Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Leafsnail]

I meant "would" as in "if congress weren't dominated by people who want to keep the unconstitutional phrase".

[Nadaka]

I meant "would" as in "if congress weren't dominated by people who want to keep the unconstitutional phrase".

Don't give him so much credit. As much as everyone likes to claim, the only parts of the bill of rights that Obama has not violated with unconstitutional laws are the 2nd and 3rd amendments.

[Leafsnail]

I'm not giving him "credit", just noting that he doesn't seem to like the current motto of the US.  That's irrelevant to what he thinks of the rest of the constitution.

[GlyphGryph]

I should note that vote was specifically non-binging.

Meaning it doesn't force anyone to do anything, or not do anything, or anything.

It's not a law, just a ploy to catch votes.

[Sheb]

Yes, of course, because an actual law could be struck down by SCOTUS or something.

Now, aren't your motton and anthem etc etc defined somewhere?

[GlyphGryph]

Only by tradition and non-binding votes, I believe.

Could be wrong, don't really know.

[Mr. Palau]

I wouldn't want it changed not because I like it, although I am fond of it I also think Latin is pretty cool too, but because the nation doesn't want it changed. We are talking about a policy that would effect what would appear on the everyone's coins, and when considering things that effect the nation you should consider the opinion of the people, and the peaple are clearly in favor of keeping this. On such a minor thing couldn't you let them keep it?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

No.

[Gotdamnmiracle]

No.

[Urist Imiknorris]

No.

[Darvi]

.oи

[Gotdamnmiracle]

I love this place.

[Sir Finkus]

I wouldn't want it changed not because I like it, although I am fond of it I also think Latin is pretty cool too, but because the nation doesn't want it changed. We are talking about a policy that would effect what would appear on the everyone's coins, and when considering things that effect the nation you should consider the opinion of the people, and the peaple are clearly in favor of keeping this. On such a minor thing couldn't you let them keep it?

Leaving it up to "the people" unchecked results in disaster, especially when minority groups are involved.  There is a reason that laws can be vetoed by the President and struck down by The Supreme Court, even if they have the support of the general public.

I have a feeling that despite the fuss people will make about it, it won't affect religious people's lives that much.  Nobody is going to give up their imaginary friends because their money doesn't endorse it, nor are we going to be smitten with an increase in lightning strikes, earthquakes, and floods.

Regarding the vote reaffirming the motto: Which is more cynical, assuming they're just doing it to pander to the religious vote and lobbies, or that they just don't understand or care about the first amendment?

[PTTG??]

Prayer HAS NOT been banned in schools! That is false, it is a lie, it is totally wrong.

Teachers may not force students to worship. That is all. And even Christians should like this, because it is the law that prevents teachers from demanding that students do muslim prayers.

Students are explicitly allowed to pray however they like so long as it doesn't disturb other students.

Going back to the fake motto on currency: I don't really care. I'd rather it wasn't there, but I'm not going to spend time worrying about it.

It's when we're talking about the pledge I get concerned. The pledge in general I dislike- why pledge to flag? What's it ever done for you? Is it going to wave majestically at a mugger to scare them away? And I particularly don't like a kid being told to pledge fealty to a rather specific deity every day.

[Mr. Palau]

Ouch broke out the Crylilic on me. I feel like devouted Christians would be just as offended in the immediate impact of the removal as a much smaller group of Atheists are when they actaully think about it. Shouldn't more credence be given to the feelings of the Christains, even if they would be short term in nature. I am sure Atheists would appalled when the phrase was put on money, and have rembered it for a long time, isn't it reasonable that Christians would be just as memorable and just as angry, if not more so? By Christians I mean the group of people among the American public who are as devouted to god as the Atheists are against the inclusion of this phrase on the dollar, not the lapsed Catholics or Protestants out there.