Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Yay for our idiocracy!

  1. Nov 15, 2005 #1
    http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/1673.htm

    Remember, students aren't forced to say it. It's their choice if they want to say it or not.

    Yay for removing a possible choice for students!

    Now if ONLY they'd ban ALL religions equally, and we'd be set.

    </portionsofsarcasm>
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Nov 15, 2005 #2

    SOS2008

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Since I don't believe God has borders, maybe it could be changed to "One World Under God?"
     
  4. Nov 15, 2005 #3

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    And since im a self-centered penguin, maybe it could be changed to "One Penguin, Under God" :biggrin: :biggrin:
     
  5. Nov 15, 2005 #4

    loseyourname

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    Well, we're not pledging allegiance to the world.

    Anyway, some of this article is more than a little bothersome:

    I was under the impression that a ruling judge is not supposed to use slippery-slope arguments. Your job is to uphold the constitution, your honor, whether you like the social consequences of doing so or not.

    That's great, because interfering with the judiciary is so much more important than actually legislating, or what is supposed to be their job.

    Even better. So apparently the supreme court is supposed to rule according to what Americans believe, and not according to what the constitution tells them. It's a good thing that these men with such vast knowledge of constitutional law - apparently more than the justices themselves - are the ones we have confirming judges.

    I guess Falwell supported the Dred Scott and Plessy v. Ferguson decisions.
     
  6. Nov 15, 2005 #5

    BobG

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    I predict Newdow's case will lose in the US Supreme Court. The Court won't actually address the Pledge of Allegiance - instead they'll rule that Newdow doesn't have legal standing to bring a case against the school since he is divorced and his wife has legal custody of the child that is confronted with the daily Pledge of Allegiance.

    :uhh: This is kind of an old article to be debating, isn't it?

    Court Dismisses Court Case
     
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2005
  7. Nov 15, 2005 #6

    SOS2008

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Of course not, but the concept that God belongs to any one nation is absurd. Such notions, and religion in general is at the basis of most conflict in the world.
    It is indeed, and probably why most members are not participating in this thread.
     
  8. Nov 15, 2005 #7
    I agree wholeheartedly, but that won't happen for quite some time. Unfortunately, your article got me a bit excited for no reason. I thought it was banned recently. That would've been a step in the right direction.
     
  9. Nov 15, 2005 #8
    Untrue.

    I've been yelled at by several teachers, wasting quite a bit of class time, for refusing to say the pledge in a few different classes. Beyond that, I've been physically grabbed by my classmates in an attempt to get me to put my hand on my heart, and have been threatened to be thrown out the window by one of my more patriotic peers, all for simply not pledging.

    After all that, I got into the habbit of at least standing up so as not to stand out blaringly against the rest of my classmates. However, just 2 or 3 weeks ago in my school library, I was castigated by the librarian for just sitting down too early during the pledge. She threatened to kick me out of "her" library next time I didn't stand for the appropriate amount of time during the pledge.
     
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2005
  10. Nov 15, 2005 #9
    Wow. Seems that a call to the ACLU is in order!

    Thanks WofO2 for standing up for your beliefs! Quite refreshing.
     
  11. Nov 15, 2005 #10
    "One Universe Under God"?:wink:
     
  12. Nov 15, 2005 #11
    One universe of which God might be a part?
     
  13. Nov 15, 2005 #12

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Yah thats it, it's going to eventually become

    "One nation, whether or not you support it as long as you are proud of your non-American heritage, under a possible God although we are not allowed to tell you whether or not to believe in one, indivisible......etc etc"
     
  14. Nov 15, 2005 #13
    I'd like it alot better if it were just shortened to this:

    "I pledge allegience to liberty and justice for all."
     
  15. Nov 15, 2005 #14
    LOL I could go for either of the above two options before the one that we currently have....
     
  16. Nov 15, 2005 #15

    loseyourname

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    I think you have it backward. The idea is that the nation exists 'under God,' and is thus presumably beholden to him in some way, not the other way around. Of course, if you believe in God, then you believe that every nation exists under him, as part of his kingdom, so the phrase is a little extraneous. The real point of putting it in was to iterate the fact that our nation is a nation that acknowledges its debt to God, as opposed to the atheist Soviet Union.
     
  17. Nov 16, 2005 #16

    Congratulations on having your freedom of speech/choice imposed upon! =D

    Anyway, I had no idea that the article was old, I googled an article about it and posted it because I had seen it in my school newspaper.
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2005
  18. Nov 16, 2005 #17

    SOS2008

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I'm not fooled by the way it is worded. In God We Trust is similar from this perspective. As you state, Christians had these words added to the pledge primarily to rebuff the godless communists (used against an evil enemy, i.e., unbelievers). Most religions believe their religion to be the only true religion, and many Christians in this country believe God favors our nation (oh yes they do). And by combining God to nationalism they create a wedge for inevitable conflict. Has it not resulted in conflict? Of course it has.
     
  19. Nov 16, 2005 #18
    Here is the Newdow's next lawsuit that is a current event.
    http://www.wltx.com/news/news19.aspx?storyid=32301
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Yay for our idiocracy!
  1. Our President (Replies: 43)

  2. A tribute to our dead. (Replies: 12)

Loading...