Whitehouse.gov responds to petition about removing the "Under god" from the pledge of allegience - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Broseph_;33034886]No they fucking didn't, "In God We Trust" was added to coins during the Civil War by the treasury under Lincoln, stop being stupid [IMG]http://acdwyer.com/images/1864_two_cent_small_motto_ms65rd_pcgs_obv.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] No, I meant they only appeared on coins until 1957, at which point paper currency began using it as well. Perhaps you didn't understand the sentence structure, but I wasn't implying that coins lacked the phrase. [editline]30th October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=thisispain;33035193]*psst* you meant paper currency...[/QUOTE] No, my sentence was correct. [editline]30th October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Broseph_;33036698]Don't try to start shit with me now, 'Under God' is in the pledge, not 'In God we trust', and I already conceded that it was a modern addition to the pledge in my first response, FlakAttack how ever decided to broaden this to 'In God We Trust', while Megafanx13 has decided to shit all over history to attack the latter.[/QUOTE] Hey dude, no need to go all personal attack on me just because you misread my response.

I don't mind the god part but reciting the plege of allegiance daily in school is shitty and its like were in north korea

[QUOTE=stupid10er;33041329]just like how Obama doesn't care how a non-citizen feels about domestic matters.[/QUOTE] Maybe, like me, he has dual citizenship?

Please, just [I]leave it be![/I] I think most people, as well as the government, is 1) tired of hearing about it and 2) it's impossible to do. Taking it off the money is doable, but it's impossible to stop something that's become almost rote. I say it without even thinking about it. It's just not going to happen, so the shitstorm needs to move away.

"Under god" was added as an intentional stab at atheism. This is establishment of a state religion, plain and simple, and intentional discrimination against a significant portion of the population. We should stop disgracing our fucking pledge by including a line that directly counters our mission statement. Fucking ridiculous.

[QUOTE=GunFox;33049939]"Under god" was added as an intentional stab at atheism. This is establishment of a state religion, plain and simple, and intentional discrimination against a significant portion of the population. We should stop disgracing our fucking pledge by including a line that directly counters our mission statement. Fucking ridiculous.[/QUOTE]BUT ITS [I]TRADITION![/I] WE [I]CAN'T[/I] DO THAT! Besides, religion is so [I]obviously[/I] supposed to be a part of the government. I mean, who would we be if we said that religion [I]doesn't[/I] need to play a part in it? A bunch of dirty commie socialist gays. That's what.

[QUOTE=rosar0980;33049079]Please, just [I]leave it be![/I] I think most people, as well as the government, is 1) tired of hearing about it and 2) it's impossible to do. Taking it off the money is doable, but it's impossible to stop something that's become almost rote. I say it without even thinking about it. It's just not going to happen, so the shitstorm needs to move away.[/QUOTE] It can be done, it can be undone. [editline]30th October 2011[/editline] I really wish people on facepunch weren't so fucking passive

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;33050009]BUT ITS [I]TRADITION![/I] WE [I]CAN'T[/I] DO THAT! Besides, religion is so [I]obviously[/I] supposed to be a part of the government. I mean, who would we be if we said that religion [I]doesn't[/I] need to play a part in it? A bunch of dirty commie socialist gays. That's what.[/QUOTE] god bless america :*)

[QUOTE=RichyZ;33050275]may jesus protect our troops and may the lord send a j-dam to those sandniggers now, where's my 12 guage, i gotta go shoot me some varmint![/QUOTE] You don't use 12 gauge on varmint.

[QUOTE=Homez;33050479]You don't use 12 gauge on varmint.[/QUOTE] 12 gauge frag rounds are the [I]only[/I] thing I use on varmints.

[QUOTE=GunFox;33049939]"Under god" was added as an intentional stab at atheism. This is establishment of a state religion, plain and simple, and intentional discrimination against a significant portion of the population. We should stop disgracing our fucking pledge by including a line that directly counters our mission statement. Fucking ridiculous.[/QUOTE] I think you're taking two words a bit too seriously. Yes, they're completely unneeded, and an obvious stab atheism. And they do go against the reason why this country was founded. But it definitely isn't an establishment of a state religion, and I'm pretty damn sure that "mission statement" is extremely out of place here.

[QUOTE=GunFox;33050499]12 gauge frag rounds are the [I]only[/I] thing I use on varmints.[/QUOTE] and by varmints you mean minorities correct?

[QUOTE=Killerjc;33053072]and by varmints you mean minorities correct?[/QUOTE] only if they're loitering

[QUOTE=The First 11'er;33019159]No, I'm just saying that it was added by Congress for a reason. Whether it was good or bad, it was still a reason.[/QUOTE] Cool. Now let's remove it for a reason.

[QUOTE=Fatman55;33018631]I don't get [B]why[/B] it's so important to remove that. It's hardly tying religion and government together at all.[/QUOTE] Because some people can't come to terms with the fact that not everyone shares their god-delusion thumping atheist beliefs that make them 'superc00l and uniqu3." And some people seriously have nothing better to do than bitch and moan all the fucking time.

[QUOTE=Strongbad;33054610]Because some people can't come to terms with the fact that not everyone shares their god-delusion thumping atheist beliefs that make them 'superc00l and uniqu3." And some people seriously have nothing better to do than bitch and moan all the fucking time.[/QUOTE] Soccer-moms. Getting offended and causing an uproar about the smallest meaningless things.

[QUOTE=GunFox;33049939]"Under god" was added as an intentional stab at atheism. This is establishment of a state religion, plain and simple, and intentional discrimination against a significant portion of the population. We should stop disgracing our fucking pledge by including a line that directly counters our mission statement. Fucking ridiculous.[/QUOTE] What is our 'mission statement?' I thought it was to provide a place for anyone to live free of repression, be it religious, ethical or moral. Believe it or not, the reason America has such a statement is due to it's roots in religion. In any case, it's only intended as a 'jab at atheism' if you're really so sensitive and thin-skinned that the slightest mention of religion in an official document constitutes(see what I did there?) a direct insult against atheism(which didn't really exist in America when the pledge of allegiance was written on the scale it does today, so how could it be intended as a 'jab at atheism?') and against you personally.

[QUOTE=Strongbad;33054667]I thought it was to provide a place for anyone to live free of repression, be it religious, ethical or moral.[/QUOTE] Just so you know, you mean oppression.

How is decrying the movement to remove under God any better than the movement itself? You're using your time bashing people you don't know on the internet whilst they're participating in the democratic process.

[QUOTE=Megafanx13;33046898]No, I meant they only appeared on coins until 1957, at which point paper currency began using it as well. Perhaps you didn't understand the sentence structure, but I wasn't implying that coins lacked the phrase.[/QUOTE] It still has appeared on Currency since the 1860s, who gives a fuck it was only added on paper in the 1950s, it was coins that actually were worth their face value in precious metal [editline]31st October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=GunFox;33049939]"Under god" was added as an intentional stab at atheism. This is establishment of a state religion, plain and simple, and intentional discrimination against a significant portion of the population.[/QUOTE] Except the phase 'one nation, under god' is a bit vague qualify as a establishment of state religion due to the fact 'god' isn't exclusive to any one religion, and it states America is "under god" in a fashion that can be legally debated to be figurative and not literal which would be needed to equal a establishment And it can be further argued 'under god' is simply a modification of the traditional and now legal motto of the United States which is 'in god we trust' therefore extending the traditional defense to it [editline]31st October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;33050009]BUT ITS [I]TRADITION![/I] WE [I]CAN'T[/I] DO THAT! Besides, religion is so [I]obviously[/I] supposed to be a part of the government. I mean, who would we be if we said that religion [I]doesn't[/I] need to play a part in it? A bunch of dirty commie socialist gays. That's what.[/QUOTE] The constitution only says the federal congress can't pass laws regarding religion, and no public service shall be put to a religious test, it says jackshit about the judiciary or executive, or even that the legislative can't take part in religion as long it doesn't create laws that promote that religion or demote other religions [editline]31st October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Strongbad;33054667]What is our 'mission statement?' I thought it was to provide a place for anyone to live free of repression, be it religious, ethical or moral. Believe it or not, the reason America has such a statement is due to it's roots in religion. In any case, it's only intended as a 'jab at atheism' if you're really so sensitive and thin-skinned that the slightest mention of religion in an official document constitutes(see what I did there?) a direct insult against atheism(which didn't really exist in America when the pledge of allegiance was written on the scale it does today, so how could it be intended as a 'jab at atheism?') and against you personally.[/QUOTE] Atheism has existed for centuries, and under god was added to the pledge in response to the Soviet Union having declared their state religion to be atheism after spending decades razing churches

I miss the days when people at grocery stores could say "Merry Christmas" without every non-Christian jumping down the throats of the whole fucking country.

[QUOTE=Broseph_;33054935]It still has appeared on Currency since the 1860s, who gives a fuck it was only added on paper in the 1950s, it was coins that actually were worth their face value in precious metal [/quote] Some coins. [quote]Except the phase 'one nation, under god' is a bit vague qualify as a establishment of state religion due to the fact 'god' isn't exclusive to any one religion, and it states America is "under god" in a fashion that can be legally debated to be figurative and not literal which would be needed to equal a establishment And it can be further argued 'under god' is simply a modification of the traditional and now legal motto of the United States which is 'in god we trust' therefore extending the traditional defense to it [/quote] Except its not. It states "God", which reefers specifically to, at the most specific, the Christian god, at the least specific, the Abrahamic god. It ignores buddhism, which at least half has no god and the other half recognizes the Buddha as [i]a god[/i], as well as Hinduism, which has many gods, but no one 'God'. And an establishment is the existence, not a single religious entity. [quote] The constitution only says the federal congress can't pass laws regarding religion, and no public service shall be put to a religious test, it says jackshit about the judiciary or executive, or even that the legislative can't take part in religion as long it doesn't create laws that promote that religion or demote other religions [/quote] True true, but then we ignore the entire separation of church and state precedent that the judiciary has upkept and that has been around since the founding of this nation. [quote] Atheism has existed for centuries, and under god was added to the pledge in response to the Soviet Union having declared their state religion to be atheism after spending decades razing churches[/QUOTE] Which is just as much a reason to get rid of it now. Do you see any Soviets anywhere? Are we n a cold war with a godless state again (yet)? Was there really any reason besides politics to declare the US a religious nation.

[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];33055524']Some coins.[/quote] Oh so it being used on only [I]some[/I] coins for the past 150 years some how devalues the traditional value of it, good to know, let alone the fucking fact it was copied from the United States National goddamn Anthem which was written with that in it 200 fucking years ago [QUOTE='[Seed Eater];33055524']Except its not. It states "God", which reefers specifically to, at the most specific, the Christian god, at the least specific, the Abrahamic god.[/quote] Yet what you are doing here is the very definition of Denying the antecedent, you can't prove it refers to a specific god to your own admission, since Christianity unlike Judaism or Islam, the two other Abrahamic religions, doesn't give a specific name to god, which is why you have to state "Abrahamic God" or "Christian God", further proving the point you can't connect a single religion to the use of the word - 'god' - since - 'god' - in it self is a simple noun, which is why Yahweh and Allah are also referred to as 'god' by jews and muslims respectively, despite having proper names, and why the deities in Roman and Greek mythology are referred to as 'gods'. [QUOTE='[Seed Eater];33055524']It ignores buddhism, which at least half has no god and the other half recognizes the Buddha as [i]a god[/i], as well as Hinduism, which has many gods, but no one 'God'. And an establishment is the existence, not a single religious entity.[/quote] Yes, [I]a god[/I], as for Hinduism, it has multiple gods yes, but the pledge doesn't define what god it is referring to meaning it could be referring to any one of the hundreds of Hindu gods [QUOTE='[Seed Eater];33055524']True true, but then we ignore the entire separation of church and state precedent that the judiciary has upkept and that has been around since the founding of this nation.[/quote] That brings up a good question, how the fuck does the judiciary have the power to use this precedent against states when the very part of the constitution they cite for their rulings clearly limits it to the federal legislative in plain english? [QUOTE='[Seed Eater];33055524']Which is just as much a reason to get rid of it now. Do you see any Soviets anywhere? Are we n a cold war with a godless state again (yet)? Was there really any reason besides politics to declare the US a religious nation.[/QUOTE] A better question is why and what is the point when god is referenced to in both the National Anthem and National Motto? It seems like a pointless feel-good measure, since due to the age of the national anthem, and the motto being lifted straight from the national anthem, both are never going to be repealed on the grounds that due to the 2 centuries of use of the phrase without issue it has passed into tradition losing it's link to any religion it may have had

[QUOTE=Broseph_;33054935]Atheism has existed for centuries, and under god was added to the pledge in response to the Soviet Union having declared their state religion to be atheism after spending decades razing churches[/QUOTE] No, atheism isn't a religion. A good way to put it is that atheism is as much of a religion as "off" is a tv channel. Atheism hasn't "existed for centuries", it is a term to describe the absence of belief in the existence of gods. For example everyone here is probably atheist in regards to the ancient Greek and Egyptian gods. You wouldn't consider your religion to be "anti Zeus" or "anti Horus", you'd just be a person who doesn't believe in those gods. And as far as this topic is concerned, I find the response as a pathetic dodge to appease the religious people in this country. This country was founded on secular ideas, and those fairy tales have no place in our government. "These phrases represent the important role religion plays in American public life" - is a pathetic dance around the issue. That would again, be like saying that putting "One nation, under Thor" is just there to represent the role religion plays in American public life. They've singled out a particular religious figure (the christian god), attempted to tie it into our government, and now are trying to play word games to avoid taking a stand on an issue that will offend people. Really, their response just translates to "we'll we're too afraid to offend the religious people so we'll just skirt around the issue and try to appease everyone"

I think we should change it to "One nation, under the Flying Spaghetti Monster", just for shits.

[QUOTE=Noble;33056039]No, atheism isn't a religion. A good way to put it is that atheism is as much of a religion as "off" is a tv channel.[/QUOTE] Except it is due to due it being as much of a belief system, since it is a held belief that god does not exist, just as Scientology is as much a religion due to its members believing Xenu is their alien overlord or some shit [QUOTE=Noble;33056039]Atheism hasn't "existed for centuries", it is a term to describe the absence of belief in the existence of gods. For example everyone here is probably atheist in regards to the ancient Greek and Egyptian gods.[/QUOTE] Oh I'm fucking sorry I used the wrong measurement of time to refer to how old the concept of atheism is which I fucking know goes back to antiquity, my fucking bad [QUOTE=Noble;33056039]You wouldn't consider your religion to be "anti Zeus" or "anti Horus", you'd just be a person who doesn't believe in those gods.[/QUOTE] You are counterdicting your self, how can you start this off as 'your religion' when referring to atheism just after you you self said atheism is not a religion

[QUOTE=Noble;33056039]No, atheism isn't a religion. A good way to put it is that atheism is as much of a religion as "off" is a tv channel. Atheism hasn't "existed for centuries", it is a term to describe the absence of belief in the existence of gods. For example everyone here is probably atheist in regards to the ancient Greek and Egyptian gods. You wouldn't consider your religion to be "anti Zeus" or "anti Horus", you'd just be a person who doesn't believe in those gods. And as far as this topic is concerned, I find the response as a pathetic dodge to appease the religious people in this country. This country was founded on secular ideas, and those fairy tales have no place in our government. "These phrases represent the important role religion plays in American public life" - is a pathetic dance around the issue. That would again, be like saying that putting "One nation, under Thor" is just there to represent the role religion plays in American public life. They've singled out a particular religious figure (the christian god), attempted to tie it into our government, and now are trying to play word games to avoid taking a stand on an issue that will offend people. Really, their response just translates to "we'll we're too afraid to offend the religious people so we'll just skirt around the issue and try to appease everyone"[/QUOTE] uh-huh. It's as much as to avoid offending religion as it is to avoid offending atheism, because atheists are just as ready as theists to bitch themselves hoarse because they don't like something. In addition to the fact that your argument is flimsy as a rope made of used chewing gum, you fail to realize that up til the seventeenth century, religion was an integral part of life for people. Rome was an empire founded off of religion. Ghengis Khan called himself the "scourge of God." The fact of the matter is, brushing religion off as irrelevant is both ignorant and stupid. Atheism is a recent concept on the scale most people think of it today.

[QUOTE=Broseph_;33056031]Oh so it being used on only [I]some[/I] coins for the past 150 years some how devalues the traditional value of it, good to know, let alone the fucking fact it was copied from the United States National goddamn Anthem which was written with that in it 200 fucking years ago [/quote] Just pointing it out. [quote]Yet what you are doing here is the very definition of Denying the antecedent, you can't prove it refers to a specific god to your own admission, since Christianity unlike Judaism or Islam, the two other Abrahamic religions, doesn't give a specific name to god, which is why you have to state "Abrahamic God" or "Christian God", further proving the point you can't connect a single religion to the use of the word - 'god' - since - 'god' - in it self is a simple noun, which is why Yahweh and Allah are also referred to as 'god' by jews and muslims respectively, despite having proper names, and why the deities in Roman and Greek mythology are referred to as 'gods'.[/quote] God vs god, two completely different things. And for the record, yes, we do have a specific name for god. The Jews had a name for god that was never written down and was lost when the First Temple was destroyed, as well as others, such as (as previously said)YHWH or Yahweh, also translated as Jehovah, El and Elohim, and Ehyeh-Asher-Ehyeh, which are all in the bible and all accepted as names of god in Christianity. However, we simply use the Christianized 'God' and 'LORD' to refer to the very same god- which is in both Islam and Judaism. We have the same god, who we specifically refer to as God, with a capital G, and that is specifically written on our motto and in our anthem, can can be considered to be on our currency. In God we trust. We could easily just use "In Faith We Trust", or something similar, but we specify the use of the word GOD, which is a name, one specific to the Christian religion. Arguing that it means gods in general or the god of any religion is arguing that we could say "In America We Trust" or the actually used "God bless America" and be referring to the Americas a s a whole, or Central America, or South America. The thing is even dumber when we use America when the continents are spelled as, I don't know, Amerika. "We spell it America but we obviously mean Amerika and America". [quote]Yes, [I]a god[/I], as for Hinduism, it has multiple gods yes, but the pledge doesn't define what god it is referring to meaning it could be referring to any one of the hundreds of Hindu gods[/quote] See above. [quote]That brings up a good question, how the fuck does the judiciary have the power to use this precedent against states when the very part of the constitution they cite for their rulings clearly limits it to the federal legislative in plain english?[/quote] Judicial Review. Look it up, or retake a middle school government class. [quote]A better question is why and what is the point when god is referenced to in both the National Anthem and National Motto? It seems like a pointless feel-good measure, since due to the age of the national anthem, and the motto being lifted straight from the national anthem, both are never going to be repealed on the grounds that due to the 2 centuries of use of the phrase without issue it has passed into tradition losing it's link to any religion it may have had[/QUOTE] Tradition doesn't hold a candle to equality. Religion as a motto and preference of government seems obviously to ignore separation of church and state, and it specifically excludes 10% of our population, and even more if you accept that God refers to the Abrahamic or Christian god. Progress is progress because we progress, holding on to our old traditions that exclude, discriminate, or persecute wrongfully are the very things we need to change to fit the modern world.

just don't say it lmao

[QUOTE=Broseph_;33056205]Except it is due to due it being as much of a belief system, since it is a held belief that god does not exist, just as Scientology is as much a religion due to its members believing Xenu is their alien overlord or some shit[/quote] Atheism is as much of a religion as theism is. Which it isn't. It's a religious belief. [quote]You are counterdicting your self, how can you start this off as 'your religion' when referring to atheism just after you you self said atheism is not a religion[/QUOTE] I like how you're arguing semantics and did nothing to actually counter his point.