|
>"So if the US government determines that it is against the law for the words "under God" to be on our money, then, so be it."
They determined no such thing. When people speak of removing 'under God' they generally are refering to the case of Newdow vs. Elk Grove Unified School District. The case is not about removing the words 'under God' from our money, but from the Pledge of Allegiance. While the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found for Newdow, the Supreme Court later struck down this ruling.
Interestingly the original pledge had no reference to God, even though it was written in 1892 by Francis Bellamy, a Baptist minister. It read 'I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.' He considered adding 'equality' to it, but decided against it because most schools were actually against equality of women and african americans.
The words 'under God' were added in 1954 after a campaign by the Knights of Columbus. This was done partly to point out the differences between the United States and the 'Godless' Soviet Union, and in such was a highly political move. Bellamy's grandaughter said he would have resented this addition. He had been forced to leave his ministry in 1891 because of his socialist views, and stopped attending entirely because of the racial bigotry he found there.
Our money in fact has 'In God We Trust', not 'Under God' written on it. As yet there is no lawsuit, or legislation, aiming to remove this from our currency.
>"And if that same government decides that the "Ten Commandments" are not to be used in or on a government installation, then, so be it."
This in fact was not the decision. The split decision by the Supreme Court was actually a bit more complex. It ruled against a display of the commandments put up in Kentucky because they felt that it's purpose was there to favor monotheistic religion. Meanwhile other displayes like a granite monument in Texas were allowed, as they were less blatantly religious, and tinged with historical and educational meaning. According to the very decision the Ten Commandmants MAY be used in or on a government installation, as long as they are used in a historical or educational context, and not one favoring the Judeo-Christian relgions over others.
>"And since they already have prohibited any prayer in the schools, on which they deem their authority, then so be it."
Again this isn't so. They've prohibited public prayer, which is different. Whether led by school officials, or students, prayer which is forced upon others in public schools is considered against the establishment clause. The schools are allowed to have moments of silence where students are allowed to privately pray. They are even allowed to congregate together and participate in led prayer. What they are not allowed to do is to broadcast these prayers to people who do not want to participate. Prayer isn't prohibited.
>"I say, "so be it," because I would like to be a law abiding US citizen."
Well good for you. It just doesn't sound like you enjoy being one.
>"I say, "so be it," because I would like to think that smarter people than I are in positions to make good decisions."
I dare say there are. Hopefully the people in positions realize that nobody is trying to remove words from our money that aren't there in the first place, or that prohibition of forced prayer is different from a prohibition of prayer entirely.
>"I would like to think that those people have the American Publics' best interests at heart. BUT, YOU KNOW WHAT ELSE I'D LIKE?"
I'm quivering with anticipation.
>"Since we can't pray to God, can't Trust in God and cannot Post His Commandments in Government buildings, I don't believe the Government and it's employees should participate in the Easter and Christmas celebrations which honor the God that our government is eliminating from many facets of American life."
You can pray to God. You can trust in God. You can post His commandments on government buildings. Prohibiting people from participating in religious holiday's goes explicity against the establishment clause. Perhaps you need to review your understanding of our great Constitution. Making a law prohibiting a celebration is as unconstitutional as making a law enforcing it.
>"I'd like my mail delivered on Christmas, Good Friday, Thanksgiving & Easter."
I can't recall the last time mail was delivered on any Sunday, so Easter isn't affected. Mail is in fact delivered on Good Friday as well. Thanksgiving isn't even a religious holiday, but a national one. Are you against all national holiday's? Christmas is a national holiday because the government recognizes that the majority of people in the country celebrate it. Similarly there are school districts with majority jewish populations which have school holidays for everyone on certain jewish holy days. It's simply done because if they weren't holiday's most people would take that day off anyway.
The fact of the matter is that of all the Federal Holidays (New Year's Day, Martin Luther King Day, Inauguration Day, Washington's Birthday, Armed Forces Day, Memorial Day, Flag Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Columbus Day, Election Day, Veterans Day, Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day) only one of them has a religious foundation, and even that one is celebrated by many non-christians as a secular mid-winter family celebration.
>"After all, it's just another day."
That it is.
>"I'd like the US Supreme Court to be in session on Christmas, Good Friday, Thanksgiving & Easter as well as Sundays. After all, it's just another day."
Federal labor laws are another issue entirely. The US Supreme Court doesn't operate on a 40 hour week, and are not paid hourly. If they wish too, there is nothing preventing them from working on those days. There are many instances of them working on Sunday's, and on Good Friday.
>"I'd like the Senate and the House of Representatives to not have to worry about getting home for the "Christmas Break." After all it's just another day."
Snottyness aside, are you arguing for no vacations ever? It's an established day of celebration, as is Thanksgiving or Memorial Day. Would you be ok with them taking a break a week later for New Years Day?
>"I'm thinking that a lot of my taxpayer dollars could be saved, if all government offices & services would work on Christmas, Good Friday & Easter."
Actually the savings in electricty alone on those days by not having lights and computers on saves the American people millions of dollars.
>"It shouldn't cost any overtime since those would be just like any other day of the week to a government that is trying to be "politically correct.""
Federal Law still requires a certain number of vacation days a year. It would all balance out in the wash.
>"I think that our government should work on Sundays (initially set aside for worshipping God...) because, after all, our government says that it should be just another day.... "
How bout Saturday? Don't confuse labor laws with religious ones. Days of rest are established in many cultures because it's widely acknowledged that resting creates better productivity. Are you advocating no day of rest?
>"What do you all think???? If this idea gets to enough people, maybe our elected officials will stop giving in to the minority opinions and begin, once again, to represent the 'majority' of ALL of the American people. "
Again you show you don't understand the U.S. Constitution. If you don't like our country and our ways maybe you should leave. The constitution isn't about protecting the majority opinion. It's about protecting the all opinions, not just yours. If the majority opinion would have ruled the day in this country women wouldn't have the vote, African Americans would still be enslaved, and creationism would be in every biology textbook in the country. Our nation wasn't founded by perfect people, they were deeply flawed, like all of us. Yet their genius was in allowing the constitution to expand, to grow, and at it's heart to protect the rights of all, even when some of the founders were able to insert discriminiatory language into the document.
Today our society exists because of this document, and your disrespect and misunderstanding of what it stands for, shows your ignorance in what it truly means to be an american. It means to be free to do what you will, as long as it doesn't hurt someone else. Stop being selfish and try and think about someone else. Think about the little guy. Being an American means protecting everyone's freedom. Not just yours.
>"SO BE IT............"
So be it.
|