Newdow anti God pledge case heard

[Mr. Clark]

Remeber, If our "unalienable Rights" did not come from God/Creator then they are not unalienable and are subject to the whim of man the courts.

No, as I have said before. There is the whole natural law pholosphy that establishes our rights as part of our nature and as necessary for us to live according to that nature. At no point do they have to invoke a God to make that work.

They came from the enlightenment era. They were aware that if they based rights on ANY concept of God, then someone could come along and say "If you don't believe in God or in MY God then you can make no claims to any rights because that is the source of rights." They did not want that to happen.

OK, that's my last time, I promise.

 

[TaurusCIA]

For me this is not a religious argument but a historical fact.

Call me naive.

 

[CZ 75 BD]

From today's Federalist.com...

"Those who would oppose the phrase, 'under God' are more in the camp of those religious tyrannies they point to in supposed fear. For, without God, anything is possible by the hand of man." --Dr. Laura Schlessinger

 

[TaurusCIA]

It looks like they may have compromised to give people the freedom to define their own origin and existence.

The providence of Nature's God or the will of a Creator???

Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator

The one thing we do know with relative assurance is God/Creator is prominent in the founding documents of the USA.

 

[Sean Smith]

The one thing we do know with relative assurance is God/Creator is prominent in the founding documents of the USA.

Except that the word "god" is not even in the Constitution. Neither is the word "creator."

http://www.house.gov/Constitution/Constitution.html

Must have been terribly important to be completely omitted.

 

[TaurusCIA]

Thanks Sean and thanks to all who are sharing their views.

This is the most civil debate that I have seen in a long time.


"The Declaration is more about the ideals of our country where the Constitution was about how to apply them. It would be silly to try to interpret the First Amendment independent of the ideals of the Declaration. But that's our SCOTUS."

Except that the word "god" is not even in the Constitution. Neither is the word "creator."

Excellent point...should the states decide?

Amendment I - Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

establishment - The act of forming something

an establishment - a formation of a religion not the concept of religion

free exercise - you say "under God" if you want to. If you don't want to say the pledge then you have the freedom not to.

It never says that you will be free from exposure to religious concepts, even in government.

Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

Amendment XIV
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

 

[TaurusCIA]

HOW COULD 50 STATES BE WRONG

Somewhere along the way, the Federal Courts and the Supreme Court
have misinterpreted the U. S. Constitution. How could fifty States be
wrong?

(A personal note from Charlie: Notice that the constitutional provisions cited below were written and approved by the various States from 1776 through 1959. That's 183 years of unanimous recognition of God. Just God. No denomination. No 'national religion' mandate. Just an acknowledgment and an expressed appreciation for His blessings and guidance in establishing and maintaining the United States of America.)

THIS IS VERY INTERESTING! Be sure to read the last two paragraphs.
America's founders did not intend for there to be a separation of God
and state, as shown by the fact that all 50 states acknowledge God in
their state constitutions:

Alabama 1901, Preamble. We the people of the State of Alabama,
invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and
establish the following Constitution ..

Alaska 1956, Preamble. We, the people of Alaska,_grateful to God and
to those who founded our nation and pioneered this great land .

Arizona 1911, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Arizona,
grateful to Almighty God for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution...

Arkansas 1874, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Arkansas,
grateful to Almighty God for the privilege of choosing our own form
of government...

California 1879, Preamble. We, the People of the State of California,
grateful to Almighty God for our freedom ...

Colorado 1876, Preamble. We, the people of Colorado, with profound
reverence for the Supreme Ruler of Universe.

Connecticut 1818, Preamble. The People of Connecticut, acknowledging
with gratitude the good Providence of God in permitting them to enjoy ..

Delaware 1897, Preamble. Through Divine Goodness all men have, by
nature, the rights of worshipping and serving their Creator according to
the dictates of their consciences ..

Florida 1885, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Florida,
grateful to Almighty God for our constitutional liberty . establish this
Constitution...

Georgia 1777, Preamble. We, the people of Georgia, relying upon
protection and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish this
Constitution...

Hawaii 1959, Preamble. We, the people of Hawaii, Grateful for Divine
Guidance ... establish this Constitution.

Idaho 1889, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Idaho,
grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, to secure its blessings ...

Illinois 1870, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Illinois,
grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious
liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy and looking
to Him for a blessing on our endeavors.

Indiana 1851, Preamble. We, the People of the State of Indiana,
grateful to Almighty God for the free exercise of the right to chose
our form of government.

Iowa 1857, Preamble. We, the People of the State of Iowa, grateful to
the Supreme Being for the blessings hitherto enjoyed, and feeling our
dependence on Him for a continuation of these blessings . establish
this Constitution

Kansas 1859, Preamble. We, the people of Kansas, grateful to Almighty
God for our civil and religious privileges . establish this Constitution.

Kentucky 1891, Preamble. We, the people of the Commonwealth of
grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious
liberties...

Louisiana 1921, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Louisiana,
grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious
liberties we enjoy.

Maine 1820, Preamble. We the People of Maine .. acknowledging with
grateful hearts the goodness of the Sovereign Ruler of the Universe
in affording us an opportunity ... and imploring His aid and direction.

Maryland 1776, Preamble. We, the people of the state of Maryland,
grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberty...

Massachusetts 1780, Preamble. We...the people of Massachusetts,
acknowledging with grateful hearts, the goodness of the Great
Legislator of the Universe .. in the course of His Providence, an
opportunity ..and devoutly imploring His direction ...

Michigan 1908, Preamble. We, the people of the State of
Michigan, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of freedom .
establish this Constitution

Minnesota, 1857, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Minnesota,
grateful to God for our civil and religious liberty, and desiring to
perpetuate its blessings

Mississippi 1890, Preamble. We, the people of Mississippi in
convention assembled, grateful to Almighty God, and invoking
His blessing on our work.

Missouri 1845, Preamble. We, the people of Missouri, with profound
reverence for the Supreme Ruler of the Universe, and grateful for His
goodness ... establish this Constitution ...

Montana 1889, Preamble. We, the people of Montana, grateful to
Almighty God for the blessings of liberty. establish this Constitution...

Nebraska 1875, Preamble. We, the people, grateful to Almighty God
for our freedom .. establish this Constitution .

Nevada 1864, Preamble. We the people of the State of Nevada, grateful
to Almighty God for our freedom establish this Constitution...

New Hampshire 1792, Part I. Art. I. Sec. V. Every individual has a
natural and unalienable right to worship God according to the dictates
of his own conscience.

New Jersey 1844, Preamble. We, the people of the State of New Jersey,
grateful to Almighty God for civil and religious liberty which He hath so long
permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing on our endeavors .

New Mexico 1911, Preamble. We, the People of New Mexico, grateful to
Almighty God for the blessings of liberty ..

New York 1846, Preamble. We, the people of the State of New York,
grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, in order to secure its
blessings.

North Carolina 1868, Preamble. We the people of the State of North
Carolina, grateful to Almighty God, the Sovereign Ruler of Nations,
for our civil, political, and religious liberties, and acknowledging our
dependence upon Him for the continuance of those ..

North Dakota 1889, Preamble. We, the people of North Dakota, grateful
to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, do
ordain...

Ohio 1852, Preamble. We the people of the state of Ohio, grateful to
Almighty God for our freedom, to secure its blessings and to promote
our common ..

Oklahoma 1907, Preamble. Invoking the guidance of Almighty God, in
order to secure and perpetuate the blessings of liberty ... establish this..

Oregon 1857, Bill of Rights, Article I. Section 2. All men shall be
secure in the Natural right, to worship Almighty God according to the dictates
of their consciences..

Pennsylvania 1776, Preamble. We, the people of Pennsylvania, grateful
to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, and
humbly invoking His guidance

Rhode Island 1842, Preamble. We the People of the State of Rhode
Island grateful to Almighty God for the civil and religious liberty
which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him
for a blessing

South Carolina, 1778, Preamble. We, the people of he State of
South Carolina. grateful to God for our liberties, do ordain and
establish this Constitution.

South Dakota 1889, Preamble. We, the people of South Dakota, grateful
to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberties .. establish this

Tennessee 1796, Art. XI.III. That all men have a natural and indefeasible
right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their
conscience...

Texas 1845, Preamble. We the People of the Republic of Texas,
acknowledging, with gratitude, the grace and beneficence of God.

Utah 1896, Preamble. Grateful to Almighty God for life and liberty,
we establish this Constitution .

Vermont 1777, Preamble. Whereas all government ought to .. enable
the individuals who compose it to enjoy their natural rights, and other
blessings which the Author of Existence has bestowed on man
.

Virginia 1776, Bill of Rights, XVI .. Religion, or the Duty which we
owe our Creator ... can be directed only by Reason ... and that it is the
mutual duty of all to practice Christian Forbearance, Love and
Charity towards each other .

Washington 1889, Preamble. We the People of the State of Washington,
grateful to the Supreme Ruler of the Universe for our liberties, do ordain
this Constitution ..

West Virginia 1872, Preamble. Since through Divine Providence we
enjoy the blessings of civil, political and religious liberty, we, the
people of West Virginia . reaffirm our faith in and constant reliance upon
God ..

Wisconsin 1848, Preamble. We, the people of Wisconsin, grateful to
Almighty God for our freedom, domestic tranquility ..

Wyoming 1890, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Wyoming,
grateful to God for our civil, political, and religious liberties ..
establish this Constitution ...

After reviewing acknowledgments of God from all 50 state
constitutions, one is faced with the prospect that maybe, just maybe, the
ACLU and the out-of-control federal courts are wrong!

Link...

 

[tyme]

The Declaration of Independence has no legal authority. It'd be just as wrong to cull relevant legal principles from the Articles of Confederation.

States were free to decide up until the 14th amendment. Even though the language says "Congress", it's understood that freedom of religion, and an absence of laws respecting an establishment of religion, were one of the "rights" reserved exclusively to the people (and unavailable for restriction by States) through the 14th Amendment. Therefore, those limitations ought to extend to the States via the 14th Amendment.

All this talk about "founders this" and "founders that" regarding State law is great, but the founders didn't have to worry about that pesky 14th Amendment. If you want to talk about the founders, find federal laws passed by the founders after the passage of the BoR, laws which respect an establishment of religion, and we can debate those.

As for "Creator", various people could consider their "creator" to be the big bang, apes, Adam and Eve, God, a bunch of molecules, or even their parents. It's perfectly religiously neutral in my opinion. Certain people even believe that they created themselves, from a self-awareness perspective.

 

[TaurusCIA]

All this talk about "founders this" and "founders that" regarding State law is great, but the founders didn't have to worry about that pesky 14th Amendment. If you want to talk about the founders, find federal laws passed by the founders after the passage of the BoR, laws which respect an establishment of religion, and we can debate those.

This assumes that the 1st prohibits the recognition of God by government. Just because SCOTUS ignores historical context when they interpret the Constitution doesn't make it true it just makes it a precedence.

quote]Amendment I - Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;[/quote]

establishment - The act of forming something

an establishment - a formation of a religion not the concept of religion

free exercise - you say "under God" if you want to. If you don't want to say the pledge then you have the freedom not to.

It never says that you will be free from exposure to religious concepts, even in government.

 

[CannibalCrowley]

CZ 75 BD
A quote by Dr. Laura only proves that you let religion blind you to the law. She pretends to be righteous yet shrinks when people mention that she posed for nude pictures in the past. If her show is still on (last I heard she got bumped to the graveyard shift), call her up and ask about it. I doubt she'll let you get past the delay.


"The ACLU has got to take a lot of blame for this. I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way -- all of them who have tried to secularize America -- I point the finger in their face and say, 'You helped this happen.'" -- The Rev. Jerry Falwell, in a Sept. 13 appearance on "The 700 Club."

TaurusCIA

free exercise - you say "under God" if you want to. If you don't want to say the pledge then you have the freedom not to.

That was part of the point in my previous post. I even cited several cases in which children were punished for not saying either the pledge or just the "under god" portion.

 

[TaurusCIA]

I guess you guys think the courts have interpreted the 2nd correctly also...?

I even cited several cases in which children were punished for not saying either the pledge or just the "under god" portion.

I know. That isn't right either. Its hard to respond to all the posts. I'm just one guy.

 

[CZ 75 BD]

Cannibal...

...quite the contrary, Dr. Laura has spoken on the subject of her youthful indiscretions.... "She then explained how she followed her own "moral authority" in her twenties and "the inadequacy of that way of life is painfully obvious today."

"I have undergone profound changes over the course of my life," she said. "My early experiences have taught me how much better is it to live by an objective and absolute standard of right and wrong, preferably a standard set by God. And that is the hard-won wisdom I try to pass along to others as I preach, teach and nag."


Jerry Fallwell also repudiated his remarks and said, paraphrasing, Jerry Fallwell is responsible for the attack.

Please explain how I am blinded by religion. By including the quote, I mean to agree that left to their own devices governments of men who acknowledge no higher power know no limits. Mao, Amin, Hitler, Stalin, Saddam and others prove that point.

 

[Marko Kloos]

Please explain how I am blinded by religion. By including the quote, I mean to agree that left to their own devices governments of men know no limits. Mao, Amin, Hitler, Stalin, Saddam and others prove that point.

Unfortunately, that argument would only hold water if you could conclusively prove that men are more prone to obey limits when they have faith. The Bosnian ethnic cleansings, the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Thirty Years War, the Irish civil war, and a few hundred more religious conflicts in history mrely prove that religious faith (or the lack thereof) has little to do with the capacity to act "outside of limits."

Religious warfare has been such a recurrent feature in European and world history that nobody with an education in history and a faculty for reason can seriously argue that religious people are somehow less prone to violent excesses and atrocities than the rest of humanity.

 

[dischord]

establishment - The act of forming something

an establishment - a formation of a religion not the concept of religion

respecting -- related to.

The 1st bans more than formal establishment. Respecting means it bans those activities a government would take in the process of establishment. FWIW: One of the primary acts respecting the establishment of a religion is to recognize a divinity.

The 1st would be rendered meaningless if the government could take steps respecting establishment as long as it never officially established.

That said, I’ve never been too worried about “under God†in the pledge. But I wouldn’t be too worried about the pledge reverting to its original wording, either. My relationship with my deity and my love of my country would remain intact either way.

Both sides in this fight seem to be pushing religious agendas, IMHO.

 

[brookstexas]

Taurus CIA

SO your premise is ifall 50 states or the majority say so it's right?
Like say slavery or children age 8 working in factories or blacks getting their own special water fountains?
The Constitution is about the rights of the INDIVIDUAL the mob be damned.
Don't forget many nods are nothing more than pandering by politicians like the placing of "in God We Trust" on our money in the 1950's....
BT

 

[TaurusCIA]

Don't be silly. 14 relies on 1 while 13 stands on its own as does 15 and 19.

So far we have all been civil and on point even though we may not agree. Let's keep it that way.

 

[dischord]

Not to hijack the thread, but:

Some slavery is permitted under the 13th Amendment. It would be perfectly constitutional to force a criminal to become the lifetime slave of the victim, for instance.

 

[RealGun]

--one nation, safely armed, with liberty and justice for all.

Like that better as something children should recite daily? Think about it.

In The Great Poobah We Trust

"God" and The Ten Commandments are Judeo-Christian. America includes many more religions than that. The believers are not guests. Their religion isn't found relevant to government, so why should any other be, if deliberately not trying to be a theocracy?

 

[The_Antibubba]

Why Pledge Allegiance?

Allegiance to a symbol? If we are going to have our children memorize something, and recite it daily, how about The Preamble?

We The People...

Who here under the age of thirty can recite it? Without looking? I can't-they sure didn't teach it in my school. I learned it listening to "Schoolhouse Rock".

 

[TaurusCIA]

Sounds good...problem solved.

how about The Preamble?

We The People...

 

[fix]

How 'bout we just toss out the pledge entirely and replace it with:

I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same. [optional] So help me [insert deity of choice]. [/optional]

Problem solved.

 

[corncob]

Fix and Bubba beat me to it!

I have never understood how the Pledge fits in with what I though this country was all about--namely, tossing a government when it gets too greedy. I thought most of the folks on THR agreed that the Founders fully expected the current system to get corrupted and replaced through revolution long before now. In that line of thinking, it's not the flag (or those who fly it) we should be pledging allegience to, but something like the Constitution or the power of the people to institute a government that protects thier liberties. I don't know.

 

[tyme]

The recitation of the Pledge by school children merely provides standing for Newdow or others like him to sue the government over the occurrence of "under God" in the Pledge. Even if it were not so recited, the Pledge with "under God" might still be unconstitutional; without someone being forced to say it, chances are nobody would be "harmed" and so nobody would have standing to sue. So discussing alternatives to the Pledge doesn't resolve the Constitutionality issue.

Getting schools to direct recitation of something other than the Pledge has nothing to do with federal law or government, and to the extent that it's possible, it would have to be effected by the States. I think the States are the highest authority responsible for laws requring the Pledge to be recited in schools.

 

[RealGun]

I was going to try to make a useful comment, actually offer a question, but then decided not to, because it felt too far removed from relevance to gun rights advocacy.

I really think all we're talking about in the context of THR is a watch to see which way the wind blows around the Supreme Court. Can they be counted on to make remotely popular decisions that seem to make sense, or will most walk away shaking their heads about convoluted logic and what may seem like abuse of discretion? How the opinions are divided, liberal and conservative etc., will also be an indicator of the current probability of making any headway re the 2A.

Of course the main test is whether the Constitution will be treated as plain and simple language or whether a seemingly odd rationale will make it appear that logic has been turned on its head once again. It's amazing that this issue took so long to be tested before the USSC, but then we are used to that in regard to the 2A and the 14th re the 2A.

I think it could be the last higher profile case for some of the justices rumored to be contemplating retirement. The question is whether those retirements will occur before the election. I doubt it very much, since confirmation would be a partisan circus right before an election. Announcements might occur, however.

If a US Supreme Court Justice retirement announcement is made, does the current administration immediately gain an entitlement to make a nomination that would survive a possible change of administrations? Or is it linked to when confirmation hearings would occur? Or what? I assume all the timing is essentially political.

I think we'll hear about some Cabinet changes also, perhaps as part of an incumbent campaign strategy.

 

[tyme]

Let's not forget the four terror-related cases coming up in late April.

Tuesday 4/20: Rasul v. Bush (03-334), Al Odah v. United states (03-343)
Wednesday 4/28: Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (03-6696), Rumsfeld v. Padilla (03-1027)