge originally, I don't have a problem with it because they are new, and I won't ever argue that reason. BTW, I don't think the horny-one-with-the-right-initials is arguing to change thm back for that reason either - just rebutting those who state that the court is trying to change the "original" content.

In the spirit of full disclosure, I have to admit to being against putting "In God we trust" on money as well. But as I looked at deang's list of 6/30, I believe keeping the rest of them, as they are either treating with the fact that an individuals are religious; or in the case of the statues in government buildings, paying tribute and recogition to the source of our laws. Now can we get the drapes taken off the greek ladies? (BTW, has MaxG heard about that?)

In particular, I *wish* my public school education had included a comparative religion course. I wish I knew more about Judaism, Islam, and other religions - not because I believe it might convert me, but so I can be respectful, avoid unintentional slights, find common ground, etc.

OK, I have to admit that one point I reflected on over the weekend was the American-historical use of the bible to teach reading. I would have thought it was both because of the religion-of-choice of those teaching and being taught as well as the availability of the document. But on the whole, I was glad to have the readers I was taught with, rather than trying to use "See Matthew pray. Pray, Matthew, pray."

But to go back to one last thing I missed over the weekend - the congrats for participation and entreties for continued critical thinking. FH2, and k-boy - please keep up that thinking and discussion. And remember to vote your Christian-or-whatever-source consciences. On those topics you think important, launch into meaningful debate with your friends in hopes of leveraging your point of view with a few more votes. Or if you're sufficiently passionate about something, work for or against it politically. BTW, I sure hate that word - "politically." I twinge every time I say it. Hmmm, maybe I need to get more active about political reform? Can I suggest that you do work for or against something statesmen-like?

Eric

P.S. to HornED: Thanks for your paragraph last evening: Besides the first amendment and "...with liberty and justice for all" ending to the Pledge, that succinctly put forward the best other argument I've heard for changing/restoring the words. I may have to change your name to the Great-HornED-Owl or just visualize you as "Owl" from Winnie the Pooh hereafter. Anyway, I merrily plagerize ("let no one else's work evade your eyes!" ) it here so people may consider the argument by itself:

"I believe that a return to a Pledge and Motto that conforms legally to the First Amendment would strengthen our country at a time when religious fervor is again dividing the world. No one doubts America's strong Christian Heritage... but, today, the Muslim faith is the world's fastest growing religion... and the official National Motto that does not conform to the Constitution is another "proof" that terrorist/opportunists like Osama, Saddam, et al have used to gain support and blow up Americans.

-HornED

(editied 'gain to correct quoted material)

This message has been edited by Eric D on 07-01-2002 at 02:14 PM

[HornEd]

Agreed deang! And even further, the events following the attack on Pearl Harbor fulfilled Admiral Yamamoto's greatest fear of awakening the sleeping giant. It was then America leaned to produce beyond all expectation and, then, consume more than it could produce.

The economic impact upon a world caught up in essentially interlocked/interdependent national economies is the glue that included the Arab Block on the side of America in the Gulf War and the War in Afghanistan. It seems that the opportunity to have the general population become relatively rich and fat in this life has reached epidemic proportions... and the ranks of the poor and pious more unpopular.

Thus, the trick of getting our National Heritage through the next half century of Klipschorn production will be to trim the "sales" of the various ships of state to provide economic safety, high employment, low unrest... and a reduction of planet pollutants. Hopefully in all that secular activity there can be woven a global moral fabric based on the ethics of faith in a Force beyond our understanding... and beyond a dictator's ability to usurp.

Watching little things like a nonconforming "under God" provides a better marketing tool in the global economy... if nothing else. "Holy Wars" are among the most deadly that can be fought in this or any other time. And surely, a pre-conceived image of the U.S.A. as the "Great Satan" by so many Islamic people harkens back to the "bad taste" of Christian aggression in the Crusades.

Some how, we, the economically interdependent nations of the world, have to pluck World Peace from the vision of nuclear "Whirled Peas" as terrorists redress historical, religious, economic and fancied grievances. It will not be easy in this Faith Testing Facility we call Planet Earth. -HornED

PS: to Eric D... Thanks for the insightful contribution... and, yes, one has to sort through a lot of "poo" in the watchful owl business... mythical or not. BTW, I edited the final "again" to read "gain"... every once in a while my little finger becomes overzealous... and communication suffers.

On your point of times change and the necessity of changing with them... human nature is more constant than historical eras... and the practical endurance of our Constitution (including its heritage of the separation of church and state) is a tribute to the framers' understanding of human nature... no matter how well intended or how perverse.

Thanks to for your commitment to clear thinking... for clear thinking provides an inherent basis for changing one's mind... or even a Pledge or National Motto. Righteousness usually doesn't suffer when past errors are made right. -H.E. for E.D.

This message has been edited by HornEd on 07-01-2002 at 02:02 PM

[lne937s]

I have to state that this country was founded by Christians, not Christian Ideals.

Firstly, the concept of Democracy and the Republic are Greek, not Christian. For centuries, the Christians burned books pertaining to this and denounced these concepts. A modified monarchy or theocracy is closer to the ideal.

Secondly, capitalism isn't very Christian either. Greed is a sin and even if you rename it "rational self interest" (A. Smith), it is the same concept. It is much easier to make an argument against capitalism using the Bible than for it.

A theocratic, heirarchical communism is the closest to a true Christian foundation. After all, the original word and concept of "communism" comes from the debates during the formative years of the Catholic church over the role of the Church. These predate the rulings that proclaim monogamy, life at conception, and no birth control- all concepts held to by Christians today. While they basically agreed that the early Christians lived in poverty and shared everything from those who have the most to those who need the most, the idea came about that golden caldlestick holders and ornate churches would better show the glory of God- in order to spread the religion. (sounds familiar) However, there were some subdivisions that sought the original Christian vision, taking a vow of poverty and living simply. Perhaps the best examples of a society based on Christian ideals are Jesuit monks.

There have also been proponents of Christian ideals that have tried to separate out the Christianity. The Christian Atheist (oxymoron) party in France and the Christian Democrat party in Gernmany are two examples. Generally these attempts are morally conservative, socialist parties.

In the end we adopted a system that worked, based more on economic ideals than theological. A true Christian society would never have been successful. In addition to an inefficient economy, many people here would be excluded. Laws would be so strict that they would eliminate many of the freedoms we enjoy. I realize that mostly men are on this board, but women would be treated like second-class citizens. We would be reduced to a backwards theocracy like Iran. Even if the people want it, combining church and state should never happen. Remember Hitler (who put manditory prayer in schools and at all public meetings) was elected, and the German people even voted 2/3+ to eliminate their voting rights to remove him. The will of the people is not always right, which is why we have a Constitution in the first place.

Larry

This message has been edited by lne937s on 07-01-2002 at 02:08 PM

[HornEd]

WOW! This audio thread has certainly brought out some sound thinking!

Your points are well taken, Larry... and they bring in to sharper focus earlier attempts of others who tried to make some of them. It is this kind of thoughtful dialogue that allows each of us to reflect upon our own pre-judgments (i.e., prejudice) to see if they meet today's needs.

We live in an imperfect world and historical reference is often an imperfect reflection of what's happened in one's own life. Helping one another see additional fragments of the diamond of truth... with a minimum of flames... and that is a remarkable accomplishment for an audio web site. It tends to make one think that thinking people buy Klipsch! -H.E.

[kenratboy]

There is also the whole topic of HONORING (NOT WORSHIPING) your nations heritage.

Where is the line for that?

------------------

Receiver: Sony STR-DE675

CD player: Sony CDP-CX300

Turntable: Technics SL-J3 with Audio-Technica TR485U

Speakers: JBL HLS-610

Subwoofer: JBL 4648A-8

Sub amp: Parts Express 180 watt

Center/surrounds: Teac 3-way bookshelfs

Yes, it sucks, but better to come. KLIPSCH soon! My computer is better than my stereo!

[Eric D]

Quoth HornEd:

"every once in a while my little finger becomes overzealous... and communication suffers."

Hmmm, usually it's another overzealous finger that causes communication to suffer.

But more seriously, this later statement "Holy Wars" are among the most deadly that can be fought in this or any other time. " is the one I really think that Americans, even if we didn't grasp it before when terrorism was something that happening to other people, should *surely* get now.

. I've got all kinds of ideals, but we've all learned about tempering them with realism. An understanding of human nature was indeed important to the writing of our constitution.

I also enjoyed and appreciated Larry's post mightely, but it sure opens another can of worms. Is there a way to propagate the ideals of capitalism without some of the growing pains such as our early manifest destiny misdeeds (have those ended yet?), monopolistic robber barons, profit-making legislators, or fraudulant corporate accounters. OK, we're obviously still in infancy - well maybe in our teens - grown to our powers but not in charge of our hormones (apologies to some of the impetuous youth about on the thread who provide different forms of motive force). Would that our constitution gave us such insightful and powerful limiters for the area of economy.

And America could sure do with a basic fix for the selling of legislation. As long as it's left up to specific law-making, it's sure to be end-run. IMHO, we need a serious basic change that can pass through Occam's Razor unbloodied (Side note: those of you considering telling me to leave any Arabic philosophies out of this discussion, it's time to do a little reading. ) Anyway, can this group of great thinkers come up with a fix? If it can, maybe the Internet can retire Salon.com.

So I'll continue to give thanks for the constraints that prevent my Government practicing my or any other religion, paradoxical though it sounds.

Eric

(who has never posted one byte on the aforementioned den of over-clever self-labelled high-thinkers - and is doing a weak job of imitating such).

This message has been edited by Eric D on 07-01-2002 at 04:37 PM

[HornEd]

Obviously, kenratboy, the line for that is NOT behind breaking the heritage of the Supreme Law of the Land by making the Pledge into a prayer.

I am a history buff with a great respect for our heritage in fact not fiction. If you stand for what is historically correct and deserving of HONOR... then I am in line right behind you!

When you start a thread like you did this one, you need to consider more than your own version of "truth," "justice" and the "American Way." -HornED

[Roadhawg]

I keep thinking I'm done with this thread, but I wanted to respond to some of Larry's comments.

Democracy and republic are ideas and concepts. Who can say whether a Greek first imagined the concept or someone else and does it even matter? Greeks have followed Christ as well. Do the original Greek concepts of democracy and republic mirror what we have in America. Could be a case of creating a better mousetrap here. Did Christians burn books and denounce these concepts? I'll have to take your word for it. I can tell you the Bible does not advocate either action.

To the best of my recollection, the New Testament does not advocate one form of government over any other. The emphasis is on the believer's heart condition. To view rulers as in the hand of God with the believer submitting to their authority as long as it did not violate God's teachings.

Capitalism & greed are not synonymous. Greed is a sin. To suggest capitalism is evidence of greed and communism is not denies history. Communism is forced on individuals. The lifestyles of Communist leaders at the expense of those under their rule proves that. Rather than making lives of individuals better as had been claimed, it served to enrich and empower the few.

The same can be said for some church officials and sadly, many government officials. Wealth and power are a great temptation to many. The early Christians you refer to willingly put their possessions in common without coercion or threat of punishment if they didn't.

With regards to ornate churches, I repeat that men can put the so-called Stamp of God's Approval on anything they wish. That does not mean God either initiated or is pleased with it. Men have been using God's name as justification for selfish acts since the beginning of history. Having said that, I don't have a problem with nice church buildings. I'm not so hypocritical as to think I should live in a nice house and drive nice vehicles and expect the church to be made of mud and straw.

I submit that our system has in fact worked because of its' moral foundations which, like it or not, are rooted in Christian beliefs and ideals. And while, as I stated earlier, a nation (or society) cannot by definition be Christian, our society founded on Christian principles has been wildly successful.

I find very little in the way of economics in our Declaration or Constitution. What I do find throughout these and all of the documents I have read pertaining to our country's origins is evidence of our Founders' belief in and reliance upon God for the formation and continuance of America.

I believe that the closer we as a people come to living out the teachings of Jesus the more freedom and liberty we have.

Laws are an imperfect external attempt at controlling and correcting an inward condition.

Laws have no hold on me. A law against murder has no effect on me because I am bound by a higher law to love my brother as myself. Laws against theft do not impact me in the least because I have been given a higher law not to covet and be glad for the good fortune of others. I don't have to worry about violating laws dealing with the equality of women or minorities because Christ compels me to esteem others more highly than myself.

Moreover, these are not things I have to choke down like bad medicine. How many times have you heard someone who has done wrong say they wish they could stop? That is the miracle of Christianity-the freedom not just to do whatever you want, but the freedom to keep from doing wrong things that you seem powerless to resist by yourself.

If you accept the concept that Jesus was in fact the Son of God; consider how amazing that He who holds all the power of Heaven in His hands, knelt to wash the dust and filth from the feet of His followers.

How could anyone, believer or not, find fault with such an example. This selflessness is what caused the spread of Christianity, not ornate churches or fancy candleholders.

I agree that the will of the people is not always right. The Constitution seeks to protect us from our own worst impulses. I suggest to you that the success of this remarkable document is solely attributable to the religious beliefs and principles held dear by its' authors; the very same values it has become so fashionable to call backward and unenlightened.

[Allan Songer]

I have been avoiding this one like the plague because I AM a "liberal," a card-carrying member of the ACLU and have NEVER voted GOP and consider the leadership of the Democratic party to bee WAY TOO CONSERVATIVE. I worked for Barbara Boxer's first campagin for Congress and I was a guest at both Clinton innagurals (even though I think he is WAY too conservative)and . . BLAH BLAH BLAH

But I am also a devout and active memeber of my local Episcopal church. I guess I'm not a good enough Christian for most of you GOP bible-thumpers (or is that "humpers?").

Anyway, I also thought you'd like know that SOME of our founding fathers were NOT Christian--the two most notable being Jefferson and Franklin. But I suppose they don't count either . . . .

Ah, to HELL with it!

[Eric D]

Alan - but do you have Klipsch speakers? That would make you a member of the Horn party. (no reference to HornED intended). Come to think of it, none of the founding fathers had Klipsch speakers - Why should we trust them at all?

I understand a bit of your frustration. There's been quite a bit of off-topic conversation, history lessons, etc. here. I've tried to digest it only to the extent that it illuminates the discourse on the subject at hand. The rest, I've had to let drop on the ground or else I would have gone running off stark-ravers. There have been a few lines I've wanted to ask about gently and some that I've wanted to absolutely scream at the stop of my lungs, "NOOOO!!!!" about, but they haven't been germaine to the topic (and it would not have been productive). I don't have time to be lured into shouting matches or to go off on tangents.

I, for one, am quite interested in the view on this issue by someone who proudly proclaims themselves a liberal. I just don't use either word for myself because it depends upon the topic too much for me. And I don't know how I can be called a moderate either because there are some things where I may be to the left of you, and somethings where I may be to the right of those arguing against the court decision here. Maybe I'm an Oscillist?

Anyway, I do see people signing off of this. I'll only follow it as long as it continues to bring up meaningful new discussion. I'm glad it didn't end too soon to get the early comments from Roadhawg or the later comments from Larry.

But this being a Klipsch forum, get with the program. We aren't laid-back - we are direct and dynamic! If you have another note to add to this cacophany, please play on.

And finally, maybe in the spirit of the Horn party, a better curse to end your message with might be, "Ah, to BOSE with it!"

Have a good night all,

Eric

Much of the above is purely

[lne937s]

RoadHawg

I think you failed to grasp the meaning of my comment about communism. Communism is a concept that predates Marx and our contempory vision of a Tyrannical Atheist entity. The original term comes from Christianity circa 400AD. However, you will never hear this in any high school textbook, only at the upper ends of higher education. Education seperates many of us on our opinions.

It amuses me that "Christians" hold so strongly to like monogamy and life at conception that are more recent rulings(Look at the papal rulings of Pope Pius IV ). Less than a thousand years ago these weren't the case and the soul was considered to enter the body with the first breath and later at the quickening (the first movement in the womb- roughly equivalent to the begining of the second trimester). Reaction to sexual rulings were a major reason for the Bourbon uprising in France.

Many of the works of Greek, or I should say ancient Athenian, authors were burned by the Church prior to the reformation, some of them lost forever. These writings were by people who believed in multiple gods, none of which were Judeo-Christian. Many were burned for reasons other than politics, such as homosexuality (if you want to know what the true meaning of "Platonic love" is, read Plato's Phaedrus in the section talking about love between two men, historians have proven this to be less innocent than what many teachers tried to contort it into- you'll laugh every time you hear someone use the term). Plato's Republic and Athenian Democracy were the prototypes our government was spawn from and the Aristotelian concepts of rhetoric have shaped the structure of many government entities.

As far as the capitalism and greed issue, you need to take an intro to Macroeconomics course. Classical Economics (Capitalism is based on the writings of Adam Smith- The Wealth of Nations) attempts to use the concept of Rational Self Interest to fuel the economy. This basically creates a system to utilize and encourage the greed of individuals to fuel the national economy as a whole. This was extreemly conservative and created unstable economies. John Maynard (oops-not Alan) Keynes (a homosexual atheist) modified Smith's concept to create the foundation that our current economy is based on. This includes subsides, interest rate controls, illegalization of insider trading, anti-trust provisions, etc.

In theory, Communism is a give-from-the-rich-to-the-poor, share everything system. However, like Christianity, the power within the system has been corrupted. The best way to think of communism is as a godless religion. In its original form- it is an embodyment of Christianity. However, it will never work for the same reason as Theocracies, it is too easy to take advantage of. Your assesment is like saying that Christianity is based on killing people of other faiths, fueling tyrants like Hitler, and forcing religion on indiginous peoples, which history also supports and some Muslims argue.

Also Jefferson and Franklin were Unitarians, which is very loosely based in Christianity. However, their behavior was anything but moral- Bill Clinton looks like a saint next to them.

Larry

PS- if Christianity is such a moral power, then why do we consistantly have the highest murder rate despite having high church attendance comapred to the rest of the industrialized world? I think our greatness is based more in our strength in military and economy than our moral righteousness. Claiming otherwise is like the football players thanking God for being on their side at the end of the Superbowl, like God loves them more. And what about "blessed are the meek and the humble for they shall inherit the earth". I don't think many foriegners or most Americans would claim that we are either meek or humble. I am a Catholic, but the religious furvor in the public sector ticks me off.

This message has been edited by lne937s on 07-01-2002 at 09:43 PM

[kenratboy]

No, I am not a big fan of the church, but I am a big supporter of America.

------------------

Receiver: Sony STR-DE675

CD player: Sony CDP-CX300

Turntable: Technics SL-J3 with Audio-Technica TR485U

Speakers: JBL HLS-610

Subwoofer: JBL 4648A-8

Sub amp: Parts Express 180 watt

Center/surrounds: Teac 3-way bookshelfs

Yes, it sucks, but better to come. KLIPSCH soon! My computer is better than my stereo!

[HornEd]

Hey, Allan, be cool, there is no good reason why liberals should not be welcome here. Everyone is entitled to an opinion of their country. My late father was a friend of Barbara Boxer who honored his passing. For many years the "think tank" I built was able to solve problems because we could apply a wide range of disciplines to find an answer.

I mentioned several of the non-Christians that were key to building and preserving this Republic earlier in this thead... and I agree with you it is unfair to give all the credit to the Christian majority of those early days.

Understanding ourselves as a nation means examining all our contributing parts... and by your own admission, you have been a contributor. This thread works best for people of good will. Hopefully the resident Forum torch bearers are off flaming elsewhere. But their taunts are empty and you should make your contribution with knowledgeable pride.

There is no reason we need to agree with one another before we share... it is only prudent that we respect one another. The key point of this thread is whether the Pledge of Allegiance should contain the phrase, "under God" which was inserted after he fact and is non-conforming to the First Amendment in the view of 9th Circuit Court following guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court.

I for one, would appreciate your point of view. -HornED

[TBrennan]

Roadhawg---I think Christianity has nothing to do with the success of this country; I think hard work and clear-headed pragmatism, plus the ability to put our ideals in our pockets as we grab for the main chance, has. Plus we've only been around a couple of hundred years, it's really too early to tell, we could be gone in 50 years; things in Rome were going great under Trajan, 100 years later things were a mess. Now if you want to give Christianity credit for the good things then it also has to take the blame for the bad: Slavery, mistreatment and conquest of the Indians, the war of naked agression against Mexico in 1846, Jim Crow and numerous other things. Now as a pragmatist I can justify the need for some of these things but I can't justify them as a Christian. Most American Christians, including devout ones, are simply Germanic Pagans with a veneer of claimed Christianity, with The Trinity cast as Wotan, Thor and Balder and Satan standing in as Loki and Justification through Faith the Great Loophole. Not that that goes for you and me. :-)