Volconvo Debate Forums - View Single Post

Fonceai · Oct 12, 2006, 08:31 am

I don't see anything wrong with the pledge, but I don't see anything right with it either.

It's neither harmful nor beneficial.

As far as having God in the pledge, and only on that point, I think it's fine.

While some people will say that it specifically addresses the Judeo-Christian God, I have to disagree. Many other religions acknowledge that they have a God, and they don't make the twitchy distinction.

As RickSp said about the pledge being defended by conservatives, it's mostly the Atheists complaining about the "under God."

If you're Atheist and you're offended, that's on you. You can always dismiss its relevance as applying to those in the country (the other 92%) who are some type of Theist.

Insisting on eliminating God from the pledge is a form of religious persecution.

If you espouse freedom in this country, acknowledge that the majority of the people in the country had and have no problem with "under God."

Oct 12, 2006, 08:31 am	#14 (permalink) (top)
Fonceai BANNED Location: New York Posts: 4,217	I don't see anything wrong with the pledge, but I don't see anything right with it either. It's neither harmful nor beneficial. As far as having God in the pledge, and only on that point, I think it's fine. While some people will say that it specifically addresses the Judeo-Christian God, I have to disagree. Many other religions acknowledge that they have a God, and they don't make the twitchy distinction. As RickSp said about the pledge being defended by conservatives, it's mostly the Atheists complaining about the "under God." If you're Atheist and you're offended, that's on you. You can always dismiss its relevance as applying to those in the country (the other 92%) who are some type of Theist. Insisting on eliminating God from the pledge is a form of religious persecution. If you espouse freedom in this country, acknowledge that the majority of the people in the country had and have no problem with "under God."