pajarito

Lose an argumentive point and so you scream favoritism? how childish, I did expect better from anyone who chooses to participate in open discussion in the Speakers Forum, if you cant handle being called on an ignorant belief then maybe you shouldn’t debate? My calling you out on breaking the rules of debate "here" is not "loosing and argumentive point." If you can't handle the rules "here", then maybe you shouldn't debate (here). There are other places to go. I thought the idea was to attack the idea and not the person. That's weak...

I don’t belong to a Methodist “faction.” As for higher education, I went to Auburn University and The University of Alabama at Birmingham……not LaGrange College (which is Methodist). You can talk about it all day long just like I can. You, however, were talking about expert Phychologist/Phychiatrist opinion. I don’t qualify you as being able to prove someone insane or not based on your undergraduate work. Except for a few core courses, I have no further studies in the area. My degree is Management Information Systems. I still don’t consider your opinion “expert” in the field. I don’t think anyone else would either. Again, however, feel free to babble. I didn’t bring up “Son of Sam.” That was a quote from someone else. I believe PhillyKev. You’re credibility is plummeting. That woman may not, in fact, be “all there”, however, you’re comparing her and all churchgoers to the insanity of “Son of Sam?” Sounds crazy to me, however again, I’m not expert. Again, in your “expert” medical opinion.

There’s “majority rule” in a democratic society. Like it or not. That’s not to say that the rights of the minority can be trampled on. However, in this case, they’re not. NOBODY is making them say, as you said, the pledge with “Under God” included in it. “Under God” is not the endorsement of a particular religion. This is not a “feel good” society where no one is allowed to be upset, offended, or embarrassed. Just because someone might feel pressured into doing something that’s not required of them does not justify making it illegal or unconstitutional.

I knew you were one of the liberal "golden boys" in this forum and, therefore, you're granted more freedom to bend the rules. I didn't expect that yours would get deleted. Oh well...Asi es la vida! I think that's the moderator's job to determine if something fits the rules or not in this forum. Not you. Well, maybe you can. Nevermind.

I catch your sarcasm in the end but that’s not always true. Whether a decision or action is “of God” or not has to be scrutinized on its merits Biblically. Sometimes by others. We can’t always tell ourselves if what we’ve done, even after praying about it, is what God really wants or what we really just want ourselves based on our innate preponderance toward selfishness. That’s where the accountability from other Christians comes in.

The Atheists are very much the small subset. If they want to unofficially add “under myself” to it, feel free.

I’d be interested in hearing from a reputable source that knows what the hell he/she’s talking about on the subject. I don’t think you qualify having taken some undergraduate (elective?) courses at a “liberal arts” institution. I think what I was trying to say in my “re-quote” was exactly what I’m trying to say to you now. I’m not saying I’m anyone who can say how God talks or communicates to people. I just said that he does so in different ways. I meant exactly what you said. Who’s to say? I don’t believe I ever did that. If you can find that I did, please quote.

Not quitting...Just gotta leave right now....be back later.

Great....frustration to the point of personal attacks....I guess it's working.

That would be change it back to how it was written. Kind of like the placing of clothing on nude statues, the addition of "under God" is a change to the original, in an attempt to "guide" the people to a thought set that is desired to be mainstream by the changers. Kind of like the Amendments to the Constitution. I don't think that's the intent. It's just the acknowledgement of God. Not an attempt at evangelism.

Seriously dude...are you just misconstruing and exaggerating this or did Aschcroft or anyone else you're talking about actually say that he talked to God as if I was talking to you face to face (verbally)? He might have said God spoke to him but God does, in fact, speak to people in different ways. In Biblical times, there were instances where God vocally spoke to his people. Don't intentionally paint someone as insane just because you don't believe or agree with them.

So…we need to give the kids some kind of disclaimer before the Pledge. Kind of like requiring Miranda Rights is given when someone is arrested. If it’s a public school and they’re going to officially say the Pledge of Allegiance, I’d think it would have to be the one recognized by the State and the US Government. Of course, it isn’t required that you say it. Or, you could, yourself, say it with “Under the tree God if you wanted to. Officially, however, the Pledge would have to be official.

Ok Your own words: Of course. He/she could but it wouldn’t hold much validity.

Yes I’ll personally continue to say it as I feel appropriate but I wouldn’t expect anyone else to or for it to be printed or said officially in any other way except for what was decided to be Constitutional. So would I. I don’t see this as being that extreme, though.

PeacefulJeffrey……you will obey what Christians everywhere are trying to make you do……you will pray to Jesus and say the Pledge of Allegiance in its entirety with reverence….you will also go to Church and learn more about the Bible and what Christianity is all about….PeacefulJeffrey……you will conform to the Christians who are trying to control you and everything around you…..

Why, are you also a Psychologist or a Psychiatrist in addition to being a Field Engineer? Ok…I agree. Many renowned scientists have been done the same. That didn’t mean that they were. I believe what I said earlier to PeacefulJeffrey was:

that is not a right granted to you until you become a member of the US Supreme Court. I didn't say right or wrong. Just what is and is not. The weather happens to be mostly cloudy with scattered thunderstorms right now in my area. Tomorrow is supposed to be just scattered thunderstorms but we'll have to see. The Pledge with "Under God", as it stands now, is in fact Constititional.

Oh...well....If it's more "poetic" without like you say, then we should definitely change it. We'd sure want everybody, across the board, to "feel" as good about it as possible when they say it. Maybe, so they could all then sing it at Christmas time, or the day when you make it a point to protest religion, or when you worship your cat, or whenever. Again, nobody is making anyone, including school children anymore, say the pledge of allegiance.

I guess ~85% of the US population who claim a religious association with that of Christianity are mostly schizophrenic and you guys are the only normal people in the mix. Go figure. An equally irrational and greatly exagerated association.

And that makes perfect sense that you would think like that. You are correct. More like they hope that what they choose or "are led" to do by God is his will...but yeah....same thing. I fully believe that God answers prayers. Answers come differently for different people. I've had some answered. Not verbally like you'd talk on the telephone but answered nonetheless. I don't discount what God can do otherwise. You can only criticize what you don't understand. It's sad that you will never humble yourself beneath your own ego. Until then, you'll never know God.

There's a difference between being religious, praying to God, and seeking guidance and being schizophrenic. You're being derogatory by saying that "he hears voices in his head" simply because you despise religion and religious people. I also don't really think his reasons for going to war with Iraq were so that he could go to another country and kill people. You're just spouting more emotionally charged babble to bash Bush and the Republicans. Now, I've heard Bush compared to Hitler, David Koresh, and Son of Sam. You guys are really out of control.

This is an idiotic example/comparison. Something may be thought as wrong but, until it is defined and deemed against the law or unconstitutional or whatever, it's just not. I'm just saying what is and what isn't. Not what might or could be. Right now, it is perfectly constitutional to acknowledge God in the Pledge of Allegiance. You think it's wrong. Very well then. Tough shit. Vote for your candidate who will try and appoint liberal judges to the bench.

Irrelevant No one is holding a gun to anyone’s head and making them say the Pledge of Allegiance. There is nothing unconstitutional about “Under God” being in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Because there's nothing wrong with the way it is.

That goes for all of us, Christians too, no matter how aggressively Christian they are. Wendy W. I agree. I make no exceptions.