More problems from the pathetic
FREEHOLD, N.J. — A family is suing the Matawan-Aberdeen Regional School District and its superintendent, seeking to have the phrase "under God" removed from the Pledge of Allegiance that students recite every day.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/natio...e/7996207/
It's easy enough not to say if you don't want to.
(04-22-2014 08:29 AM)Paul M Wrote: [ -> ]It's easy enough not to say if you don't want to.
But then everyone else won't bend around their special little snow flake..
Liberals sure do have a lot of free time on their hands.
(04-22-2014 08:45 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote: [ -> ] (04-22-2014 08:29 AM)Paul M Wrote: [ -> ]It's easy enough not to say if you don't want to.
But then everyone else won't bend around their special little snow flake…
What BIE said.
For all their prattle about "tolerance", the bulk of modern liberalism isn't about
allowing dissidents or minorities to do things that the majority doesn't like. It's about
compelling and
forbidding the majority to do things, according to the Left's values.
If this pisses them off then just wait and see what that family does when sharia law takes hold in this country.
(04-22-2014 09:02 AM)Native Georgian Wrote: [ -> ]For all their prattle about "tolerance", the bulk of modern liberalism isn't about allowing dissidents or minorities to do things that the majority doesn't like. It's about compelling and forbidding the majority to do things, according to the Left's values.
But, is not adding "under god" to the pledge compelling the minority to do things (and, keep in mind that the pledge existed without the "under god" for years phrase until the cold war came along).
(04-22-2014 06:41 PM)smn1256 Wrote: [ -> ]If this pisses them off then just wait and see what that family does when sharia law takes hold in this country.
Fighting against trivial, inconsequential things now will actually do more to stave off sharia than systematic, relentless, attempts to narrow or trivialize the separation of church and state.
(04-22-2014 06:41 PM)smn1256 Wrote: [ -> ]If this pisses them off then just wait and see what that family does when sharia law takes hold in this country.
I was going to post my opinion on this matter but your post made me laugh.
Well played.
(04-23-2014 01:19 PM)I45owl Wrote: [ -> ] (04-22-2014 09:02 AM)Native Georgian Wrote: [ -> ]For all their prattle about "tolerance", the bulk of modern liberalism isn't about allowing dissidents or minorities to do things that the majority doesn't like. It's about compelling and forbidding the majority to do things, according to the Left's values.
But, is not adding "under god" to the pledge compelling the minority to do things (and, keep in mind that the pledge existed without the "under god" for years phrase until the cold war came along).
Only if they are compelled to say or do something against their conscience. Is that the case here?
(04-23-2014 01:19 PM)I45owl Wrote: [ -> ] (04-22-2014 09:02 AM)Native Georgian Wrote: [ -> ]For all their prattle about "tolerance", the bulk of modern liberalism isn't about allowing dissidents or minorities to do things that the majority doesn't like. It's about compelling and forbidding the majority to do things, according to the Left's values.
But, is not adding "under god" to the pledge compelling the minority to do things (and, keep in mind that the pledge existed without the "under god" for years phrase until the cold war came along).
(04-22-2014 06:41 PM)smn1256 Wrote: [ -> ]If this pisses them off then just wait and see what that family does when sharia law takes hold in this country.
Fighting against trivial, inconsequential things now will actually do more to stave off sharia than systematic, relentless, attempts to narrow or trivialize the separation of church and state.
Think about how pathetic and meaningless it is to sue over a mention of God in our pledge. You cannot actually think this is worthwhile and noble cause. Good Lord.
(04-23-2014 01:57 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote: [ -> ] (04-23-2014 01:19 PM)I45owl Wrote: [ -> ] (04-22-2014 09:02 AM)Native Georgian Wrote: [ -> ]For all their prattle about "tolerance", the bulk of modern liberalism isn't about allowing dissidents or minorities to do things that the majority doesn't like. It's about compelling and forbidding the majority to do things, according to the Left's values.
But, is not adding "under god" to the pledge compelling the minority to do things (and, keep in mind that the pledge existed without the "under god" for years phrase until the cold war came along).
(04-22-2014 06:41 PM)smn1256 Wrote: [ -> ]If this pisses them off then just wait and see what that family does when sharia law takes hold in this country.
Fighting against trivial, inconsequential things now will actually do more to stave off sharia than systematic, relentless, attempts to narrow or trivialize the separation of church and state.
Think about how pathetic and meaningless it is to sue over a mention of God in our pledge. You cannot actually think this is worthwhile and noble cause. Good Lord.
If we compromise separation of church and state for Christians, what'll happen if Islam starts having more influence in the US?
These atheists would be your best friend if Islam was a threat in this country.
Is this really the most important thing someone's life? Just don't recite the fcking thing. Problem solved.
Is the pledge binding?
If not, then what difference does it make?