1

Sure, no one is being forced to say the Pledge in the sense that a child that refuses to recite it will not be thrown in jail or fined. But of course we all know about peer pressure and most all of us have done things we didn’t necessarily want to do because of it. Asking those who object to it to simply refuse to recite the Pledge is hardly fair. Rather, I would ask why it is institutionalized in any way at all? Would it not be fairer for those who want to recite the Pledge to do so in the privacy of their own home?

2

Forgive me but that is a rather silly comment… any pledge or oath is taken in public to illustrate unity and common cause. To say it in the privacy of your home lifts the republic to the level of God as though it is sitting out their waiting for some supplication. I am an extreme advocate of the separation of church and state, of course, I’m also Catholic … go figure! I do believe the amount of religion found in the pledge is inconsequential to make this entire discussion moot…

And if we’re so worried about peer pressure let’s concentrate on bullying and the fact that schools participate in the separation of peer groups … don’t we all remember them … jocks, stoners, theater/band, etc…

3

Oh come now, who’s making silly comments? To say that you believe in the separation of church and state but that "the amount of religion found in the pledge is inconsequential" makes no logical sense whatsoever. Either you have separation or you don’t.

Sep.a.rate 1. To put or keep apart: disjoin. 2. To serve to keep apart, as a barrier does.

4

Excellent use of a dictionary … now try to apply common sense.

5

Common sense dictates that what is "inconsequential" to one person may not be inconsequential to another. Just because you believe the phrase "under god" is an inconsequential part of the Pledge of Allegiance is not the same as everyone believing that it. In fact, if it really were inconsequential to everyone else then there would be no debate now would there? (People that believe in the separation of church and state would not care and nor would those who did not!)

6

No … common sense would tell most people that you cannot please every person in every circumstance on every subject. Shall we bring existence down to a nice level of gray so as not to offend anyone’s particular aesthetic sense? Of course, I would then be offended … Finding the most harmonious point at which to call it a draw is the hardest point of law and for the majority of thinking people the phrase "under god" or "under God" has no more meaning than "I promise never to speed again officer if you don’t give me a ticket …"

Why are you so resolute as to think that the Constitution or any law for that matter is something other than a guide to life and not an end-all solution?

Remember good like life is relative …

7

> for the majority of thinking people the > phrase "under god" or "under God" has no > more meaning than "I promise never to > speed again officer if you don’t give me a > ticket …"

And you took this poll when? I’ll restate my question differently: Since, as you claim, most people could care less about the phrase "under God" then what’s all the brouhaha about? A small minority on either side of the issue? I don’t believe the press would devote so much attention to a non-issue.

8

Live a while longer and you’ll learn that the silent majority is truly the largest voice in America. They don’t speak up until you take away their television and fast food of choice. The press devotes whatever space they choose to whatever subject seems to draw the most attention at the moment. Have you ever heard of "yellow journalism"? Don’t be naive and believe the press only reports the news… it also creates it on a daily basis. Why else would a young, wealthy white girl kidnapped in Utah get so much press when poor Latinos and Blacks daily are abuse, starved and ignored by most people? Because the press created a hot story. Two years ago shark attacks, last year the war on terrorism and this year the abduction of children. All sad events made sadder because it happens all the time and we don’t care until we are slapped in the face with it’s reality.

No offense but I’m willing to bet you aren’t more than 23 … Travel a little bit, talk to people and open your eyes. It’s a big, scary world out there!

9

Actually, I am considerably older than 23 (try nearly 38), I’ve lived abroad for almost 7 years of my life and have travelled in Europe, the Mideast, Asia and Australia.

The fact is, the press make their living by getting viewers/selling papers. They can only do so if they report on items of interest to their viewer-/readership. If this so-called "silent majority" were not interested in the debate over the Pledge of Allegiance then the press would not make any money reporting on it. I agree that it is sad that so much space is devoted to kidnapped, young, wealthy white girls while blacks and latinos are ignored but unfortunately the press are doing nothing more than feeding us what we (the American public) want to hear about.

You may respond if you like, but this will be my final posting here. However old you are, I find your behavior immature. You’ve called me silly, told me that I lack common sense and have made judgements about me in complete ignorance. I on the other hand have only pressed you for logical consistency and evidence (admittedly with some mild sarcasm). Neither of which do you appear willing to supply. If this intellectual discussion is too hot for you then get out of the kitchen but don’t call me names and don’t patronize me.

10

Speaking of getting out of the kitchen… sorry if my style of debate offended you but that’s life.

To be honest your style of argument is rather pendantic and shows little thought outside of a firm entrenchment in your own beliefs hence my misjudgement about your age.

I’m older than you by several years and also well traveled but that is neither here nor there at the moment. I’ll miss your responses but that too is life.

Newspapers make their living off of their readership???? Try off the ads they place and if their revenues dip because of the "wrong" readership they’ll change they’re reporting.

Please don’t be offended and, surely, at 37 you’re too old to pout… oh, my that was rather sarcastic wasn’t it??? LOL