Anti-Cross

Nothing wrong with that  :)
Click to expand...
That is debatable.

Click here to See what I mean

christian.jpg


 
Last edited by a moderator:
***SNIP***
As for here in the states, I wish they would bring back the "Pledge of Alliegence" in schools. I dont know the answer why they ever did get rid of it, maybe because it mentioned God? I'll have to google it.

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.
Click to expand...
The Constitution of the United States is the answer to your question.

Remember, until 1954, the phrase "under God" never appeared in the Pledge of Alligence. Congress, after a campaign by the Knights of Columbus, added the words, 'under God,' to the Pledge. The Pledge became both a patriotic oath and a public prayer.

And therein lies the problem. Remember, the federal government cannot enact any laws that abridge your right to worship as you wish. By placing that phrase in the Pledge, Congress did just the opposite - it promoted one religion over all others, thereby forcing non-Christians to worship in a manner not of their choosing.

 
***SNIP*** 
As for here in the states, I wish they would bring back the "Pledge of Alliegence" in schools.  I dont know the answer why they ever did get rid of it, maybe because it mentioned God?  I'll have to google it. 

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.
Click to expand...
The Constitution of the United States is the answer to your question.

Remember, until 1954, the phrase "under God" never appeared in the Pledge of Alligence. Congress, after a campaign by the Knights of Columbus, added the words, 'under God,' to the Pledge. The Pledge became both a patriotic oath and a public prayer.

And therein lies the problem. Remember, the federal government cannot enact any laws that abridge your right to worship as you wish. By placing that phrase in the Pledge, Congress did just the opposite - it promoted one religion over all others, thereby forcing non-Christians to worship in a manner not of their choosing.
Click to expand...
Thanks AR HF! I didnt know the answer and that's why I asked a question. :)

Different "views" can certainly cause problems of disagreement. Tough to be on the same page. And people are different.

 
WOW, we have had a discussion about religion sort of and it did not get out of hand. Some people take the extreem on either side and will fight and lower themselves to try and make their point the correct point. Another reason this is such a great board. :cheers

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Another ruling by the Supreme Court about not allowing religious icons displayed in goverment buildings. The Supreme Court does not have very good S/A. Situational awareness. The Supreme Court building is adorned with such icons. In God we trust is carved in numerous areas. The Ten Commandments are also displayed there. Get out the freakin' sandblasters and rid themselves of such nonsense. Our forefathers didn't have a clue about government.

:sarcasm

GBR

PS I can at times be very fervent about the topic and like to point out the hypocrisy our government drowns itself in at times. My 60's kharma showing. :cheers And I am a Christian, but you won't hear me say judgmental things about other religions. Not my job man. Everyone chooses their own path to follow. Grasshopper. :) gettin' off the :boxosoap now.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Another ruling by the Supreme Court about not allowing religious icons displayed in goverment buildings. The Supreme Court does not have very good S/A. Situational awareness. The Supreme Court building is adorned with such icons. In God we trust is carved in numerous areas. The Ten Commandments are also displayed there. Get out the freakin' sandblasters and rid themselves of such nonsense. Our forefathers didn't have a clue about government.


:sarcasm

***SNIP***
Click to expand...
There is a differnce that's quite significant. The Supreme Court has always held that when religious "symbols" are displayed for historical purposes, they are permissable - the idea being that such a display doesn't "promote" one religion over another. In the case of the Supreme Court building, what is actually displayed are various figures and symbols that represent a kind of historical time line regarding "law makers". The displays on the Court building include representations of the Code of Hammaribe (sic), the Magna Carter, etc.

In other words, the display is not about religion at all.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top