Enshrining religion into law


The Legal Crusaders ride again
This doesn't have any thing to do with religion. It has EVERYTHING to do with politics.

The House, citing the nation's religious origins, voted Wednesday to protect the Pledge of Allegiance from federal judges who might try to stop schoolchildren and others from reciting it because of the phrase "under God."

The legislation, a priority of social conservatives, passed 260-167. It now goes to the Senate where its future is uncertain.

"We should not and cannot rewrite history to ignore our spiritual heritage," said Rep. Zach Wamp, R-Tenn. "It surrounds us. It cries out for our country to honor God."

First and foremost, I have a big problem with requiring school children to recite a pledge when they do not understand the meaning and when they can not be held responsible responsible for it.

Second, a pledge extracted under duress has absolutely no value and should be rejected by a free people.

Third, under the Constitution, Congress does not have the power to adopt a personal pledge, define the wording of such a pledge, or to declare another's faith.

Fourth, someone doesn't know their history. The phrase "under God" was added in 1954. It has nothing to do with "spiritual heritage" and everything to do with rejecting "Godless communism." The national motto was changed at the same time for the same lousy reason.

Fifth, anyone who has to impose their religion on everyone else by force of law obviously doesn't have any faith in their religion.

Hat tip to Wren's Nest.

— NeoWayland

Posted: Thu - July 20, 2006 at 08:07 AM  Tag


 ◊  ◊   ◊  ◊ 

Random selections from NeoWayland's library


Pagan Vigil "Because LIBERTY demands more than just black or white"
© 2005 - 2009 All Rights Reserved