GreekChat.com Forums  

Go Back   GreekChat.com Forums > General Chat Topics > News & Politics
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

» GC Stats
Members: 329,749
Threads: 115,669
Posts: 2,205,172
Welcome to our newest member, isabllapittoz22
» Online Users: 5,716
1 members and 5,715 guests
No Members online
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 04-04-2004, 11:44 PM
Optimist Prime Optimist Prime is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: somewhere in richmond
Posts: 6,906
Okay, here is the only logical thing I think of to say about this...

The Pledge of Allegience was written by some one who inspired by seeing his flag wave in the wind. I guess. Anyway, he wrote the pledge. Then Eisenhower changed it. I don't think people's work should be changed. So I think they should take it back out again. Plus we do have the whole 250 year old "seperation of church and state" thing going on. Fuck it, I hate you all. If you like the words under god then you are fascist and should be killed. If you don't like it then you will burn in hell for ever, and deservedely too, heathen.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 06-14-2004, 11:00 AM
DeltAlum DeltAlum is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Mile High America
Posts: 17,088
Court preserves wording...

Updated: 10:51 AM EDT
Supreme Court Ruling Keeps 'Under God' in Pledge
But Decision Doesn't Address Whether Phrase Is Constitutional
By ANNE GEARAN, AP

WASHINGTON (June 14) -- The Supreme Court at least temporarily preserved the phrase ''one nation, under God,'' in the Pledge of Allegiance, ruling Monday that a California athiest could not challenge the patriotic oath while sidestepping the broader question of separation of church and state.
__________________
Fraternally,
DeltAlum
DTD
The above is the opinion of the poster which may or may not be based in known facts and does not necessarily reflect the views of Delta Tau Delta or Greek Chat -- but it might.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 06-14-2004, 12:42 PM
DZHBrown DZHBrown is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Leavenworth, KS
Posts: 1,805
I'm extremely relieved and glad the Supreme Court made this decision.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 06-14-2004, 12:53 PM
Optimist Prime Optimist Prime is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: somewhere in richmond
Posts: 6,906
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 06-14-2004, 01:12 PM
valkyrie valkyrie is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: WWJMD?
Posts: 7,560
Quote:
Originally posted by Optimist Prime
That about sums up how I feel about it too.
__________________
A hiney bird is a bird that flies in perfectly executed, concentric circles until it eventually flies up its own behind and poof! disappears forever....
-Ken Harrelson
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 06-14-2004, 01:20 PM
moe.ron moe.ron is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Southeast Asia
Posts: 9,026
Send a message via AIM to moe.ron
From what I've read, it did not address whether or not the "Under God" was constitutional or not. The ruling pretty much said that the father did not have the authority to sue on behalf of the daughter.
__________________
Spambot Killer
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 06-14-2004, 01:26 PM
valkyrie valkyrie is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: WWJMD?
Posts: 7,560
Quote:
Originally posted by moe.ron
From what I've read, it did not address whether or not the "Under God" was constitutional or not. The ruling pretty much said that the father did not have the authority to sue on behalf of the daughter.
Interesting -- so it's a standing issue. I'll have to read the opinion.
__________________
A hiney bird is a bird that flies in perfectly executed, concentric circles until it eventually flies up its own behind and poof! disappears forever....
-Ken Harrelson
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 06-14-2004, 10:34 PM
AGDee AGDee is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,821
That's right. They didn't rule on the actual issue. The father is in the middle of a custody dispute with the girl's mother and the court said there wasn't enough proof that he was the legal guardian and therefore, he couldn't sue on her behalf.

Interesting way for them to side step the issue!

Dee
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 06-14-2004, 11:00 PM
Kevin Kevin is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Posts: 18,668
Who really cares one way or the other?

It doesn't bother me with, it doesn't bother me without.

It's our country, our flag... be proud of it.
__________________
SN -SINCE 1869-
"EXCELLING WITH HONOR"
S N E T T
Mu Tau 5, Central Oklahoma
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.