Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 6/27/2002 7:55:20 AM EDT
And so should anyone here who takes the Constitution seriously. The line, "one nation . . . indivisible" is a crock. The Supreme Court has clearly ignored the rights of secession and revolution that the Founding Fathers intended. The Pledge is merely a fascist tool designed to indoctrinate our young into joining the ranks of the goose-stepping thugs who control our once-great nation. It would be best to eliminate the whole line. That way, atheists' children aren't forced to kowtow to anyone else's imaginary friend(s), and Constitutionalists' children won't be force-fed the big lie.
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 8:01:04 AM EDT
Yeah, let's just replace the Pledge with... "America's kinda cool...sorta..." and that way everyone can be filled with joy. [rolleyes]
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 8:02:34 AM EDT
So do you object to the very name "[red]United[/red] States of America"? "indivisible" is simply another way of saying "United", meaning joined, bonded or combined into one single unit.
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 8:05:50 AM EDT
Sure Mac you COULD say that.. But you would be WRONG.. Indivisible means CANNOT be divided. United means.....currently together.
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 8:06:56 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/27/2002 8:07:21 AM EDT by ipschoser1]
Originally Posted By 71-Hour_Achmed: The Pledge is merely a fascist tool designed to indoctrinate our young into joining the ranks of the goose-stepping thugs who control our once-great nation.
View Quote
Maybe years of crap like this is why our nation is, as you say, "once-great. We diched our values that we were founded on. It's time to get back on track and this was a definite step in the wrong direction.
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 8:07:22 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Stormbringer: Indivisible means CANNOT be divided. United means.....currently together.
View Quote
Indivisible is an exteme of "united." It means united permanently.
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 8:07:42 AM EDT
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 8:08:42 AM EDT
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 8:08:58 AM EDT
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 8:15:54 AM EDT
Another good reason to keep my children out of the government schools. Keeps them away from idiots, athiests, communists, liberals; Puts them in with God fearing, Christ loving, servants.
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 8:15:58 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Stormbringer: Sure Mac you COULD say that.. But you would be WRONG.. Indivisible means CANNOT be divided. United means.....currently together.
View Quote
Okay, I'll grant you that one. It's a matter of degree. One of the definitions of "United" is "to become one". That doesn't necessarily imply inseperability, but it doesn't exclude inseperability either. See. And I didn't even poke you about being a Canadian talking about purely American issues this time. [;)] DOH!! [>:/]
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 8:16:42 AM EDT
Originally Posted By 71-Hour_Achmed: And so should anyone here who takes the Constitution seriously. The line, "one nation . . . indivisible" is a crock. The Supreme Court has clearly ignored the rights of secession and revolution that the Founding Fathers intended. The Pledge is merely a fascist tool designed to indoctrinate our young into joining the ranks of the goose-stepping thugs who control our once-great nation. It would be best to eliminate the whole line. That way, atheists' children aren't forced to kowtow to anyone else's imaginary friend(s), and Constitutionalists' children won't be force-fed the big lie.
View Quote
Want the short version of why this country has no future? See above. [img]http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/jpshakehead.gif[/img]
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 8:17:54 AM EDT
"United", in "United States", refers to the States. Indivisible refers to the people of the Nation. As in: "United We Stand, Divided We Fall" The above truism is not about States and secession. It's just a cute little saying. Just like the Pledge. It's not a "fascist tool designed to indoctrinate our young into joining the ranks of the goose-stepping thugs who control our once-great nation". Isn't there anything more important to make an issue of?
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 8:18:11 AM EDT
Originally Posted By raf:
Originally Posted By The_Macallan: So do you object to the very name "[red]United[/red] States of America"? "indivisible" is simply another way of saying "United", meaning joined, bonded or combined into one single unit.
View Quote
With all due respect, Mac, it means nothing of the sort. "United" in and of itself does not connote any degree, whatsoever, of permanence. The union might be permanent, maybe not. "Indivisible", unlike "united", [b]does[/b] connote permanence. In short, the two words are [i]NOT[/i] synonyms.
View Quote
i disagree. i think you're taking a very (too) broad view of the definitions of the terms. as with all historical documents and their texts, one must look at the [i]intended[/i] meaning of the words written by the authors. i'm pretty sure that they intended the word 'united' to have some permanence (otherwise, what was that war that was fought mid-19th century all about?). besides, indivisible, as i understood it, meant united for a common cause. and since most of the time people don't change their minds, that cause would have some permanence. hence, so would the "united" and "indivisible" parts of the picture. just my pennies, though.
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 8:20:58 AM EDT
Thought we settled the "indivisable" thing from 1861-1865. Guess I was wrong----huh? Gee, I wonder when the next "divisable" attempt is due.[;)]
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 8:21:22 AM EDT
So just take out "under God". We can still be indivisible. Isn't our country's motto "in God we trust" ? I guess we will have to come up with a whole new one there.
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 8:22:41 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/27/2002 8:23:18 AM EDT by platform389]
Originally Posted By shamayim: Thought we settled the "indivisable" thing from 1861-1865. Guess I was wrong----huh? Gee, I wonder when the next "divisable" attempt is due.[;)]
View Quote
If you look to western horizon(sunset...)you will see the dust cloud of the approaching "party". [img]http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/sadness.gif[/img]
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 8:25:53 AM EDT
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 8:26:14 AM EDT
Originally Posted By garandman: Yeah, let's just replace the Pledge with... "America's kinda cool...sorta..." and that way everyone can be filled with joy.
View Quote
What if some poor, unsuspecting french born child were offended by a statement like that in a public school? They could be irreparably harmed!
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 8:30:58 AM EDT
Huh, I thought the Civil War proved there was no right of secession...trial by combat and all that.
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 8:34:39 AM EDT
Originally Posted By raf:
Originally Posted By ARLady:
Originally Posted By raf:
Originally Posted By The_Macallan: So do you object to the very name "[red]United[/red] States of America"? "indivisible" is simply another way of saying "United", meaning joined, bonded or combined into one single unit.
View Quote
With all due respect, Mac, it means nothing of the sort. "United" in and of itself does not connote any degree, whatsoever, of permanence. The union might be permanent, maybe not. "Indivisible", unlike "united", [b]does[/b] connote permanence. In short, the two words are [i]NOT[/i] synonyms.
View Quote
i disagree. i think you're taking a very (too) broad view of the definitions of the terms. as with all historical documents and their texts, one must look at the [i]intended[/i] meaning of the words written by the authors. i'm pretty sure that they intended the word 'united' to have some permanence (otherwise, what was that war that was fought mid-19th century all about?). besides, indivisible, as i understood it, meant united for a common cause. and since most of the time people don't change their minds, that cause would have some permanence. hence, so would the "united" and "indivisible" parts of the picture. just my pennies, though.
View Quote
I'm a strict constructionist on this issue. I don't care to interpret the language presented here. IMHO, the meanings of the simple words are plain. But if you want to "interpret" the Pledge, perhaps to discover some heretofore hidden "emanations", go ahead. [;)]
View Quote
your sarcasm is completely unnecessary. and if you read my post thoroughly, you'll be aware that i do not mention anything about interpreting the meaning of words. i speak only of making sure the intent of the authors isn't lost when one starts defining the individual words (don't lose the forest for the trees, so to speak). people get so hung up on the meaning of one word or phrase that they forget the true intent of the whole body of text. the 2nd amendment is a great example. and with all due respect, what you think the words mean matters little, truly. personal perceptions do not make fact. i understand your point, and i'm not flaming so don't take it the wrong way. but word meanings change subtly over time. and to use today's accepted, vernacular meaning doesn't always coincide with the true intent of the authors. hell, some words in common usage "back then" aren't used today.
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 8:37:18 AM EDT
People whining because the government is opposed to armed insurrection, rebellion and the destruction of our Nation. Idiots.
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 8:58:11 AM EDT
It is not "I pledge of allegiance...", it is simply "I pledge allegiance..."! Do you even know the pledge? Apparently not.
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 9:01:37 AM EDT
Hey, y'all, if the Founding Fathers intended that 'United' meant that the union was for the time being and not permament, WTF was the War Between the States all about? That Lincoln owes us a friggin explanation and it damn well better be a good one! If Lincoln was wrong, well, I've got some chattel that I need to be rounding up![:D] Eric The(AllRight,AllRight,I'llManumitAllOfMyGreat­GreatGranddaddy'sChattel!)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 9:03:38 AM EDT
The constitution only applies to the states united. Those that succede will need their own.
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 9:06:15 AM EDT
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 9:16:05 AM EDT
HERE IS THE NEW PLEDGE: I have removed all objectionable phrases from the pledge of allegiance: "The flag of the United Stated of America, With liberty and justice for all" I'm sure somebody will still have a problem with what's left.
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 9:45:00 AM EDT
Originally Posted By ARLady: to raf - your sarcasm is completely unnecessary.
View Quote
Au contraire. Sarcasm is ALWAYS necessary. Just not always appreciated. [:D]
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 9:49:23 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/27/2002 9:51:47 AM EDT by garandman]
Originally Posted By SNorman: HERE IS THE NEW PLEDGE: I have removed all objectionable phrases from the pledge of allegiance: "The flag of the United Stated of America, With liberty and justice for all" I'm sure somebody will still have a problem with what's left.
View Quote
An offense- free pledge: "[strike]I pledge allegiance[/strike] to the "[strike]flag[/strike] of the "[strike]United Stated[/strike] of "[strike]America,[/strike] and to the "[strike]republic[/strike] for which it "[strike]stands, one nation, individible, under God,[/strike] with "[strike]Liberty and justice[/strike] for "[strike]all." Then again, "all" seems a bit intolerant. What if somebody feels unfairly included in "all?" Better strike that too. [rolleyes]
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 10:03:22 AM EDT
The Founding Fathers never even HEARD of the Pledge of Allegiance, which was first published in 1892. Arguing over the "historical" interpretation of a revision that took place in the 50s is beyond belief. Next we'll talk about how the Founding Fathers stood up during the National Anthem during baseball games.
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 10:12:56 AM EDT
The way I understood it the whining atheist and his supporters take offense to the "under God" part. I think to a smaller degree they didn't like the school system making the Pledge mandatory. What I wonder, as I have heard others point out as well, is how they feel about that "In God We Trust" on their hard currency. Good thing the lawyers probably get paid with something other than cash, they might not have been able to take the case. [;)]
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 10:22:23 AM EDT
The original Pledge of Allegiance: "I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands - one nation indivisible - with liberty and justice for all." On September 8, 1892, the Boston based "The Youth's Companion" magazine published a few words for students to repeat on Columbus Day that year. Written by Francis Bellamy, the circulation manager and native of Rome, New York, and reprinted on thousands of leaflets, was sent out to public schools across the country. On October 12, 1892, the quadricentennial of Columbus' arrival, more than 12 million children recited the Pledge of Allegiance, thus beginning a required school-day ritual. At the first National Flag Conference in Washington D.C., on June 14, 1923, a change was made. For clarity, the words "the Flag of the United States" replaced "my flag". In the following years various other changes were suggested but were never formally adopted. It was not until 1942 that Congress officially recognized the Pledge of Allegiance. One year later, in June 1943, the Supreme Court ruled that school children could not be forced to recite it. In fact, today only half of our fifty states have laws that encourage the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in the classroom! In June of 1954 an amendment was made to add the words "under God". Then-President Dwight D. Eisenhower said "In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country's most powerful resource in peace and war." ------------------- Source: [url]http://flagday.com/history/origional_pledge_of_allegiance.shtml[/url] ------------------- USPC40 [img]www.ar15.com/members/albums/USPC40/line.gif[/img] [url=www.nra.org][b][red]NRA[/red][/url] [url=www.nra.org][blue]Life Member[/blue][/url] [url=www.gunowners.org][b][red]GOA[/red] [/url] [url=www.gunowners.org][blue]Life Member[/blue][/url] [url=www.saf.org][red]SAF[/red][/url] [url=www.saf.org][blue]Supporter[/blue][/url] [url=sas-aim.org][red]SAS[/red][/url] [url=sas-aim.org][blue]Supporter[/blue][/b][/url] [img]www.ar15.com/members/albums/USPC40/alabamaflag.gif[/img]
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 12:26:51 PM EDT
I have seen [url=http://www.fee.org/vnews.php?nid=4937]this[/url] or similar several times before. Has anyone else read it and have any thoughts? If you get a registration page there is a skip registration link.
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 12:36:48 PM EDT
I've been thinking about this whole conundrum as of late, and I'm now thinking, the hell with it. There is nothing stopping me from buying an indoor flag and having my kids recite the mattja version of the Pledge before they leave for school. The public school system is BS. We all know that. I'll fill the gaps in their education with a handful of old time religion thrown in for good measure. Being a product of the public school system, I know I cannot depend on them to educate my children. So, let the public school commies do as they might, cuz old daddy has his own reeducation in store for his kids.
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 12:49:09 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Tinker: The Founding Fathers never even HEARD of the Pledge of Allegiance, which was first published in 1892. Arguing over the "historical" interpretation of a revision that took place in the 50s is beyond belief. Next we'll talk about how the Founding Fathers stood up during the National Anthem during baseball games.
View Quote
true, if you think that the meaning of the words is only important in relation to the Pledge of Allegiance. i think there's a bigger picture.
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 1:07:37 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/27/2002 1:10:03 PM EDT by acftgrunt]
The following words were spoken by the late Red Skelton on his television program as he related the story of his teacher, Mr. Laswell, who felt his students had come to think of the Pledge of Allegiance as merely something to recite in class each day. Now, more than ever, listen to the meaning of these words. "I've been listening to you boys and girls recite the Pledge of Allegiance all semester and it seems as though it is becoming monotonous to you. If I may, may I recite it and try to explain to you the meaning of each word?" I -- me, an individual, a committee of one. Pledge -- dedicate all of my worldly goods to give without self pity. Allegiance -- my love and my devotion. To the flag -- our standard, Old Glory, a symbol of freedom. Wherever she waves, there's respect because your loyalty has givenher a dignity that shouts freedom is everybody's job! United -- that means that we have all come together. States -- individual communities that have united into 48 great states. Forty-eight individual communities with pride and dignity and purpose; all divided with imaginary boundaries, yet united to a common purpose, and that's love for country. And to the republic -- a state in which sovereign power is invested in representatives chosen by the people to govern. And government is the people and it's from the people to the leaders, not from the leaders to the people. For which it stands, one nation -- one nation, meaning "so blessed by God" Indivisible -- incapable of being divided. With liberty -- which is freedom -- the right of power to live one's own life without threats, fear or some sort of retaliation. And Justice -- the principle or quality of dealing fairly with others. For all -- which means, boys and girls, it's as much your country as it is mine. Since I was a small boy, two states have been added to our country and two words have been added to the pledge of Allegiance... UNDER GOD Wouldn't it be a pity if someone said that is a prayer and that would be eliminated from schools too? God Bless America! [url=http://home.att.net/~poofcatt/july.html]The website with Red Skelton saying the above.[/url]
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 1:40:47 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Philadelphia_GunMan: So just take out "under God". We can still be indivisible. Isn't our country's motto "in God we trust" ? I guess we will have to come up with a whole new one there.
View Quote
That is indeed our Nations motto. The athiest who brought the suit first wanted to target that, but decided the pledge in the schools would be easier. He was right. The motto is next.....
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 1:59:26 PM EDT
A pledge could not be a "Facist" indoctrination tool unless required to say it by law and punished (or at least counseled) for not doing so. Forced patriotism is a sign of an insecure government. The pledge of allegience is not required by law for anyone to say it. Your free to keep your mouth shut. Under this idea, you could say that 'Eddie Eagle' is a "Facist" indoctrination tool like some already have. Public Schools are in the buisness of indoctrination however as you get in trouble for not going, and the fact that teachers union dont like alternative education for children. They want kids in Public schools only. What happens if you choose not to go to school? Time for a meeting.... lib
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 2:07:45 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ArmedAggie: The way I understood it the whining atheist and his supporters take offense to the "under God" part. [;)]
View Quote
Can you please point me to an interview in which the applicant whined?? The only person I have seen whine has been Jerry Fallenangelwell... Oh and a few posters here.
Link Posted: 6/27/2002 2:12:41 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/27/2002 2:19:00 PM EDT by QCMGR]
Originally Posted By 71-Hour_Achmed: The line, "one nation . . . indivisible" is a crock.
View Quote
No, the civil war validated that line.
The Pledge is merely a fascist tool designed to indoctrinate our young into joining the ranks of the goose-stepping thugs who control our once-great nation.
View Quote
....and your point is?
Top Top