As far as I'm concerned, "In God We Trust" should not be on our currency, as it too constitutes an establishment of our government's views on religion. For those who say it's the minority controlling the majority, let me remind you that no one is using tax dollars to tell the monotheistic majority of this country that their beliefs are wrong. Everyone is free to believe in and to worshop God (or not) as they please. In other words, "Freedom Of" is still in effect for monotheists, even with this ruling.

On the other hand, non-monotheists continue to be told by their government on a daily basis that their views are wrong. Can anyone really say that this is acceptable? Try to think of it from the other person's perspective and practice the golden rule.

And another thing. The fact that the Pledge is not mandatory might make the government less coercive in spreading its religious doctrine, but it does not stop the words "under God" from unconstitutionally establishing a government-endorsed religious view. In other words, the government is still saying what it believes about God (a no-no), even if it is not requiring children to say that they believe the same thing. Besides, even though kids are not legally required to say the Pledge, as a practical matter it would be difficult for them not to, for two reasons.

First, consider that our elected officials -- the president, his representatives, senators of both parties, and others -- have been publicly quite vicious in response to the ruling, using words like "stupid", "just nuts", "ridiculous", and so on to describe the plaintiff, the judge, and the ruling. Sen. Byrd of West Virginia went on to call the judge an "atheist lawyer" and essentially said that that judge could consider himself blacklisted and would never be promoted by the Senate. Does anyone really think that a student could excuse themselves from the Pledge and not catch grief from other students or maybe even the teacher or principal? It's wrong to make a child choose between dishonestly taking an oath they don't believe and facing the harsh social and administrative sanctions that come with being honest.

Second, just because students have the legal right to excuse themselves from saying the Pledge doesn't mean they are aware of that right. As a student, I was never informed of that right. In fact, I remember being told by a teacher one time that I had to say the Pledge.

The kids HAVE to go to school. How would anyone like it if their child were required by law to go listen to a bunch of atheists recite every single morning "god does not exist?" Would it make it any more okay with you that your own child didn't have to say it if she didn't want to?

Part of freedom of religion IS freedom from religion. Freedom from being told by the government that a certain religion is correct. I don't care how many private individuals, nonprofit or commercial organizations tell me about their religion. But the government and its institutions (i.e. schools) have NO RIGHT to force me to go somewhere and then tell me what to think about God. Much less do they have the right to force my (hypothetical) child, a minor who is unable to give consent, to do the same.

The fact that the child didn't mind saying it is totally beside the point. Would the child mind if she went to school and was fed ice cream and candy every morning? Parents decide what is best for their children. It is called raising them. It is the job of the parents, not the schools.

Personally I don't pledge allegiance and neither will my children and it has nothing to do with "under God." I love my country but I am an individual and I will make up my mind as situations come up as to whether I agree with my government's stance on them. We are governed by men and women, not angels, and they have been wrong in the past and will be wrong in the future, and I reserve the right to oppose them. I will teach my children to love this country and never to hurt it, but I won't teach my children that this country is infallible or that it is superior to other countries - which, to me, is the idea that the pledge of allegiance sounds like it is trying to get across. Blind allegiance to flags and nations, and disrespect for the people of other nations, has produced far more evil than good in the world.

I am proud to be an American. I am thankful for what God has allowed me to be. I am thankful for the men and women who have fought for our country to give us the freedom we have come to take so freely and too many times for granted.
If it wasn't for God you and I would not be here today. Lee Greenwood says it for me.. May you get to know God and His Will for your life...
Then you will have a greater love for this country and for your fellowman and will be willing to Stand for God and country.

This may help. What do you believe? The truth or a lie.

Here is a link that might be useful: http://users.1st.net/index30.htm

The following is a poem,"The Narrow Way", by Anne Bronte. I hope you will read it with earnest and meditate upon it and maybe it will inspire you to greater heights. May God Bless you. May God continue to Bless America. You may have a little trouble finding the specific poem but follow http://ww.acacia.pair.com/Acacia.vignettes/ Click on Christian poetry. There are many other good items at this site. May we all have a closer walk with the Lord.

Here is a link that might be useful: http://www.acacia.pair.com/Acacia.vignettes/The.Narrow.Way.html

We keep losing sight of the fact that, regardless of what citizens believe in as their faith, this country gained its independence due in large part to their desire for a freedom of worship. Were it not for their desire to have that freedom, we would not be independent today. The freedom to believe in a religion, AND the freedom to be an athiest, is present because of the founding fathers' belief in religion. Which is one reason God pops up in many places.

The 'in God we trust' was added to our currency at the height of the Civil War, when the country was being torn apart. Many citizens requested it be added, and the memo to Congress listed the reasoning as this: They felt at the time that it was very possible that the country would tear itself apart, and cease to exist. They wanted future civilizations who unearthed evidence of our society not to think we were 'heathens' (a popular word back in the 1860's I guess).

The words being added to the pledge were part of our government's misguided McCarthy-ism days. I am not totally attached to the words remaining in the pledge.

I just think that we can't deny religion's place in this country's founding, and I am very thankful that the founding fathers succeeded in their quest for indepenence.

I also think that the people in this thread at least have more honest motives to discuss the Pledge than the father who filed the lawsuit for no other reason but to make a name for himself. There is nothing in his discussions in the press that comes close to some of the honest, thought-provoking comments in this thread.

From the battle hymn thread, I am not sure I agree with the founding fathers having solely "Christian" principles as motives, solely, as in my research I saw the term "Judeo-Christian." used often in discussing the 1st amendment, and as their goal was to ensure that church and state had a wall between them, as opposed to England in those days, in which they were too intertwined, leading to religious persecution.

But I did find this interesting excerpt from a case in the Supreme Court. If one used the tests below, it could be argued that the CA man can't claim 1st amendment violation, because Atheism doesn't pass the litmus test used below, and as such, is not protected under the 1st amendment:
From this link
" What is a Religion?
If it is unconstitutional to establish a religion, then it might sometimes be important to determine whether something is a "religion" for Establishment Clause purposes. For example, Malnak v Yogi (3rd Cir.) considered whether SCI/TM (scientific creative intelligence/transcendental meditation), offered as an elective course in New Jersey public schools, was a religion. If so, offering such a course--even on an elective basis--might be unconstitutional. Those challenging the course produced evidence that instructors told students that "creative intelligence is the basis of all growth" and that getting in touch with this intelligence through mantras is the way to "oneness with the underlying reality of the universe." They also pointed out that students received personal mantras in puja ceremonies that include chanting and ritual. On the other hand, supporters of the course showed that SCI/TM put forward no absolute moral code, had no organized clergy or observed holidays, and had no ceremonies for passages such as marriage and funerals. Is SCI/TM a religion? Judge Adams of the Third Circuit applied these three criteria before answering the question in the affirmative:
1. A religion deals with issues of ultimate concern; with what makes life worth living; with basic attitudes toward fundamental problems of human existence.
2. A religion presents a comprehensive set of ideas--usually as "truth," not just theory.
3. A religion generally has surface signs (such as clergy, observed holidays, and ritual) that can be analogized to well-recognized religions.

In 2001, a federal appeals court ruled against Fundamentalist parents who had contended that a public school had established the religion of "Earth worship," citing such practices as having the students give "gifts" to the planet during an Earth Day program. Does this sound like a religion to you?

Questions
1. Social critic Charles Krauthamer suggests that American Civil Religion consists of three major tenets: (1) belief in a Just Providence (whether "God" or not), (2) the sanctity of the social contract (our rights and obligations as citizens), and (3) tolerance of dissent. In his view, any practice that promotes any of these three tenets (including, for example, school time for silent meditation) should be constitutional. Do you agree?
2. If it were to be satisfactorily demonstrated that a majority of those voting to propose and ratify the First Amendment had a narrow view of the application of the Establishment Clause, should the Court reverse course and overrule many of its established precedents in this area?
3. What do you think about the suggestion made by Professor Laurence Tribe and others that "religion" should be given two interpretations--a narrow one for Establishment Clause purposes and a broad one for Free Exercise Clause purposes?"

Arkensasgardenboy,

I am glad you are strong in your faith, and I respect your right to worship as you please. If I were in the majority and you were in the minority, I would never try to use my position and the government's authority to force my beliefs on your children or grandchildren. I am sorry that you don't accord the same respect and tolerance to those who worship differently from you. Jesus would never have sought to use the government to forcibly promote a religious agenda, and I urge you to follow His model. If He were alive today, He would lead by example and leave the religious indoctrination to the Taliban and others who fear free choice in religious matters.

For what it's worth, I too am proud to be an American, and I too am profoundly grateful to the men and women who have served our country. I will say, though, that I am ashamed of how our elected leaders and populace have responded to the Pledge issue. Like Anita9, I do not believe that our leaders will always act properly, and I reserve the right to judge their actions for myself. I will teach my children to do the same.

Frogman,
My Savior is Alive today. His name is Jesus. There is the truth in the Battle Hymn of the Republic. You, as the others have, may email me. I would be glad to discuss my faith and why I believe it.
I believe it pays to serve Jesus in this life and the life to come. Why? Domestic Tranquility. Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and the assurance of a eternal heavenly home in true peace and tranquility.
Jesus is alive today. Free free to email. The choice is ours today while we are living. I have chosen to follow Jesus. He is inviting you. I am inviting you to email me.

Arkensasgardenboy,

Thanks for the invitation, but I have no particular desire to discuss your faith. I certainly don't want the government to force it on my kids.

I know a little bit about Christianity. It's a fine faith when practiced in the model of the man it is named after. Unfortunately, Christians seem no more likely than the general population to follow this model. The world would be a better place if we would all learn from Jesus' example.

AKBoy,
I am glad you have your faith in Christianity, as I am also Christian. But the founding fathers did not have in mind converting non-believers to Christianity when they fought for independence. They instead fought for civil and religious liberty, no matter the religion. They fought to ensure a government separated from the church.

I don't think a discussion on salvation, and a discussion on religions freedom, 1st amendment rights and separation of church and state belong in the same conversation.

Again, they were interested in religious liberty, not converting all who come to this country to one religion.

America is great because of the freedom we offer to those who live here, to choose their own path. We should never take our freedom of choice for granted, because there are many places in the world that this freedom does not exist.

Charles Carroll was the last surviving signer of the Declaration of Independence. He worked for the liberties in the Declaration and wrote letters to the Maryland Gazette in which he condemned those who would for any reason "deprive an individual of freedom of thought, religion or politics". According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, "His grandfather, Charles Carroll, emigrated from England to Maryland because of the persecution of Catholics, 1 October 1688." At that time, in England, AND in the colonies, Catholics were not even allowed to hold office.
According to this document, almost all of the signers were protestant Christians, with Mr. Carroll being the only Catholic signer.

He said, in 1826,
"I do hereby recommend to the present and future generations the principles of that important document as the best early inheritance their ancestors could bequeath to them, and pray that the civil and religious liveries they have secured to my country may be perpetuated to the remotest posterity and extended to the whole family of man".

Again, the 1st amendment was written to ensure that no one religion would be established by the government: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

You may notice how extreme some were in their beliefs from the beginning of history. I am reminded concerning Cain and Abel. Envy, strife, jealousy, murders, malice are evil deeds of the flesh.
The early Christians had problems such as we have today. The lusts of the flesh were to be put off and the new man was to be lived. We as Christians are to be like Him. Our life must be controlled by love, just as Christ loved us and gave His life for us as a sweet-smelling offering and sacrifice that pleases God..
I would encourage you to read and study the books of the New Testament. ( Especially Corinthians, Galatians, and Ephesians to start with.) I have a great desire to know more about God and what pleases Him. It comes froms His Word and following His teachings. I am just inviting over some study partners. God loves you and I love you. Faith comes hearing the message, and the message comes through the Word of God. Being a Christian is continuous. This is one reason I believe we see so much in our history of our constitution, declaration of independence, and laws of our country. Many of our founders were not Christians in name but in deed. Their works did follow them and are still in existence today.

The following link may be of benefit.

Here is a link that might be useful: http://www.people.virginia.edu/~cfi3a/mas.html

Ok....I've missed a lot, huh??? :)
I want to be in your study group Gardenboy, ok??
I have no particular stance on this, except to say that I never considered the Pledge to be offensive to anyone who claims to be American, and we ARE "One Nation, Under God." Nothing wrong with the truth, under which God is personal, and I don't believe that something as sacred as the Pledge should be worded differently to suit the few.
Tough thread here!!:)
Gardenboy, I was enjoying the poems from your link above, the one called "The Professor" grabbed me in and I was LOST!! I would love to read so much more of that poetry, thank you for the link!

The following people had a message that still applies today. Go search for profiles of famous Christians of America on the internet. Just type in, "profiles of famous Christians of America."

" the truth, under which God is personal, "

Actually, I do not consider God to be personal. The Truth is that God is absolute. He is only The One God; all others are false. Which is why, as a Christian, I do NOT like the 'under God" in the pledge.

Oh and patriotic as I am, I don't consider the pledge to be "sacred."

Every knee and every tongue will confess that God is Lord in this life or the life to come. If you don't confess Jesus as Lord in this life it will be too late in the judgement. The Christian hall of fame list some who took their stand for the Lord. Who would be some current inductees into the hall of fame of Christians? God is keeping the permanent record.

Here is a link that might be useful: http://www.cantonbaptist.org/halloffame/byname.htm

I'm Canadian but I must say that I wouldn't recite the Pledge because school and church should be kept separate... BTW, I'm a non-practicing Roman Catholic and I'm 15... What about children who don't believe in God anyway? Who decided America was "under God" anyway?

Charles

The founding fathers didn't decide it was "under God" specifically. That was added later for questionable reasons. But they did agree that total freedom of religion (even freedom to choose no religion) was critical to the success of the newly formed states. It is still something that we take for granted, and could easily be lost.

I agree with Frogman. Under God IS religious & it imposes that belief on everyone. I could care less one way or the other, but I stand by the decision. I personally don't beieve in God myself.

Michie

Michie 1,
What about those of us who do believe in God and about those who established our heritage? Are we to be ruled by the heathern? Daniel and others didn't conform to the king's decree while they were in Babylonian captivity. I will stand on God's promises and proclaim them to others. The choice is your's to decide who you will serve. God or mammon. Jesus died for the sins of the world. The sin debt has already been paid. You have to accept Jesus in order to recieve the gift of salvation. Not everyone who cites the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America is a Christian but atleast they do acknowledge there is a God and even the devils know that. The Bible states that even the devils believe and tremble.
Please allow those who have helped establised this nation;whose faith was and for those who still believe in God as our Creator, Redeemer and Savior the honor,respect,freedom of expressing their faith in God. Please respect the rights of those who do believe and trust God for salvation. Remember you can have Jesus as your Saviour too. The choice is yours.
The pledge will go on as written no matter what judge or man rules otherwise. There are some of us who will not be moved. We will practice our faith and we will stand for God and uphold his Word. You are invited to be a part of our rich heritage and to go forth with Jesus in showing the light unto the world.

Arkansasgardenboy,

> What about those of us who do believe in God and about those who established our heritage? Are we to be ruled by the heathern?

Not at all. No one is saying you can't believe in God, or worship God to your heart's content. You can even say "under God" part when you say the pledge. But the government should not include those words in the official version since they define a definite, government sponsored position on a religious issue, namely the existence of God. You are not the victim here; the victim is the minority that has been compelled to swallow the government sanctioned religious doctrine for the last 50 years. Using the might of government to force religious compliance is not a Christian act.

> Not everyone who cites the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America is a Christian but atleast they do acknowledge there is a God and even the devils know that.

No, not everyone who recites the pledge acknowledges that there is a God.

> Please allow those who have helped establised this nation;whose faith was and for those who still believe in God as our Creator, Redeemer and Savior the honor,respect,freedom of expressing their faith in God. Please respect the rights of those who do believe and trust God for salvation.

Nothing in the 9th circuit's ruling dishonors, disrespects, restricts the freedom, or abridges the rights of those you mention. Rather, the status quo dishonors, disrespects, restricts the freedom, and abridges the rights of nonbelievers.

> The pledge will go on as written no matter what judge or man rules otherwise. There are some of us who will not be moved. We will practice our faith and we will stand for God and uphold his Word.

You are right, and you are free to speak and practice as you see fit. I would only ask that you respect others enough to let them find their own way.

We can see this nation falling apart at the seams. The stock market is falling to pieces. We are continuing to build hatred among the nations of the world. More seem to be just out right denying the existence of God. People seem to be on edge on more issues. More civil suits every in the history of this country. More corporate greed than ever before. So why are the things happening as they are? It is not because more people are living more dedicated lives for Christ but just the opposite. When a nation forgets God it is doomed for destruction. Wake up America before all is gone.

A message from God to all of us. We must do better. The following link may inspire each of us to be ready for his coming.

Here is a link that might be useful: http://www.intrex.nmet/unitedamericaalliance/Words%20of%20Wisdom7.htm

I am not Christian. I think, generally given the pathetic
state of the spirituality of most adults, that this is a
silly issue to bother with. Instead of worring about the
pledge, why not worry about how your children are treated,
taught to think, and taught to treat others? Learning about
God or forcing his lip service on the young should be done
in the proper invironment-i.e. church or at home. Religion
is forced on children in middle eastern countries. Have
you noticed the level of justice, education, and over all
state of living in these places? Europe was the same way
once. Most religions were power bases for warfare in the
past rather than testing and proving grounds for learning
concepts of spirit. Read your history of manifest destiny
before giving me any trouble about this. And I remember
that when I was a child, the pledge was just another thing
they had us do. Patriotism is not meant to be a knee-jerk
reaction. That is for countries that don't believe in
the freedom of religion, the right to question government,
the right to have doubts. And by the way, why do people
who talk about God and his world usually understand next
to nothing about that world, and spend a fair amount of
their time denying the incredible diversity of it? Part
of that diversity being a wide variety of religions? I
truely do not believe anyone worth worship cares if he
gets lip service from the innocent or what name he is
called by. I also believe that school time should be
spent on school subjects like math, language, writing,
science. Parents, if they cannot teach their children the
basics of manners, spirituality, and morals should not be
parents. Expecting your school districts to do this more
than is necessary for everyone to enjoy the learning process
is shirking your duties as parents. The pledge is not an
important issue compared to why you stand still and do
nothing when you know your neighbor beats his wife. Your
children learn from that, too.

Who is forcing what on whom? What about our want to? I want my rights, too. Who ever forced anyone to say the pledge. I say it because I like it and I will continue to do it. No judge is going to stop me....Same as prayer as well.....It is your choice to be a Christian or not. We are not robots. We make choices. I have chosen Jesus. I am choosing Jesus. I will continue to choose Jesus.

AGB,

You say you have found a spiritual path that suits you, that you will continue to pray and believe and say the pledge the way you like to say it. If that is true, then why do you want the government to compel others to say the pledge the way you do? Why not grant to them the same courtesy that you enjoy -- the right to find and practice a religion that suits you, without government compulsion?

Currently, no one is compelled to say it at all, or to include or not include certain lines.

A lot of people have fought and bled and died to ensure we have the freedom of religion (freedom to even choose to not have a religion).

I think that to argue over the pledge, which people are not forced to say if they don't want to, is an insult to the memory of all those people.

Let's count our blessings that we are still enjoying freedoms that were won with a lot of bloodshed.

Gardenboy:

No matter how it distresses you the US is NOT A CHRISTIAN NATION. It is a nation of many different people. Of Jews, Christians, Athiests, Moslems, Hindus, and many others that I cannot think of right now. The US has NEVER been a Christian nation. And I hope to G-d it never is. Not because I dislike Christians, but because I beleive that each and every person has the right to determine his own relationship with G-d (including the right not to have one).

The US Constitution guarantees that the rights of the least popular minority are the same as the rights of the most common majority. And in order to gurantee that those rights continue G-d needs to stay out of school in any organized fashion.

Mommabear

My parents were appalled to hear, "under God" included in the Pledge when my brother entered school in 1955. Not because they didn't have their own beliefs but because was a violation of the separation of church and state. Both my brother and I were taught the original words penned by Dr. John W. Baer. When a teacher, "corrected" me for my "oversight" I replied that, "under God" was added in 1954.

This does, however, raise the fascinating issue of how much school kids are actually taught about something that so many feel is so central to our country. Is it important for children to learn recitation (I think it is)? Is it important that they be taught to really listen and think about what they are reciting (I absolutely believe that!).

Actually, TREKaran, many school districts require students to say the pledge unless they are explicitly exempted by their parents (the supreme court ruled that such exceptions must be allowed). In theory, this opt out clause might justify your earlier statement. In practice, however, getting opted out is frought with difficulties. Among these are teachers and administrators who make life hard for those who seek exemptions and the fact that many students and parents don't know they have the right to opt out.

How could they not know by now?

That's a little like the people who say, "But I didn't know I couldn't bring a loaded gun on the airplane!"

You make it sound as if they either have to say it, or go thru some type of process to get opted out. It's not that complicated. All they have to do is either not say the pledge, or say their own edited version if they desire.

Any educators out there want to chime in on your personal experience with this issue in your schools?

But a 5 year old might not know. A 5 year old is told to say the pledge and he does.

Mommabear

Mommabear,
The 5 year old will do what the parents tell him/her to do or not do.

But his parents are NOT with him in school. My son went to K, they told him to stand up and say the pledge. So he did. He did NOT question whether it was right or wrong or whether I wanted him to do that.

We send our kids to school and have faith that the schools will do the right thing for our kids. So, IMO the schools have an obligation to be fair to ALL CHILDREN, especially those whose parents are not in the majority. And the right thing to do is to keep all religion OUT of public schools. If parents want religious education for their kids they need to provide it in some way.

Mommabear

Mommabear,
What about the children whose parents don't teach their children any faith? What about those parents who want to practice moral values and patriotism? What about family values and religious principles this nation has been founded upon? In all pledges and prayers I have ever been associated with in public has not been mandatory. For example, "please join me in a salute to the flag or will you stand for prayer or please bow your heads for a moment of silence".
Will you not allow those who do pray, believe in God, and practice what they believe their freedom to practice it freely and openly. It might just "rub" off on someone. Try it you might just like it. I don't know anyone it ever hurt or hindered. It always made a better individual when applied and continued in it.

I will answer your questions one at a time:

What about the children whose parents don't teach their children any faith?

That is the parents perogative. You don't get to tell other people what to teach their children about religion. And neither should the teacher. My son's teacher is Jewish. How would you like it if she started spouting off to her class that she didn't believe Jesus was G-d's son? Well that's what non Christians feel when you shove your beliefs in their face in school.

What about those parents who want to practice moral values and patriotism?

Moral values can be practiced anywhere. You do not have to say the word G-d to be moral. In fact, morality has very little to do with religion. Religion may affect your ideas about what is moral, but morality is more about doing what is right, not doing what G-d tells you. Teach your children to be kind and to treat other people well. They can pray at home. Patritism has NOTHING TO DO WITH RELIGION. One can be patriotic without believing in G-d. In fact the words "under G-d" were NOT a part of the original pledge, but were inserted later.

What about family values and religious principles this nation has been founded upon?

Family values is a fiction made up by politicians. It has no basis in the real world. I care very much for my family. I am sure you care about yours, but our values are very different.

In case you haven't heard the Constituion ensures that ALL citizens of the US are free to choose thier own religion. The actual words are as follows:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Our nation was not founded on ANY particular set of religious principles. How hard is that to understand?

In all pledges and prayers I have ever been associated with in public has not been mandatory. For example, "please join me in a salute to the flag or will you stand for prayer or please bow your heads for a moment of silence".
Will you not allow those who do pray, believe in God, and practice what they believe their freedom to practice it freely and openly.

They can practice whatever they beleive freely and openly, but NOT IN SCHOOL. Because public schools are part of the government. And the government is not allowed to favor one set of religious beliefs over another.

It might just "rub" off on someone. Try it you might just like it. I don't know anyone it ever hurt or hindered. It always made a better individual when applied and continued in it.

I happen to be a religious person. But I am not Christian. And I don't have to be. And you can't make me. And the school shouldn't try to make my child a Christian. It is MY BUSINESS what I teach my children about religion. If you want religious school for your kids you should send them there. But religion should stay out of government run schools.

Mommabear

TREKaren,

I was ordered by my homeroom teacher to say the pledge one time when I didn't. Her tone made it quite clear that not saying the pledge would have landed me in trouble. Why do we want to put kids in the position of having to confront an authority figure if the pledge conflicts with their religious beliefs?

AKGB:

Everything Mommabear said, plus this: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Would you want a teacher preaching atheism in the classroom with the government's backing? Of course you wouldn't. Silence is the proper governmental position on the existence and divinity (or lack thereof) of God, Jesus, Vishnu, Zeus, etc. The government should respect people enough to let them make up their own minds. So should you and I.

I also had a high school teacher tell me that we should all smoke marijuana instead of drinking because it was better for you. Doesn't mean all teachers do that. I am sure there are some ill-informed teachers out there. But I think that after the lawsuit, there are probably less of them around. If I had a religious belief that conflicted, and it meant that much to my convictions then I would educate both my child and the teachers.

The schools have gotten so PC lately that they can't even say Happy Halloween, they have to say Happy Autumn, lest they offend a Christian. They can't say Merry Christmas, just Happy Holidays, so as not to offend non-Christians. They have it drilled into them at every possible moment, to try their best NOT to offend anyone, with all the possible religions out there.

The family should teach religious convictions, and stop trying to make schools walk a tightrope. If a teacher doesn't understand the rules, then the family should go to the principal, and have the teacher follow the rules.

I agree with separation of church and state. I agree with the poster who said many citizens in the 50's, even Christians like my dad, were puzzled when the phrase was added.

But there is no way to go thru a school year and be completely void of any reference in any way that might favor one belief over another. And the attempt to do so has gotten somewhat ridiculous.

Frogman,
It is good to hear from you. Your post almost makes sense to me, but when you try to leave God out aren't you teaching some form of atheism? Our constitution gaurantees freedom of religion not freedom from religion. Why not cash in on the guarantee? If you say you have the right to say there is no god, then where is my right and priviledge to show you My Saviour, Jesus Christ. It is by the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus. He died for all. Only those who accept Jesus will inherit eternal life with Him.

This may be of benefit to you.

Here is a link that might be useful: http://www.no-apathy.org/tracts/mythofseparation.html

Gardenboy:

You say "Our constitution gaurantees freedom of religion not freedom from religion. Why not cash in on the guarantee?"

That is not true. The US Constitution provides each and every citizen freedom from interference in the free excercise of thier religion (which includes the right NOT to have one). It guarantees each American freedom from religion when dealing with the government (public school is part of the government).

You also say "If you say you have the right to say there is no god, then where is my right and priviledge to show you My Saviour, Jesus Christ."

I think you are missing the entire point of this conversation. The First Amendment DOES guarantee that the GOVERNMENT will not establish a religion. Which means that schools (run by the government) must maintain silence with regard to relgion. It says NOTHING about what private citizens can or cannot say about religion. You are free to say whatever you want. The teacher in school IS NOT.

Mommabear

What God the Father considers pure and genuine religion is this: to take care of orphans and widows in their suffering and to keep oneself from being corrupted by the world. James 1:27
How is the government going to regulate or control this? Why should they? Why would someone reject the Best? Which are you seeking God's mercy or God's wrath?

AKGB,

> ...when you try to leave God out aren't you teaching some form of atheism?

No more than you suggest there are no zebras by failing to mention zebras in your post.

> Our constitution gaurantees freedom of religion not freedom from religion.

You are free to practice your religion. So are kids in school; they can and do pray there. They can even talk about religion to their classmates.

> If you say you have the right to say there is no god, then where is my right and priviledge to show you My Saviour, Jesus Christ.

You have the right to do so. Indeed, you exercise that right each time you go online and share the word. You do so with my support. What you don't have the right to do is to make the government your personal megaphone, broadcasting your message into the ears, minds, and hearts of the nation's youth in school, where they must go and where their parents are not present.

> What God the Father considers pure and genuine religion is this: to take care of orphans and widows in their suffering and to keep oneself from being corrupted by the world. James 1:27
How is the government going to regulate or control this? Why should they?

If that's the definition of religion, why mention God in the pledge at all? If schools taught what you describe, I would consider it to be building character, not advocating religion (unless, of course, they included the James 1:27 part).

If the government wants to teach character, then I suppose that's OK. Personally, I'd rather the schools focus on teaching things like math, reading, history, and the like. I guess I'm a bit of a radical in that respect.

> Why would someone reject the Best? Which are you seeking God's mercy or God's wrath?

"The Best" is my right to teach my children about religion as I see fit, and to do it without government interference. That is what I seek (and, by the way, what the founders sought).

Frogman,
If you never heard, seen, or read about zebras how would you know they have stripes or how would you know a zebra if by chance you did see one? Christianity is more than a religion it is a relationship. The heavens declare the handiwork of God. The "devils" believe and tremble. So you are either for God or against Him. There are no real reasons not to know and accept Him as Lord of lords, King of kings and Saviour.
We are accountable unto God for everything we do whether it is good or bad. He knows all about us. He died for all sinners, but not everyone has or will accept His Mercy so His Wrath will abide.

AKGB,

> If you never heard, seen, or read about zebras how would you know they have stripes or how would you know a zebra if by chance you did see one?

My point was, just because a kid can get through school without learning about zebras doesn't mean the school's position is that zebras don't exist. Likewise, official silence on religious subjects does not imply that the school is teaching atheism. I made this point in refutation of a statement you made earlier.

Now, though, you seem to be suggesting something different. Now you seem to be saying that it's the school's job to teach kids about God & the like. Sorry, that's the job of the parents. I'll bet you wouldn't like it if the school started teaching your kids or grandkids that atheism or Hinduism were The Truth. We're asking for a world of trouble if the government starts to do the parents' job.

> Christianity is more than a religion it is a relationship. The heavens declare the handiwork of God. The "devils" believe and tremble. So you are either for God or against Him. There are no real reasons not to know and accept Him as Lord of lords, King of kings and Saviour.
We are accountable unto God for everything we do whether it is good or bad. He knows all about us. He died for all sinners, but not everyone has or will accept His Mercy so His Wrath will abide.

I tried to understand what you have written, but I have to say I find it devoid of content other than "this is what I believe so you should too." Let me know if I missed something.

If you read the founding fathers papers they most certainly intended freedom of and from religion. They did not put 'under God' in the pledge.

If 'Under God' means any god, why is it capitalized?

If it is truly meant for any god, why not have your children say 'one nation under Allah'? Or would that be disturbing?

Christianity, Judaism and Muslim are all splinters of the Abrahamic faith. So how about 'Under Abraham' that would certainly be a closer match for the greatest majority of believers?

We have a Representative government, not a Democracy to protect unpopular minorities' rights from being trampled. This is clearly a case in which it applies.