Well said and I agree 100%. United we stand (lol I almost typed untied.. heeehhee) divided we fall, and people who try to divide us, who celebrate our division are not patriots, and they are to be pitied.
A "patriotic" email I received this morning
Archer ~ The Limit Break of PHAET
2012/06/29 13:51:33
I swore I wouldn't make another political poll...
But I just got an email this morning that irked me.
I'll preface this by saying the following:
1) I believe in a higher power, so this isn't some atheists vendetta against theism.
2) While I believe the two words that will be the subject of this poll should never have been added, I am not a 'die hard' for getting them removed. I'd like it if they were, but I'm not pushing the matter - I can live with them there. I'd just be happier without them.
The two words in question: "Under God". Namely in the pledge of allegiance for the United States.
I am of the firm opinion that those two words effectively negated the following word in the pledge: Indivisible. In one act, the nation was divided. Oh, it's true that the majority of Americans believe in a God of some sort, but the crux of the matter is that not ALL people in this country do, and by saying the nation is 'Under God' successfully ostracises the percentage who have no belief in a higher power.
But that particular belief of mine isn't the point of this at all - it's only to give you some idea of where I'm coming from.
The point?
This morning, I received an email from a friend. This email was attempting to be patriotic. It said it wanted to get it forwarded around before July 4th, and had cute little gifs of flags waving, bald eagles, etc... It really was cute. And under a few inches worth of glittery images was the pledge. Which I really don't mind at all.
Except that in this email, the phrase "On Nation, Under God" was underlined.
And the word "Indivisible" was not.
That was all too telling for me. I deleted the email, rather than forwarding it. Had those words not been underlined, or had "indivisible" been underlined, I'd have happily forwarded it.
But I will not condone overt, blatant attempts at further dividing our nation under the guise of a false sense of patriotism. Yes, false. You read that right. Because a true patriot wouldn't be trying to divide us, they'd be trying to unite us. A true patriot would want to stand by ALL people in this nation, not just the ones they agree with. A true patriot would see someone who doesn't believe what they do and say "that's fine, I'll defend you to the teeth, despite that."
Patriotism is loving your country. Period.
It's trying to unite us, not using two words as a weapon against a minority.
I don't care if you say "under God" in the pledge or not. But the second you use it as something to *hurt* your fellow countrymen (and women)? You cease to be a patriot and are only scum in my eyes. You're attacking the very people who should be your 'brothers' and 'sisters' in this great nation.
So what are your thoughts?
But I just got an email this morning that irked me.
I'll preface this by saying the following:
1) I believe in a higher power, so this isn't some atheists vendetta against theism.
2) While I believe the two words that will be the subject of this poll should never have been added, I am not a 'die hard' for getting them removed. I'd like it if they were, but I'm not pushing the matter - I can live with them there. I'd just be happier without them.
The two words in question: "Under God". Namely in the pledge of allegiance for the United States.
I am of the firm opinion that those two words effectively negated the following word in the pledge: Indivisible. In one act, the nation was divided. Oh, it's true that the majority of Americans believe in a God of some sort, but the crux of the matter is that not ALL people in this country do, and by saying the nation is 'Under God' successfully ostracises the percentage who have no belief in a higher power.
But that particular belief of mine isn't the point of this at all - it's only to give you some idea of where I'm coming from.
The point?
This morning, I received an email from a friend. This email was attempting to be patriotic. It said it wanted to get it forwarded around before July 4th, and had cute little gifs of flags waving, bald eagles, etc... It really was cute. And under a few inches worth of glittery images was the pledge. Which I really don't mind at all.
Except that in this email, the phrase "On Nation, Under God" was underlined.
And the word "Indivisible" was not.
That was all too telling for me. I deleted the email, rather than forwarding it. Had those words not been underlined, or had "indivisible" been underlined, I'd have happily forwarded it.
But I will not condone overt, blatant attempts at further dividing our nation under the guise of a false sense of patriotism. Yes, false. You read that right. Because a true patriot wouldn't be trying to divide us, they'd be trying to unite us. A true patriot would want to stand by ALL people in this nation, not just the ones they agree with. A true patriot would see someone who doesn't believe what they do and say "that's fine, I'll defend you to the teeth, despite that."
Patriotism is loving your country. Period.
It's trying to unite us, not using two words as a weapon against a minority.
I don't care if you say "under God" in the pledge or not. But the second you use it as something to *hurt* your fellow countrymen (and women)? You cease to be a patriot and are only scum in my eyes. You're attacking the very people who should be your 'brothers' and 'sisters' in this great nation.
So what are your thoughts?
Top Opinion
-
+13
Well said and I agree 100%. United we stand (lol I almost typed untied.. heeehhee) divided we fall, and people who try to divide us, who celebrate our division are not patriots, and they are to be pitied.
Today it seems many use various weapons against others instead of trying to find common ground.
I have always loved the sentiment of this quote by Jimmy Stewart in Mr Smith Goes to Washington, "Because I wouldn't give you two cents for all your fancy rules if, behind them, they didn't have a little bit of plain, ordinary, everyday kindness and a - a little lookin' out for the other fella, too..."
What happended to looking out for the other fella?
Few people look out for 'the other fella'. Those that do often get voted out for going against what is popular, or ignored.
Orignial Pledge:
"Honor the Texas Flag,
I pledge Alegience to thee,
Texas, one and indivisible"
Pledge with under God added:
"honor the Texas Flag,
I pledge alegience to thee, Texas,
one state under God,
Texas, one and indivisible"
It's incredibly strange, that I felt "under God" to not be out of place even knowing it was added later, because, having said the pledge both ways, it gathers the same rhetoric, and the phrase "under God" makes it feel more complete and in line with the framers of the country...
In the Texas pledge, on the other hand, it fits neither rythmically nor rhetorically. This was a pledge written by Christians by, but it's still obvious that the phrase "under God," has no place. And why? The initial foundations of Texas, it's pledge, it's constiution, was even more secularistic than that of the...
Orignial Pledge:
"Honor the Texas Flag,
I pledge Alegience to thee,
Texas, one and indivisible"
Pledge with under God added:
"honor the Texas Flag,
I pledge alegience to thee, Texas,
one state under God,
Texas, one and indivisible"
It's incredibly strange, that I felt "under God" to not be out of place even knowing it was added later, because, having said the pledge both ways, it gathers the same rhetoric, and the phrase "under God" makes it feel more complete and in line with the framers of the country...
In the Texas pledge, on the other hand, it fits neither rythmically nor rhetorically. This was a pledge written by Christians by, but it's still obvious that the phrase "under God," has no place. And why? The initial foundations of Texas, it's pledge, it's constiution, was even more secularistic than that of the United States. I'm sure there's some provisions in there stating the Christian Character of the culture, but freedom of religion is upheld and the general spirit of the society secular. For one thing the two most dominant branches of Christianity in the State do not acknowledge the Christianity of the other branch respectively, so religious harmony was necessary at first. (It wasn't until the reconstruction era that religious and ethnic conflicts began and this'll put me off on a tangent) Long story short, the presence of the extra phrase is not in harmony with the rhetoric of the pledge, perhaps becasue it's "one state" bit, which while America's "one nation under God," doesn't promote the idea that America is the only nation under god, but one of many, the "one state" bit has a stronger sense of oneness, a stronger sense of "we're special." For one thing it has this arrogance to it, that seems to imply that this state is directly below God and NO ONE else. The fact that Texas is a province of another country, in fact we're the only state that is essentially a province as we were annexed by a treaty which acknowledged our sovereignty. But that sovereignty is beneath a higher secular power, not just the divine power.
I don't give two farts about the fact the words are there.
I care that they're being used to hurt fellow Americans.
Wrong on both the first and last count. Francis J. Bellamy was a Christian Socialist and Baptist minister, not an atheist. (It should be noted that the Christian Socialism movement of the time bore little resemblance to what most people today think of when they hear the term “socialism.” It was about taking Christ’s statements about the poor seriously, and following through on how the very early Christian Church was set up socioeconomically.)
And he bloody well did too have a problem with inserting “under God,” especially with inserting it in that spot. See my other posts in this thread for more details. Basically, he and other ministers of his day (not just Christian Socialists) rightly believed that tying any Name of God to a pledge (or oath) of allegiance (or loyalty) to any physical object made by human hands (or even a concept made by human minds, e.g. a Republic) to be at the very least tantamount to, if not outright, both blasphemy and idolatry!
Moreover, inserting any words in that particular spot undermined Bellamy’s whole point in writing the Pledge in the first place. And make no mistake: the 1950s insertion was made in that spot specifically to undermine his main point!
The pledge to the flag, was also a pledge to the republic, described as one nation indivisible. Since nation states in western civilization have been for the longest time described as Sovereign beneath God, how does describing the republic as one nation under God change any of it's meaning?
Also, how does that specifically undermine his point?
P.S. I guess I should do my homework a bit better, and not take someones word for something just because they're usually right about stuff.
Inserting any words between “One Nation” and “Indivisible” broke up and thus weakened that phrase. Weakening that phrase was the goal of the Southerners in the 1950s (many of whom still sang, and believed, “Keep yo’ Confederate money, boys: the South’s a-gonna rise agin!”). They hated that phrase. Acknowledging God was just a bonus. Other elements in American society (notably the Knights of Columbus) wanted the acknowledgment of God as their primary goal, but without the support of the Southern Congressmen, they never would’ve succeeded, and the Southerners insisted that it be put in that spot.
It could just as easily and grammatically have read, “One Nation Indivisible, under God, with Liberty…” — but that wouldn’t’ve satisfied the ulterior motives of the Southerners who still pined for Old Dixie.
God help us all.
when the Romans warred it was over natural resources or Expanding the Empire everyone they conquered they let them keep thier Gods and worship as they wanted
but that all changed when the Cult of Abraham Formed
then followed by Christdoom and Islam
Your point is mostly true, yes, that was not the point of this posting. At all.
The best response I've read in months.
Brilliant.
like Horus who promised he would forever be inside us
and help cure all diseases
the eye of horus is where we get the RX symbol for Pharmacy
and the Snake
If people don't believe in God, they don't believe in God. It makes them no better or worse a person than someone who does believe in God. But for you to say that THEY are the problem, when all they want is to feel part of this nation regardless of belief - or lack of belief? No. They are not the problem.