Pledge of Allegiance poll on CNN Headline News

[derby378]

Here's the link!

http://www.cnn.com/HLN/

[cheezus]

1. argh, this pisses me off

I could see letting the babies have their bottle if "under god" were some old tradition, like some of the other god references. But for crying out loud, it was added during the cold war with the purpose of intimidating atheists (because athiesm=communism). The only reasonable argument for keeping "under god" in there is that you feel the US is a "christian nation" and we need to do everything we can do make it more christian. And that argument, well, I think the constitution says something about that.


We all know how this is going to end tho.
5-4

[DrWeird]

3. Scalia recused himself.

Because he criticized the lower court ruling awhile ago at some klan rally or something.

[connecticut yankee]

10. Do you think

he did it so he can say he's "ethical and impartial" and remain on the Cheney case?

:shrug: :shrug:

[bif]

4. It can't end 5-4

Scalia recused himself on this case.

[Indiana Democrat]

8. Why does the mention of God piss you off?

And you are aware that the vast majority of Democratic members in congress support keeping the pledge the way it is?

This is NOT a good issue to be on the wrong side of.

[LadeJarl]

11. Which God?

The christian God, Allah, some Hindu God, Odin? Thor? Zeus? Apollo?

It's not like the US is an exclusive christian religious nation. I'm not sure how many religions are represented in the US, but it quite a few. Why use the word God at all? I'm an atheist, why should I have to pledge to a God?

Erik

[connecticut yankee]

14. Do what I do

keep silent during "Under God." I notice that many other people do the same thing. But then again, I probably hang around with similar types.

:grouphug:

[RebelOne]

15. I do the same thing.

[Indiana Democrat]

16. Most any religous person will tell you they are all one in the same.

I know you're trying to pick a fight, but even Muslims call Allah "God".

And NO ONE is forcing you to pledge to God...All you have to do is not say it if you don't want too.

[chimpy the poopthrower]

17. Then should the Lord's Prayer be allowed...?

...to be led by a teacher and recited by students in a public school classroom? After all, anyone who doesn't want to say it can simply mouth the words or just remain silent, right? So you should have no problem with a teacher leading a class in the Lord's Prayer -- or some Jewish or Muslim or Buddhist religious text.

[chimpy the poopthrower]

12. See my post #7

This is NOT an attack on the Pledge of Allegiance nor its modern inclusion of the phrase "under God". I wouldn't want a teacher leading children in the Lord's Prayer in a public school, but that doesn't mean I dislike the Lord's Prayer.

[lectrobyte]

13. Because...

If God is our father, then Satan must be our cousin.

[mhr]

2. Done, Let's Unfreep This Poll

eom

[Cat Atomic]

5. Election year. Time to divide and conquer the serfs again.

I hate wedge issues. It's such a transparent way of manipulating voters.

[Wickerman]

6. Thank you CNN

for having the courage to attack head on this issue of vital importance. There certainly isn nohting lese in the news these days that good Amuricans might want to be focusing on, huh? Jeebus H. Crist on a stick.

[mike1963]

9. I couldn't vote "connection refused"...but I can imagine the results. I

wonder what the score would be if they ran one asking "Should white people be allowed to own slaves?"
:eyes:

[chimpy the poopthrower]

7. Misses the point, as usual.

This case is NOT about removing the words "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance. It is about whether having a schoolteacher lead schoolchildren in a recitation of the pledge that includes those words constitutes an establishment of religion. I believe it does. By depicting the case as an attempt to purge those words from the POA, the right wing is making supporters of the case look like we are attacking the POA itself instead of simply the unConstitutional way it is used in public schools.