Massachusetts Outlawing Pledge of Allegiance?

[Jeff]

Here we go again .


The highest court in the state of Massachusetts will begin hearing a case where the Pledge of Allegiance itself is on trial (http://www.religionnews.com/2013/08/30/mass-supreme-court-to-hear-challenge-to-pledge-of-allegiance/). An anonymous atheist couple has brought suit against the state for the mandatory recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance. The focus of the lawsuit is the simple phrase “under God”, which despite years of use, continues to offend the eminently offendable atheists. The Supreme Court of Massachusetts will consider Doe v. Action-Boxborough Regional School District on Wednesday. Their verdict will rule on whether or not the required recitation of the pledge violates the rights of students.
In the past, plaintiffs have attacked the phrase “under God” as being prejudicial to atheists and even non-Christians, in an effort to remove the pledge from our schools. This time around, the legal team representing the plaintiffs will argue that compulsory recitation of the pledge represents an attack on the state’s equal rights laws, which guarantee equal protection for everyone under those laws. This is very similar to the route that gay-marriage supporters recently used in a similarly successful case argued before the Massachusetts Supreme Court.

http://eaglerising.com/1580/massachusetts-outlawing-pledge-allegiance/

[Trinity]

From the mouth of my self proclaimed atheist 17 year old..."It is a part of our history, just skip over the under god part like I do, problem solved" :salute:

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Here we go again .


The highest court in the state of Massachusetts will begin hearing a case where the Pledge of Allegiance itself is on trial (http://www.religionnews.com/2013/08/30/mass-supreme-court-to-hear-challenge-to-pledge-of-allegiance/). An anonymous atheist couple has brought suit against the state for the mandatory recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance. The focus of the lawsuit is the simple phrase “under God”, which despite years of use, continues to offend the eminently offendable atheists. The Supreme Court of Massachusetts will consider Doe v. Action-Boxborough Regional School District on Wednesday. Their verdict will rule on whether or not the required recitation of the pledge violates the rights of students.
In the past, plaintiffs have attacked the phrase “under God” as being prejudicial to atheists and even non-Christians, in an effort to remove the pledge from our schools. This time around, the legal team representing the plaintiffs will argue that compulsory recitation of the pledge represents an attack on the state’s equal rights laws, which guarantee equal protection for everyone under those laws. This is very similar to the route that gay-marriage supporters recently used in a similarly successful case argued before the Massachusetts Supreme Court.

http://eaglerising.com/1580/massachusetts-outlawing-pledge-allegiance/ Sure outlaw it. One nation under Obama sounds so much better...:rolleyes: OR One nation under Allah.. :rolleyes: Let it be changed to --One nation under Allah-- and watch how fast all these leftist, socialist, atheist protesters go completely silent. I've not had any trust(zero) in the original 13 colonies states for over 20 years now! Now just more proof that I was correct.... --Tyr

[aboutime]

While I have trouble accepting that a State like Mass. would agree to such a thing.

I also believe it is typical, and expected when considering how Mass. was the first state to also make Gay marriage legal as well.

And, when it comes to outlawing the Pledge. I like it. It will actually separate the Real Americans from the pretenders, whiners, agnostics, and just plain disrespectful, illiterate portion of our society from the Real Americans who make it possible for such people who disrespect the nation, and the laws...to prove how STUPID they really are.

[DragonStryk72]

Here we go again .


The highest court in the state of Massachusetts will begin hearing a case where the Pledge of Allegiance itself is on trial (http://www.religionnews.com/2013/08/30/mass-supreme-court-to-hear-challenge-to-pledge-of-allegiance/). An anonymous atheist couple has brought suit against the state for the mandatory recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance. The focus of the lawsuit is the simple phrase “under God”, which despite years of use, continues to offend the eminently offendable atheists. The Supreme Court of Massachusetts will consider Doe v. Action-Boxborough Regional School District on Wednesday. Their verdict will rule on whether or not the required recitation of the pledge violates the rights of students.
In the past, plaintiffs have attacked the phrase “under God” as being prejudicial to atheists and even non-Christians, in an effort to remove the pledge from our schools. This time around, the legal team representing the plaintiffs will argue that compulsory recitation of the pledge represents an attack on the state’s equal rights laws, which guarantee equal protection for everyone under those laws. This is very similar to the route that gay-marriage supporters recently used in a similarly successful case argued before the Massachusetts Supreme Court.

http://eaglerising.com/1580/massachusetts-outlawing-pledge-allegiance/

Sigh... you know, I don't get the religious argument against the Pledge. I mean, simply because the word God is in there, why does that make it a problem? It's not saying you worship or believe.

The thing is, I don't think we should do the Pledge of Allegiance, but for completely different reasons. My reasoning is that, because I said it every day in school, it had absolutely no meaning for me, or much of anyone else in any of the schools I went to. It was just this bland recitation we did because we were supposed to, and thus, it has no meaning.

Now, the oath I took when I signed into the Navy, that had a profound impact on me that stuck with me over the years.

[Jeff]

Sigh... you know, I don't get the religious argument against the Pledge. I mean, simply because the word God is in there, why does that make it a problem? It's not saying you worship or believe.

The thing is, I don't think we should do the Pledge of Allegiance, but for completely different reasons. My reasoning is that, because I said it every day in school, it had absolutely no meaning for me, or much of anyone else in any of the schools I went to. It was just this bland recitation we did because we were supposed to, and thus, it has no meaning.

Now, the oath I took when I signed into the Navy, that had a profound impact on me that stuck with me over the years.

Dragon I agree with you all the way to it not meaning much in school ( first let me say it didn't to me either ) or so I thought, every morning it was said and it was nothing more then the morning announcements, but looking back now and seeing where this country is heading I am proud that we where allowed to say it every morning, the more they pull God from our schools the worse the schools get , maybe we didn't look at it as much back in the day but compared to kids now a days we were saints, And as I look back I do think it gave us a sense of pride ( even though back then we didn't think so ) of course back then it seemed everyone had some kind of faith and God is a word for a supreme being so if ya were not Catholic God still fit most religions.

[tailfins]

Now you know why the term MASSHOLE was coined.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Sigh... you know, I don't get the religious argument against the Pledge. I mean, simply because the word God is in there, why does that make it a problem? It's not saying you worship or believe.

The thing is, I don't think we should do the Pledge of Allegiance, but for completely different reasons. My reasoning is that, because I said it every day in school, it had absolutely no meaning for me, or much of anyone else in any of the schools I went to. It was just this bland recitation we did because we were supposed to, and thus, it has no meaning.

Now, the oath I took when I signed into the Navy, that had a profound impact on me that stuck with me over the years. My first day of school was in 1960 and the Pledge had a profound impact on me. We had a large flag in the corner of every classroom and we faced that flag to recite the Pledge. I learned early on what the red, the white and the blue stood for. To me it represents never forget, never back down, never surrender--death before dishonor! bamscum turns his back when the Pledge was recited that should have gotten his sorry ass dumped but it didn't because America has been so radically dumbed down IMHO. -Tyr

[Arbo]

I also believe it is typical, and expected when considering how Mass. was the first state to also make Gay marriage legal as well.

What exactly does that have to do with the court case about the pledge?

I think that when these people lose their case to get rid of the pledge (as that is what should happen) they should have to pay every cost that was incurred related to the case. That sort of thing would put an end to such frivolous lawsuits.

[aboutime]

What exactly does that have to do with the court case about the pledge?

I think that when these people lose their case to get rid of the pledge (as that is what should happen) they should have to pay every cost that was incurred related to the case. That sort of thing would put an end to such frivolous lawsuits.


Just your mindset. Nothing else.

[Arbo]

Just your mindset. Nothing else.

So according to you, anyone that would make gay marriage legal, would also try to ban the pledge? And it's due to their mindset?

Unbelievable.

[Jeff]

So according to you, anyone that would make gay marriage legal, would also try to ban the pledge? And it's due to their mindset?

Unbelievable.

I hate to speak for AT( he is a big boy and can answer on his own ) but after reading your Unbelievable thought I might, any state that would jump out in front of the rest of the country to set a precedent to be so liberal why wouldn't you believe they would do the same with the Pledge

[tailfins]

So according to you, anyone that would make gay marriage legal, would also try to ban the pledge? And it's due to their mindset?

Unbelievable.

As someone who's a 30 minute walk from Massachusetts, it makes perfect sense. There are organized secularists and Unitarians (I refer to them as church-going Atheists) that actively push both positions. Much of the organized political base on Beacon Hill is against ANYTHING that would make a Christian smile.

[Arbo]

I hate to speak for AT( he is a big boy and can answer on his own ) but after reading your Unbelievable thought I might, any state that would jump out in front of the rest of the country to set a precedent to be so liberal why wouldn't you believe they would do the same with the Pledge

That you (and apparently others) see gay marriage as 'so liberal', explains a lot.

Sorry, I follow the Constitution, not a party, and freedom and liberty doesn't have a side.

[aboutime]

That you (and apparently others) see gay marriage as 'so liberal', explains a lot.

Sorry, I follow the Constitution, not a party, and freedom and liberty doesn't have a side.


Well, Arbo. Perhaps you should be telling the U.S. Congress, and President such things instead of all of us you look down your patronizing nose at?