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

[forresthump2]

Horny if you so fair and Impartial why dont you Also mention the Other side - that making God references forbidden in Public School by Anybody is Against the 1st Amendment as the Framers Intended. I spell it out Freedom of Speech together with Freedom of Religion. I can say whatever the H I want in public now. No Liberal Activist Judge is going to tell me what I cant say. If somebody doesnt want to say God in the Pledge then they dont have to say it. That blows your 1st Amendemnt apart.

What you are saying is the framers forbid any mention of God in schools or public places. Show me where you get that Smart Guy. Put up or shut up and stop distorting the Bill of Rights.

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

Go Forth and Hump the World

[HornEd]

Yep, Audioholic I lucked out winning a WWII era patriotism contest while in the third grade. First prize was a set of encyclopedias that I eventually read them from cover-to-cover. When the Pledge of Allegiance was first changed I was 16 and aware enough to know that our First Amendment Rights had been compromised by our elected representatives... I was not happy... and so my journey of governmental disenchantment and politics began.

In my family, I was the only one who received straight "A's"... and caught a lot of flack for it. My father was a local politician, a staunch Democrat and president of a Teamsters Union. I was groomed to be a lawyer and politician but familiarity bred contempt and I strayed into the neuropsychiatric field instead. After an adventuresome six year + stint in the Army Medical Corps... I became an entrepreneur and built several businesses as a successful capitalist, developed cutting edge techniques with my own think tank, and developed a consultancy with Fortune 500 companies and Federal agencies.

While politically an Independent most people viewed me as a conservative. My views haven't changed a whole lot... but now you and a few others on the Forum take me for a liberal. That is somewhat of a puzzlement.

My thrust on this Pledge issue stems from my admiration for how well the Constitution is constructed to preserve our Republic from our well meaning but selfish selves. Separating God from that basic structure is ingenious in that regard. Given the references to God in their many writings, I conclude that leaving God out of the Constitution (except for the clause that establishes the separation of church and state in the First Amendment). I believe God is not affronted... although some of his devotees may be.

I don't believe that the Framers of the Constitution feared bad consequences from God for leaving him out of the Constitution... I think they feared what man might do in His name if religion was included. Putting God in the Pledge of Allegiance has already created an assumption of God being part of our official government pledge... familiar as the ABC's to use your illustration. I think that's the stuff that would make the framers of the constitution roll over in their graves.

Thanks, Audioholic, I needed a moment to reflect on my own history and be candid about my personal observations. Thanks for your interest and perceptive observations. -HornEd

PS: If I stayed on the can as much as I read, my butt would be as weak as my eyes.

[forresthump2]

Horny when was the last time you voted for a Republican

candidate. And name one thing considered to be on the GOP agenda that you support. I have seen nothing when you debate Politics that lead me to think that the Liberal Demogogue Party Line is the only thing that determines your "Worldly" views. LOL

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

Go Forth and Hump the World

[HornEd]

forresthump for someone that shows flashes of intelligence you certainly ought to go back and learn what the Greeks knew about logic thousands of years ago. I will not be drawn into your pathetic world of childish name calling, gross misrepresentations and outright fabrications.

Having read the Biblical admonition about casting pearls, I will reserve my answers for more sincere questioners. You may do your predictable rant... but I don't think anyone will think any less of me... only less of you.

Could it be that a lifetime of indulgence in your self centered passion has led to your inability to see the point? -HornED

[forresthump2]

I rest my case then that Horny is a diehard Libby who may have once flirted with the GOP in reckless youth. I hit right on the head that the Demogogue Party controls your thought process. So now when you distort

the Constitution and Bill of Rights Amendments we know where you come from. LOL

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

Go Forth and Hump the World

[Sinatra]

OK..i just read this post so hear I go. Now don't jump on me for this or anything guys. I think it was a good idea...I am an athiest. I really hated the fact that I had to show respect for my country while addin the word "god" into it. Don't get me wrong yo..I love this country...I just don't think it should all revolve around some imaginary person that lives in the clouds. Take what has happened latley...A church in Bethpage was struck by lighning...and priests are molesting little boys. So is God really that good of an image. I'm really sorry If I have offended anyone...just some of my opinions.

-Sinatra

[Deang]

I have been doing nothing except reading and soul searching since yesterday on this. I never realized just how complex the issue is. I've actually spent the better part of the day studying the historical aspects of the amendment, and as of an hour or so ago, I have been digging into the grammatical aspects.

In spite of Ed's and Gil's enlightening posts, along with some great information on the web -- I'm still wrestling with an issue.

These men apparently did not believe they were in violation of the Establishment Clause of the amendment when they were incorporating and exercising their faith while at the same time carrying out their official duties for the people of the United States. They prayed on the House and Senate floors, they preached Scripture while presenting arguments, they built a Chapel inside the Capitol, they assigned a House Chaplain, etc.. If they believed in an all encompassing level of separation -- then Houston, we have a problem.

Now Ole Forrest may be a little abrasive, but he has a valid point. It seems these men placed as much emphasis on the Free Exercise Clause as on the Establishment Clause. While they could not make a law concerning an establishment of religion, they also could not make a law regulating the expression of it. This fact is probably why they felt no conflict with the Establishment Clause of the amendment while exercising their faith on a daily basis on Capitol Hill.

I'm leaning towards the idea that Congress has no constitutionally delegated power to make any law concerning matters of religion.

However, they also can not make a law regulating the expression of my faith, whether that expression is private or public.

Incidently, it should be noted that one of the reasons they provided no constitutionally delegated power in this area, was because they wanted to leave it to the individual states.

This means that the states could work freely in this area but the federal government could not -- so, doesn't this beg the question as to why state laws are struck down by federal courts when they involve a religious matter?

I've been reading from the following three sites. Enjoy.

f>s>

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/tnppage/tnpidx.htm

http://www.schoolprayer.com/eduguide/current_law.html

http://www.wallbuilders.com/ f>s>

Sinatraf>s> Tomorrow we will talk about metaphysics and Mr.& Mrs. Flatf>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 06-30-2002 at 09:23 AM

[kenratboy]

HornED, that pool in Wisconsin is BS. First, it was an "idea", not the actual reality (which is why there is the outcry.) The only data I look at is what I see NOW.

Yes, I do respect you, and I feel you do likewise, so lets both keep it up. At the least, I think we agree on the fundamentals of what our rights should be.

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

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!

[Audio Flynn]

Gone for 2 days and the thread goes nuts!

I am still with Deang and Audioholic.

Ed,

While the politicians(like surrogate mothers H. Clinton and J. Fonda;not statesmen) are looking out for us by deleting the most offesive, "God" references for us from the "Pledge" and elsewhere; what are they really doing?

Some freindly little Socialist Elitist end around. We will figure it out later.

The, dare I say, unChristian manner we dealt with Spain and the UC manner we hear LBJ speak on the tapes recently published has NOTHING to do with the intent of the constitution. The Deist foundation of the constitution would not have supported these actions or the actions of McCarthy or Nixon. And they paid their price to fate or maybe God.

It is all about power hungry politicians and the DECEIPT we are fed every day.

There are thousands of people that think the constitution does not apply to them; the Socialist Elitist ruling class of lawyers is very similar to the Communist party in the old USSR.

Different benifits.

Different retirement plan.

Garunteed job for life.

Nice holidays.

Cute vacation spots and golf courses for the Military Elite.

Socially accepted mistesses/concubines.

Certainly Jefferson had his mistress and Franklin was a womanizer; but I think they earned their keep(and most times paid their own way) better than the schmucks we have today.

[HornEd]

AudioFlynn, there must be some wires crossed somewhere or somebody is taking forresthump more seriously than he deserves to be taken. The example of the LBJ engineered lie in the Gulf of Tonkin and the abuse of Spain were examples made to kenratboy on how polls could be shaped by error or worse it had nothing to do with the Pledge situation. I did not follow the path laid out for me in my youth to be a politician because of my distaste for the compromises that seem necessary in that line of chicanery.

While I believe that official government currency, coins and the Pledge of Allegiance should not bear any religious inscription or symbolism on the basis of the First Amendment I dont have a problem with individuals offering prayers in government buildings, offices, houses of Congress, the White House, etc. In God We Trust on coins and paper money appears to be a clear violation of the First Amendment because they are official government representations. If someone sings God Bless America in the Oval Office on National TV, thats okay by me since it is an artist rendering her art and hopefully her love of God and Country. I suspect there are many ways people can show their patriotism for this nation and their love, and reliance on a Supreme Being without trying to pass off a religious sect or symbol as something backed by the nation as policy or lending government weight to its veracity.

The public school issue gives me some pause for concern but then again prayers and religious references were not illegal when I was in grammar school. And, I havent researched the matter personally. Frankly, I think religious training and creation theory a better taught at home and in churches. But, again, I do not understand why the Federal government has so much control the schools except by the funding string and I find that suspect. I do know, however, that there is an existing Supreme Court Ruling that children cannot be required to say the Pledge of Allegiance due to its First Amendment position the court has taken which relates directly with the addition of under God provision added in 1954. In fact, the 9th Circuit Courts ruling was made to fit the Supreme Courts guidelines.

I have just as much rancor toward government elitists as you do maybe even more, whether they be liberal or conservative. There was a time in my life when I had some name elitists that were personal, high paying, consulting clients of mine and getting to know them is even worse than disliking them from afar in the abstract.

Well, friends, it has been a long day, good night and God Bless. -HornEd

[Deang]

Agreed.

So...

"In God we Trust",

using the Bible to swear in witness in court and public officials for office,

Chaplains in the Military, Chaplain and Chapel residing at Capitol Hill,

and the 10 Commandments and figure of Moses at the Supreme Court building,

...will all be challenged at some point. It is just a matter of time.

The issue regarding prayer in schools, and the exercise of religious freedom in schools is also interesting.

Apparently, we have been led to believe by some elements of the 'Religious Right' that God has been kicked out schools.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

What is true is that there has been in fact great latitude given to students and teachers.

In fact, there is so much latitude that is almost easier just to state what they cannot do.

School staff cannot be used to supervise or lead religous meetings on school property. However, students are free to meet and practice their faith on school property.

Schools cannot initiate involuntary or voluntary prayers. However, students are free to pray and express their religion at any time -- as long as it does not intefere with normal school activity.

Students are free to pass out religious literature, as long as they have made school officials aware of it so they can set up a single point of presence, like a table -- where the students can pass out the literature.

Students are free the share their faith with other students who are willing to listen. However, they cannot corner someone who does not want to listen, nor can they use the message to 'harrass' individuals.

Teachers can actually use the Bible in class for the purpose of teaching comparative religion. They can also use it to teach history.

Sience teachers cannot teach "Creationism". However, they can use elements of Creation Science that are "scientific" in nature for the purpose of presenting a balanced "view".

Some good examples of this can be found here: http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/

Many of these articles are strictly from a scientific perspective.

At any rate -- things aren't as bad as some make it out to be.

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 06-30-2002 at 10:09 AM

[TBrennan]

That this whole Pledge thing is even being taken seriously is an indication of how distracted people are from the much more frightening and dangerous things going on lately. We have an American citizen being held without charges in a military prison, the Supreme Court has ruled vouchers to religious schools legal, the Court has OKed drug testing for kids in after-school activities and more kinky adventures in Capitalism are being exposed every day. Yet people are going on about how people can no longer be forced to kowtow to "God" and retards can no longer be executed. The President is flipping from pillar to post on the Israel-Arab thing and wants to increase military spending while cutting taxes, the Attorney General has a Sulla complex and the Secretary of State, the smartest guy in the bunch, has been marginalized. Menwhile the Vice-President sits in hiding watching Doctor Strangelove admiring the character played by Sterling Hayden. The nut-case Prods are alinging with the hard-line Israelis hoping to provoke The End of The World and half the Republican Party in Illinois in gonna windup in Statesville for selling truck driving licenses to illiterate DPs who kill whole mini-vanned families. And people are worried about "God" in the pledge. Don't worry, God can look out for himself.

[Deang]

rotflol

"...God can look out for Himself."

Very profound Tom.

So, should we expand the thread to include the other topics?

As far as the Middle East goes -- When Saddam went to then Ambassador to Iraq, April Glasspie, to complain about Kurwait pulling oil out of his oil fields, and to warn her that if they did not cease -- he would invade Kuwait -- the official U.S. response was:

"The United States has no opinion on Arab to Arab conflicts."

Until the United States begins to address the multidimensional dynamics of the problem over there -- our Middle East policies will continue to be ineffective.

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 06-30-2002 at 11:28 AM

[HornEd]

Thanks for the update, deang, it is refreshing to hear that the latitude in today's public schools is about the same as it was sixty years ago when I learned to read. It is amazing how many "scientific truths" I have been required to learn over that time that have now been proven to have "mythed" the point. I like scholastic environments were learning to think is more important that regurgitation of "facts" in transition.

On the issue of "In God We Trust"... I think having it as an Official National Motto is not in keeping with the intent of the framers of our Constitution. It made it to the two-cent coin in the Civil War years without due process and was ratified as the National Motto to clearly differentiate this nation from those organized under Communism... and, this too, is probably a violation of the First Amendment since it is tantamount to a deist religious statement of the U. S. Government.

However, I would hope that Moses and the Ten Commandments are safe on the Supreme Court Building as being art that provides a history of concepts which led to the formation of the court. I think that is quite different from making a religious statement like "In God We Trust."

Military Chaplains provide support services to religious individuals and persons with religious questions and/or personal problems. Having been on the "head shrinking" side of the hospital aisle in the Army Medical Corps, working with chaplains was usually a very good situation.

There was one incident, however, when the Senior Chaplain of the Command Area tried to pull his rank and force me to let a decorated combat hero and Command Area Sergeant Major (Whom I shall call "George") out of a seclusion room in a maximum security psychiatric facility. The seclusion room had a small 2" x 6" slit that George was using to implore the Chaplain to obtain his release so that he could go to church.

George was a slick talker... especially when he was in a psychotic phase. He was also a fit combat veteran who could easily kill with his bare hands. George was basically a nice guy and a staunch Christian... who flipped out in a devilish way from time-to-time. I don't believe in sedating patients any more than is necessary to be able to meaningfully talk to them. Putting George in the seclusion room without clothes kept the rest of the patients and staff safe from his physical attacks.

The Chaplain said in his most practiced pulpit voice, "This man needs God!" To which I replied, "Sir, this man needs to stay in his little room until he is better able to commune with God." As the Chaplain was explaining how he was going to have me Court Marshalled for refusing to obey the direct order of a superior officer to release George into his custody. George asked the Chaplain to come over to the door so he could say something to him.

As the Chaplain neared the door, George said he didn't want the others to hear what he had to say... and asked the Chaplain to put his ear to the slot so he could whisper. The Chaplain did with a concerned benevolent look upon his face. George promptly placed in his ear a handful of his own fresh excrement apparently created for the occasion. The red-faced, brown-eared Chaplain left without even stopping to clean up... and I escaped yet another Court Marshall brought on by my independent ways.

With all the heavy issues on this thread, I thought it time for a little levity from a true incident. BTW, George thought it the slickest stunt he ever pulled while psychotic... and so did everyone else... well, almost everyone. But the story illustrates that even high ranking, well intended Christians can sometimes fall into the error pit.

Well, I am way behind schedule and need to be on the road again... but one last thought... maybe we are in better shape than I thought we were. -HornED

This message has been edited by HornEd on 06-30-2002 at 01:53 PM

[boa12]

again, in the words of the great Lou Reed, "show me an issue & i'll show you a tissue". but i'm w/ the majority on this one.

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

My Home Systems Page

[Martino]

What is tradition? well i for one see it as a action of the past ment for the future generations to withhold and continue commencing the action. "In god we trust" is on all of US currency. "Under god" is in all pledges throughout the United states, whether it be in the school pledge or the pledge for the marines or any other US office. Just because someone says "hey i dont believe in god" doesnt mean that we should remove the word from our vocab. that is against our freedom of speech. Does this also mean that all of the US currency must be removed for having the word "god" printed on it? It is pointless to remove it from the schools pledge and to have it everywhere else. The fact that it isnt there isnt gonig to change the fact that is was there since the original people of this country created it. Point being, no matter what someone trys to do, there will always be a "god". the pledge doesnt speficy which god so what is the complaint? the god in the pledge could be alla for all we know, well it could be our local mailmail for all we know. there is no description of the "god". the line is "Under god" it was ment this way so people wont take offense to it. But now an age long traidition dating back since i can remember is gonig to be removed because someone is offened by the word "God." Excuse me for saying this but thats bullshit. If the people before us felt it was important enough to include the word "god" in the pledge, than who the hell are we to say otherwise? we wouldnt be here had it not been for them. And now when our generation comes around some ******* comes out and says "hey, lets go against everything the protectors and founders of this country fought for. lets remove god and freedom of speech from our vocab." I for oen am sickened by the fact this had to even go to court... if your offended by it dont listen... its life, **** happens and if people get offened by a smiple word such as "god"... well than have a good life cause your not gonig to mount to anything if you cant take a word... lives ****ed up... deal with it... dont try to change words... try to change the fact that people are dieing around the world for many causes... change the fact that people are dieing for "god".

[Deang]

The "God" references weren't added to the currency, pledge, and motto until the 1950's.

Did you actually read the whole thread before you posted? We already covered everything you brought up

BTW - welcome to the forum.

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>

[Audio Flynn]

Ed,

The reason the "Pledge" discussion in the courts bothers me is that our courts should be put to good use punishing felons like the people at Enron, World Com and Xerox that ruin peoples lives while they enrich themselves through fraud and theivery.

They are no different than liquor store robbers with a .38 and that is who they should bunk with them in prison. No need for conjugal visits Bubba will give them plenty of Lovin'.

Politicians adress symptoms instead of root causes. We ought to have an ammendment to the constitution that prevents lawyers from running for public office. Then engineers can run for office; engineers solve problems by identifying the root cause!

Messed up stuff politicians encourage(short list)...

-CIA does not communicate with the FBI

-FBI management does not beleive their field agents

-DEA needs drug users to flourish; otherwise they would be unemployed

-Abortion debate; who cares, women will murder their unborn children if they feel the need regardless of the legal implications

-a dictator with A bombs in Pakistan is our best friend

-monarchy in Saudi Arabia is our best friend; the monarchy in England was not our best friend 230 years ago. Moslems monarchs are so much more appealing than the Anglican ones?

Sane ideas Statesmen would encourage...

-Free drugs to licensed addicts in asylums; let them kill themselves as fast as possible. An aids infected junkie cost us way too much showing up at the emergeny room every other month. My sister in law treats them!

-Munitions laced with pig fat; go ahead and be a terrorist but if we get you first you are not going to get the virgins Habib

-When you want to practice Socialism, call it Socialism. Not national health care, Social Security, Welfare, minority rights, free lunch, or some other misnomer that insults my intellignece.

The "Pledge" issue is just another in a long line of time wasting distractions that politicians use to pacify the ignorant that they are really looking out for us.

Politicians need to rededicate themselves to the core functions of insuring life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; while defending the borders.

All of the other shallow window dressing belittles my intelligence.

[Deang]

I'm depressedf>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]

Sorry, , it looks like your intelligence is not likely to be served by Federal Courts involved with Constitutional questions... from the sound of your condemnation, the court your looking for needs single-minded kangaroos not critical thinking Constitutional scholars.

The issues you raise concern me... as they do every other thinking American. Sadly, it is difficult to deal with them and maintain your Constitutional guarantees. Germany under Adolph Hitler was able to shortcut a lot of the problems you speak of... and then some!

The issue of keeping the Constitution intact as the Supreme Law of the Land is to prevent self-righteous do-gooders from blasting other people out of existence without due process. Putting "under God" in the Pledge undermines that basic tenet of Americanism as defined by the Constitution... but that is only important if we remain a nation of laws instead of a dictatorship ruled by fiat... fiats like the ones you made so clear.

Of course I don't quite understand how the government helps hard working people who can't keep up with inflation to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, obviously debtors prisons didn't work for the English... so they sent their working poor to the colonies as indentured servants. I'm sure your plan will be better than that.

Since your plan, in all its nobility, has no place under our Constitution... so I guess we need you to use all that intelligence to build a new Constitution to protect all the good people and waste all the bad with infallibility. You certainly have my attention.

Oh, and if you can find it in your heart... please use some of that intelligence to help deang find a way out of his depression... he really is a decent fellow that gets lost on the fairness issue. Come to think of it, I could use some help there too. -HornED

PS: Sorry for the facetious tone, Audio Flynn, I know you must be as frustrated with the situation as I am. But read your post again... as if you were somebody that you might not find in favor. It gets a bit hairy from that perspective. -H.E.

PPS: Martino, that's quite a paragraph for one's first post. However, as deang correctly notes, the people who changed the heritage did so apparently illegally in 1954... so that is to whom you should direct your anger. You make good points... only they fit the opposite side that you have taken.

Never-the-less, welcome to the Forum, you have shown that you are a passionate American, and now we look forward to your showing your passion as a Klipsch owner. -H.E.

This message has been edited by HornEd on 06-30-2002 at 10:00 PM