Restoring the Pledge of Allegiance

Kevin: The Pledge in use today, written by Francis Bellamy in 1892, was modified by the U.S. congress in 1954 by adding the words “under God” and in effect turning it into an unconstitutional public prayer.

Pledge of Allegiance

Source: restorethepledge.org

We all have the right to pledge allegiance to our country without at the same time making a specific religious statement. It is also unconscionable to ask any American to remain silent while another American promotes their beliefs with governmental authority. This is as un-American as you can get.

October 5 at 9:54pm · Comment · Like · Share

Robert and Thomas like this.

Jeffrey

There is an old Porky Pig cartoon, where Uncle Sam is telling Porky the story of America, that features the original pledge of allegiance. It was fascinating to hear it without the phrase "under God."
On a similar note, the state flag of Georgia was modified during the Civil Rights era to include the Confederate Battle flag. So, it was interesting to watch folks defend the "original" Georgia flag. Clearly, some were quite aware of the change in the mid 20th century. My guess is that most were not.

October 5 at 10:07pm · Delete

Kevin

Few people realize that "In God We Trust" was not made the national Motto until 1956 - Also a result of the "fear of the godless commie".

October 5 at 10:12pm · Delete

Jeffrey

And that remains one of the reasons, as an historian, that I get so angry when I hear these fantasy histories about the Founding Fathers and other aspects of the past. It's almost as bad as the Dunning School of Reconstruction era history that talked about the horrors of reconstruction and the redemption of the South following reconstruction's demise.

October 5 at 10:17pm · Delete

Kevin

Oh you mean those God fearing founding fathers who said:
"Question With Boldness even the existence of a god" - Jefferson

"Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind" - Madison

or the Treaty of Tripoli which states "The United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion" which was initiated by Washington and signed by Adams

October 5 at 10:24pm · Delete

Clifford

I have some problem with "in God we trust". I have major problems with "under God" in the pledge.

October 5 at 10:29pm · Delete

Kevin

I just wish people would take that whole separation of church and state thing seriously.

October 5 at 10:31pm · Delete

Clifford

Check wikipedia for some of the history and rational of the courts in upholding these seeming violations of the Establishment Clause. Two very, small, vocal groups were able to make changes to our national motto (which should be E plumbis unum ..sp) and our national pledge.

October 5 at 10:34pm · Delete

Jeffrey

If people really studied it, they would understand that the separation of church and state was really to be most beneficial to churches, the hope being to minimize political impact. Now we see the reverse idea being advocated, as though Christianity were the only faith in the country. I would love to know if Jews or Muslims began pushing for faith-based political outcomes how these same evangelical Christians would react (though I think I can guess).

October 5 at 10:37pm · Delete

Kevin

Yes I'm familiar with that argument, that God ≠ Religion. Which is of course ridiculous.

October 5 at 10:37pm · Delete

Kevin

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

Not only do I NOT believe in god; I believe there is no god...but I truly (even if I don't understand why people believe this crap) support others right to believe in whatever gets them through the night...

But I don't want references to religion in my secular life.

October 5 at 10:43pm · Delete

FaceBook debate on Healthcare reform

Another FaceBook debate with one of my favorite debating partners

--------------------------------------

Jeffrey wants to remind folks that 65% of Americans want some kind of public option.

What Howard Dean Said

While watching "Countdown" tonight, I was reminded of something during Lawrence O'Donnell's interview with former Governor Howard Dean. In the most recent poll taken, 65% of Americans (see the last...more

September 28 at 11:53pm · Comment · Like · Share it · Tweet it · Follow Blog

Kevin

Jeffrey, Jeffrey. Can 1,042 phone based interviews conducted by the New York Times TRULY be extrapolated to represent all Americans?
And if it can, then according to the poll, the majority of Americans do not understand the President's, The Republican's OR all of Congress' plans. So how could they possible support a public option they clearly do not understand?

September 29 at 12:05am · Delete

Jeffrey

Oddly enough, I think that these latest polls are closer to right than not. Can I prove that with hard evidence? Nope. And I will go so far as divine that a majority of Americans want, as I specifically defined "some kind of public option." I agree with you that everyone here in my town on the Hill did a disservice to us by not speaking plainly... Read More

September 29 at 12:13am

Kevin

Clarity would go a long way towards people understanding what it is they think they want - and that clarity needs to include the long term costs associated with any new social plans - however noble minded they may be.

In essence, I am less worried about what Americans want and more worried about what America can afford.

September 29 at 12:18am · Delete

Jeffrey

Well, if we manage somehow actually to come home from central Asia, then perhaps we would have a little bit more to spare. LOL.

September 29 at 12:22am

Kevin

It would be an awesome if we could also return the weapons we bought. I mean even with a 10% restocking fee, that's some serious money :)

September 29 at 12:25am · Delete

Jeffrey

LOL. Maybe we could just cancel a few of those defense contracts.

September 29 at 12:32am

Kevin

That's a start.

September 29 at 12:34am · Delete

Facebook Discussion

A great Facebook discussion on the healthcare debate
-----------------------------------------

Jeffrey

Health-care Reform and Congress : The New Yorker

Source: www.newyorker.com

Comment about health-care reform…

July 27 at 10:35pm · Comment · Like · Share

Kevin

Interesting Math. "Yet forty-six million of us—a number roughly equal to the population of half the states of the Union have no health insurance at all"

Since there are roughly 300 million Americans, I don't get the use of the analogy. Is he trying to say that the population of the 25 least populated states have roughly 46 million citizens? Regardless...it seems like a twisted way to make a comparison.

Also, it doesn't matter if health care should be considered a "human right" - it is NOT a right as defined by the constitution - and therefore not constitutionally the job of the Gov't to provide.

That's just the way it is.

My point is these things have to be discussed rationally and without the rhetoric that both sides bring to the table.

July 27 at 10:49pm · Delete

Jeffrey

I am the first to admit that it's a little difficult for me to talk about the issue of health care right now, without considering my own circumstances. Ultimately, I agree with your last statement. But I will say that missing in all of these discussions are the people who are most directly affected by the lack of affordable health care. Rarely are their voices heard, and that is a real shame.

July 27 at 11:27pm

Kevin

The following statement is in NO way meant to dismiss those who cannot afford or simply do not have equal access: but that 46 million number includes a number of people (usually young indestructible 20+ year olds who HAVE company provided health insurance - but choose NOT to take advantage of it - because it puts a few bucks in their pockets for drinking money. And THAT is a fact :)

"According to research by the public policy arm of Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, approximately 14 million uninsured adults and children are currently eligible for government coverage, such as Medicaid or the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), but have not bothered to enroll. Consider this: Virtually all children from low-income families are eligible for Medicaid or SCHIP. Yet the parents of more than five million eligible children have failed to enroll them. In addition, close to nine million nonelderly adults qualify for Medicaid but are not enrolled."

July 27 at 11:32pm · Delete

Kevin

Old Data - but likely still applicable:

"according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics 2001 Consumer Expenditure Survey, households headed by young people between ages 25 and 34 spend more than three times as much of their income on entertainment and dining out as on out-of-pocket health care expenses. For even younger heads of household (18-to-24-year-olds), the annual expenditure on entertainment and dining out is almost five times more than out-of-pocket spending on health care. By contrast, households headed by individuals ages 65 to 74 spend almost 50 percent more on out-of-pocket health care than on entertainment and food away from home."

July 27 at 11:33pm · Delete

Jeffrey

You are definitely right on the part of children (I thought you were off to bed. LOL). As I've said, this is an issue that is closer than most to me, so my reactions are more emotional than I prefer.

Which reminds me, you wouldn't happen to be commenting on my blog lately, have you?

July 27 at 11:35pm

Jeffrey

Oh, and I think that the author was using the figures of the number of states where the combined populations total that figure. Apparently, it equates to half of the states.

July 27 at 11:36pm

Kevin

No I haven't. I am sorry to admit I haven't been doing much web reading as of late.
But If I did, I'd use my name..Why is there some anonymous ranter there? :)

July 27 at 11:37pm · Delete

Kevin

Writers should leave comparative math to statisticians. They always make asinine comparisons. I want to see USEFUL comparisons like "That's equivalent to the number of Baptist Ministers and Conservative Politicians who visit the average Nevada Whorehouse on anygiven weekend."

OK back to my reading my book...

July 27 at 11:40pm · Delete

Jeffrey

There is, but I didn't want to accuse in a negative sense. It's a situation where I would love to know who it is, because I feel like I am being talked at, as opposed to talked with. And there was something said that made me wonder if he/she was one of my peeps or a friend of one of my peeps on fb. It's not often that I am called superficial and a chicken shit (and neither would ever be said to my face. lol).

July 27 at 11:40pm

Kevin

AH the anonymity of the web...It allows people to swing testicles that far out-strip their actual size. You'd like the book I am reading (my current status).

I am many things...but never an Anonymous Coward. :)

July 27 at 11:47pm · Delete

Chris

Just started following this discussion - Kevin is a level headed thinker - you go Kevin! And Jeffrey... who in their right mind would ever think you were superficial or chicken shit?

July 28 at 8:18am