Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And i'll add COWARD for filing the lawsuit in anonymity. Thats how liberalism works though. Such a disgusting, vile ideology.
I see you're also on board with the idea that changing a tradition back to its original form is unpatriotic, yet changing the text in the first place was not?
Perhaps you can explain that position to me, since All American NYC clearly can't be bothered to defend his own position.
If it really is unpatriotic to change our traditions, then wouldn't the people who changed the pledge be the unpatriotic ones, and the ones who are trying to restore it to its original form be the patriots?
Only an un-patriotic American would try to have our traditions removed.
Only an unpatriotic American would have tried to change the Pledge of Allegiance in the first place. Who had to unmitigated gall to think it was a good idea to change something as sacred to America as our Pledge of Allegiance?
I see you're also on board with the idea that changing a tradition back to its original form is unpatriotic, yet changing the text in the first place was not?
Perhaps you can explain that position to me, since All American NYC clearly can't be bothered to defend his own position.
If it really is unpatriotic to change our traditions, then wouldn't the people who changed the pledge be the unpatriotic ones, and the ones who are trying to restore it to its original form be the patriots?
You're not interested in tradition or patriotism. All you're interested in is strawman arguments that do no more to describe your version of "tradition" than it does to alleviate your hatred of Christians. You're not fooling anyone. The difference here is that I believe in a higher being and a nation under God. You on the other hand despise Jesus so we get these absurd arguments thinly veiled in protecting a "tradition" of which you really have no interest.
No you are failing to comprehend the examples & you are misquoting me.
You were comparing apples & Oranges in your first statement.
It seems to me he was comparing one change in the traditional pledge to another proposed change in the traditional pledge (funny enough the proposed change would restore the pledge to it's traditional form). Seems like a very apt comparison to me.
I almost entered the court case the OP was built on into discussion by this forum and backed off since I had had enough of atheist crap yesterday. I certainly am glad I did back off because the case was discussed in maybe one reply and then the topic went the direction atheists always take things like this.
The whole point of the McCarthyist "Under God" phrase that wasn't even in the pledge until the 1950s is to single out those who feel uncomfortable saying it. It's wrong. It was to single out the "godless commies" during that whole scare, and now the only victims of this twisted McCarthy remnant are the school children.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
