NBC Poll

[are12]

>. Now it is your turn .. It is said that 86% of Americans
>believe in God. Therefore, I have a very hard time
>understanding why there is such A mess about having "In God
>We Trust" on our money and having God in the Pledge of
>Allegiance. Why is the world catering to this 14%? AMEN!
>In God We Trust
>
>The only easy day,was yesterday -U S Navy Seals




I for one, do not feel we should have to cater to the 14%. Does any one know how long our money had "In God We Trusted" printed on it or how long ago was the Pledge of Allegiance said in school. I remember saying it every day until I graduated and I started school in 1965. My Dad, who is 80, says that they also started their school day with the Pledge. So why has it become such a big issue today?????

I don't think believing in God has anything to do with what is on our money or the Pledge of Allegiance, or our government certainly should not get wrapped up in this. I think it has more to do with the fact that we have so many different cultures moving to this country and they feel it is wrong for us to have "In God We Trust" on our money and the Pledge of Allegiance in our schools since they have different beliefs. Which is fine but why should we have to change our beliefs for anyone?? Just like it is "Politically Incorrect" to say Merry Christmas since not every one celebrates it. Well, you know what?? Too bad, if you see me around the holiday, I will wish you a Merry Christmas - politically correct or not!!

And yes, I believe in God - I was raised Catholic, just like I raised my kids. Like I tell everyone, we are not "Good" Catholics since we do not go to church but we have the Catholic beliefs.I still say my prayers! I don't care if a person believes in God, Budda or just a higher power - everyone is entitled to their own beliefs but if you move to this country, you have to except change - I am not talking change your religion or beliefs but don't try and change ours either.

I sure hope no one took offense to this since it was not meant to offend anyone, just voicing my opinion. And you know what they say about opinions!!:+ :+

 

[cheri1122]

One more time, and then I rest my case, and shut up. (I can hear the muttered "Thank Gods!, lol)
No one is asking anyone to cater to the 14% - if you accept an NBC poll as an accurate number, which is not likely. What is expected is that the government of the country follow the rules, which require it to remain neutral on the subject of religion. No one is expected to change their beliefs in any fashion, to cater to anyone else.
The only change to the Pledge Of Allegiance, and United States currency, is to remove the word "God" which is not neutral.
If other cultures are objecting to the recitation of the pledge, they should go back to the country they'd rather be loyal to, IMHO.

 

[nightcreacher]

its one nation under GOD, not christianity.there are many ways to believe in GOD,christianity is just one

 

[Turtle]

I'd classify myself as an agnostic. It's a little presumptuous of me to state uncategorically that there is no god, or that there is, for that matter. No one knows. You can only believe. Doesn't matter how strongly believe, you still don't know. One way or ther other.

Having said that, I don't care if "In God We Trust" is on my money. I don't care that the Treasurer and the Secretary's signatures are on it. Or the date, or who's picture is on it. I've got a $20 bill here that says, "For a good time call Sheila". Not a problem. The only thing that matters is that it says, "This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private."

I might should place my trust in God, since "we" did, whoever "we" is, but then again, I might be better off giving Sheila a call. In either case, the money spends just fine.


As for the Pledge of Allegiance.... Well, I have no problem reciting the Pledge exactly as it is currenty written. None. However, I still think "under God" should be removed from it.

The original Pledge of Allegiance, meant as an expression of patriotism, not religious faith, made no mention of God. The pledge was written in 1892 by a radical socialist and Baptist minister, Francis Bellamy. He wrote it for the popular magazine "Youth's Companion" on the occasion of the nation's first celebration of Columbus Day. At the time of the writing, he was no longer a minster, as he had been forced out of the church a year earlier because of his socialist sermons. He was the chairman of a committee of state superintendents of education in the National Education Association. As its chairman, he prepared the program for the public schools' quadricentennial celebration for Columbus Day in 1892. He structured this public school program around a flag raising ceremony and a flag salute - his 'Pledge of Allegiance.' Its wording omitted reference not only to God but also, to The United States.

"I pledge allegiance to my flag and to the republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

The "republic" was meant to mean the united states, as this was written on the heels of the Civil War. In Bellamy's own words: "The true reason for allegiance to the Flag is the 'republic for which it stands.' ...And what does that vast thing, the Republic mean? It is the concise political word for the Nation - the One Nation which the Civil War was fought to prove. To make that One Nation idea clear, we must specify that it is indivisible, as Webster and Lincoln used to repeat in their great speeches."

He initially wanted to use the phrase, "with liberty, equality, and justice for all" but knew that the equality of blacks and women, a hot button issue even then, was not going to fly in a flag allegiance ceremony. I do think that "equality" should be in there, as justice is the time-tested mediator of the often conflicting goals of "equality" and "liberty". Without "equality", "liberty and justice" merely means that some people are more equal than others, and they'll get the just liberty they want. Which is kind of what has been happening in this country since the Pledge was written, if ya think about it.

Be that as it may, the phrase 'my Flag,' was changed to 'the Flag of the United States of America,' by the National Flag Conference, held in 1923 and 1924, under the leadership of the Daughters of the American Revolution and the American Legion. Why they didn't add "equality" in there is beyond me. The addition of the "United States of America" was added in spite of Bellamy's strong protests.

Interestingly enough, his protests weren't over the use of the United States so much, even though he said its use was redundant, his strongest protests were in the changing of the word "my" to "the". When people pledge allegiance to a "my" something, it's a very personal thing, something to treasure. When they pledge allegiance to a "the" thing, it becomes an impersonal, detached object.

In 1954, under the heat of McCarthy era communism scare, and after a long and hard compaign by the Kights of Columbus (and president Eisenhower, in fact), Congress added "under God" to the Pledge.

Golly, it's two mints one one! Now the Pledge does double duty, it's both a patriotic oath and a public prayer.

Get "under God" out of there. The purpose of the Pledge is to pledge one's allegiance to "the republic for which it stands". Period. It needs to be kept simple and to the point. At most, the only change from the original should be to add "equality" to it, especially since that was the original intention of the author. People don't even take the Pledge seriously anymore. It's become too political. It's a patriotic pledge, so let's keep it one.

Did you know there are two very strong candidates, under very serious consideration, for changes currently in the works?

'I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all, born and unborn.'

'I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with equality, liberty and justice for all men, women and children, without regard to race, religion, or creed.'

The second one would give a 3-year old the same equal rights and liberties as a 21-year old. And it's being seriously considered.

Oh, my God!


Jesus is coming...

Look busy