Cantousent

Comedy. Maybe I've misjudged Spellmar. I should make friends with Spellmar and bury the hatchet!

Ender, you tease. You have free reign to pick any of mine for parody.

Look at that! She's going to be such a daddy's girl.

Billy's Got His Beer Goggles On -- Neil McCoy Hahaha. I love this song.

I think we've both had our say, Commissar. I'm willing to leave it as it stands. I'll leave it at this: I won't be upset if the Supreme Court rules against the passage "under God." I hope it won't cause you hardship and grief if the court decides against the federal judge. I simply don't see the two phrases as equivalent, regardless of how clever the idea was on your part.

USER : --- Darkside ---- ATTRIBUTES Intellgence: 3

hehehe Smartass! :Eldar's wolfish grin icon:

I'm still trying to grasp the whole idea. Have we overstepped our bounds? Perhaps. I guess it doesn't hurt to keep taking a long look at ourselves. Still, I don't think the "under no God" idea helps the case. If anything, it probably raises the unrest level of Christians who don't fit that ever present "fundamentalist" description.

Source? I'm assuming this is a satire from some webpage or another. ...Or is this a legitimate news article?

my exact wording was "even atheists." Since I assume the affirmation of divinity is most offensive to atheists, I included the phrase. While members of other religions might bristle at the phrase "under God," I see this issue as primarily regarding atheists. I think that's a fair enough statement. Feel free to disagree.

Of course that would cause hardship and grief for Christians. Of course, it would cause hardship and grief for folks of any religion, but you're taking the two phrases as being logically equivalent. I disagree. First of all, "no God" entails a statement to the negative rather than the positive. In other words, saying "under God" does not entail a denial of atheism. It entails an affirmation of divinity. It is sufficiently general that it excludes no major religion. Atheists can take "under God" to be a useless filler or simply ignore the phrase altogether. Fair enough. Still, it is not the same thing. It's tricky, I'll grant you. It's a clever approach. ...But, in the end, it's just a parlor trick. "Under God" was not included in the pledge in order to insult atheists. Changing the pledge to "under no God" would amount to nothing less than an intentional affront. Now, entrenched atheists are a different story. They are undoubtedly deeply offended by the phrase, "under God." Of course, most entrenched atheists are offended by religion as a whole and by any mention of divinity. Let's play the equivalency game for a moment longer, though, and say that the phrase "under Satan" is the equivalent of "Under God." Why don't we use that phrase? After all, there are Satanists in the United States, aren't there? "Under God" expresses a viewpoint that is more or less encouraged by the majority of Americans. The fact that the pledge contains the phrase "under God" undoubtedly causes hardship for Satanists, and yet it does so unduly. Would it be better for the atheists if we included the phrase "under Satan?" Now, let's get to the matter of hardship and grief for atheists. How about the word "indivisible?" Obviously, that word does not cause hardship or grief for folks, but there is undoubtedly a segment of the population who finds the word offensive. Does it not offend anarchists to have a pledge in the first place? So, I will amend my statement to say that the phrase "under God" does not cause excessive hardship and grief. I would have thought that this would not be necessary since it is clear that some folks are offended by the phrase. So, to recap, the passage "under God" reflects the views of the population. It does not strip away the rights of any individuals. It does not force any person to join or contribute money to a state run religion. It is does not cause excessive hardship and grief, even for atheists. ...And unless you're willing to own up to the fact that atheism is a de facto religion, with the members creating and maintaining doctrine, you have no leg on which to stand. Finally, if atheism is a religion, and you insist on including the phrase "under no God," then you have gone further towards creating a state religion than any vague phrase such as "under God."

I'll leave the question of the constitution to the courts. I just don't believe the phrase has caused hardship and grief for atheists. If the court decides that the phrase cannot remain in the pledge, I'll be perfectly happy.

You've got me on that one, Oerwinde. I've never had any mead that's gone bad. Sounds reasonable, though.

Only one post deleted in this thread. I'm amazed. Okay, inuendo will suffice for now. I'll leave Baley's raucous song for the time being. You guys can let off a little steam, but I don't have faith that the pirate thread will last long. Keep it clean. Stick to the topic, whatever it is. Don't get yourselves in trouble. ...Or, to put it another way: Ye scurvy lot best be thinkin' before yeh flap yer pie-holes. I be watching the lot o' yeh, and I'll be pushin' the whole motley bunch off the plank if it you don't trim yer sails.

Don't Look Back -- Fine Young Canibals

Other than abortion, of which I have posted my views elsewhere, I don't really care about homosexuality or strip clubs. While I have never had a homosexual experience, I have been to a few strip clubs with friends. The only thing I can say about strip clubs is that they overcharge, by a huge amount, for the drinks. I'm far more liberal than folks seem to believe. Still, anyone who engages in political discussions is going to get a label of some sort. I'll accept conservative. As far as legislating abortion, I've been against it for years. I think legislation is a losing battle and does not help the underlying issue. As for my extended comments, I'll leave those for a thread about abortion. This thread is about the pledge. I disagree with the idea that putting "under God" in the pledge has somehow cause untold grief or hardship for anyone... even atheists.

Di, do you really contend that the Republic is more in danger of falling from the attitude of fringe Christians more than folks who advocate outright treason? You immediately jump to the conclussion that fundamentalist of any religion drive a culture towards bloodshed? ...But in the United States, the population has had, at different times, greater and lesser religious fervor. It obviously isn't something so simple as the lesson you learned from your studies of history. My lesson is that, should the government fall into chaos because the population is treasonous, fringe groups are far more likely to gain power. Furthermore, you say it's intolerant for me to make an observation you don't like. If we're to go down that path, then I contend that you're intolerant of Christian fundamentalists. Let's not go down that path. I made a statement in good faith. I did not accuse you of pushing a hidden agenda. I took pains to let you, personally, know that I was addressing arguments from a variety of people. If you care to read the whole thread, you might find the posts to which I responded. I did state, and I still believe, that you are misguided in your beliefs. Isn't that the same charge you level at me? We might use different words, but it amounts to the same thing. You think I'm wrong. Finally, I worry about these things also. Religion and politics are bad enough in isolation. Combine the two in one issue and it's sure to make for hard feelings. For my part, I continue to think of you as the charming and engaging member you've always been. I'll probably continue to disagree with you regarding Christian fundamentalists. That's probably because, even though they tend to be a bit borish, they tend not to advocate violence. Only the most fring of Christian fundamentalist advocate violence.

The claim that the legislators who included "under God" in the pledge were trying to create a state religion falls flat. It does not create a state religion. It does not cite Christ. It does not allow for state sponsorship of any particular religion. It's funny, most folks in this thread would not have children pledge their allegiance at school, but for very different reasons. I couldn't care less about the phrase "under God" in the pledge. What I don't like is that the pledge is meaningless in the first place. Half the kids probably screw up the phrase, either intentionally or unintentionally. Of course, quite a few don't recite the correct words for the rest of it also. The pledge should mean something. Until the children mean it, they should not recite it. We worry about the phrase "under God" while there are folks suggesting that outright treason is good indicator of a healthy democracy? Of all the dangers that face our country, Christian fundamentalist is pretty damned low on the list. There are worse things than being intolerant in your religious views. I'd say killing folks over them would be on the worse side. I'd say advocating treason against your country is far worse. I'd say touting an existance with no view of a higher purpose or calling is far worse. I'm Catholic. I've had Christian fundamentalists make some ugly claims regarding my religion. I've had some of them make these claims to my face, which is even worse. ...But folks who act like Chicken Little in regards to Christian fundamentalists are either sadly mistaken or pushing more than one agenda simultaneously. ...And this post is not aimed directly at you, Di. You just happened to be the latest person to cite the fundamentalists.

I can understand some reasons why folks might not like mead. Even so, Gaiman apparently tasted the wrong mead. Pickle juice is not one of the impressions I've ever had from the drink. In fact, I might have expected him to cite mead as too thick, having an aftertaste, creating an odd burning in the throat and chest after swallowing (much like brandy), or being too sweet. The pickle reference doesn't make any sense to me at all.

USER : --- julianw ---- ATTRIBUTES Intellgence: 3

What an uplifting assortment! hahaha I haven't had to delete a song for some time. Great job. Keep the lyrics coming. Please remember to cite both the song and the artist.

I used to have a bunch of Peanuts and Eternal Champion books a long time ago. I'd also like to find another Chronicles of Amber set. I seem to have misplaced mine.

I'd like to tell you congrats one last time. Keep us posted as to how the little tyke is doing. For now, I'll lock this thread and let someone create a generic "what happened on your birthday" thread or some such.

She might not be bionic, but she's tougher than hell. If this were Ender's campaign, she'd be a werewolf. At any rate, back home again, so I'm game to game.

Fair enough. Those were former students, though, and they would not only say the pledge as written, but gladly as well.