Might not be in formal session....

Posted By: sam on 2008-09-24
In Reply to: My reaction would have been - Still laughing

does not mean there wouldn't still be talking going on. Obviously you don't think this is any big deal. I personally think it is a very big deal. To each his/her own.

Complete Discussion Below:

marks the location of current message within thread

what do you call a leader - cubbie
- I was a leader in the Army - Kaydie
- what do you call a leader.... - sam
  - I'm guessing you're talking about - Get Informed
  - Obama. He knows the American people - huh?
  - John McCain - nm
    - Thank you for letting me know where you stand.... - sam
      - Come on, you made that way too easy! nm - I crack myself up
        And you also I am assuming? What would... - sam
        I'd be disappointed, just as I would be if McCain is - a no-show. I'm lookin forward to this fight.
        My reaction would have been - Still laughing
        Might not be in formal session.... - sam
        I think the debate is a big deal - sm
        I think that each person needs to do what his ....sm - oldtimer

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

Other related messages found in our database

We denounce you. Please return to the indoctrination session
X

Here's the formal document
http://www.obamacrimes.com/attachments/028_Obama,%20Motion%20for%20Leave%20and%20First%20Amended%20Complaint.pdf

I'm not sure of all the formal legal implications, but (sm)
I don't think the lawsuit has anything to do with The Pledge itself except for the words, under God. I'm pretty sure this is the motivating factor of the suit.

Now here again, I believe in God, but I also respect the fact that there are other Americans who do not. Isn't that one of the primary reasons we fought so hard for indepence? The freedom to choose our religion or not to choose any religion?

Separation of church and state. It boggles my mind that this basic, simple premise somehow is so complicated.

The Pledge did not even contain the words, under God until some time in the 1950s. The Pledge was ammended to include them. The founding fathers did not write those words.

Believing in God should not be a qualification for being an American. Including the words, under God, if one does not believe in God, prohibits them from reciting The Pledge. They don't want to have to leave the room or be silent. They want to pledge their allegiance to their country, but for those words.

It has nothing to do with Americans excluding God. It's just the right of all Americans to practice their religion of choice or no religion.

Proclaiming one's belief in God can be exhibited in so many more meaningful ways than insisting that 2 words be included in The Pledge.