Re:God/Pledge of Allegiance... Right or wrong, why does CA once again have

[henslee]

to lob a soft ball that right wing propagandists can hit out of the park, right before midterm elections? Last time it was S.F. Mayor Gavin Newsom's sanctioning of Gay Marriage which set off a firestorm, energizing the Right. Yes, yes, I stand by both of these issues morally but fer chrissakes, lets be big-picture pragmatic about timing. Lets pick our spots.

[Moochy]

1. CA

Because we are right.

[henslee]

2. deleted.

[henslee]

3. Of course you are but so what ? Nader was right, too.

We have to win the war not the battle.

[Moochy]

5. He was

You be strategic and political in your state, we'll still be here making it hard for you.

[henslee]

10. I am a Californian, Mooch.

[Moochy]

19. Well lets not water down our policies or politics

...for any reason. Irrational fear of the moderate center is like trying to control what people think of you. Not fruitful. I'm a advocate for secularism, and I fully support the "under god" decision. I thought it was B.S. as a kid, and I still do. Nationalism is a poison.

[Ladyhawk]

11. This is what I was thinking, too. n/t

[Orrex]

12. The battle *is* the war

Dissenting views (e.g., atheism) are systematically being shut out of public discourse, and it's long past time that they be brought back into the discussion.

The Pledge as revised in 1954 is explicitly unconstitutional, and it was so from the moment it was approved by Congress. This is a wrong that is 51 years overdue for correcting.

Atheists can't be American by the criteria of The Pledge. Deists can't be Americans. Buddhists can't be American. Anyone else whose "battle" we should abandon for the sake of political expediency?

[henslee]

18. Good luck articulating your nuanced arguement to the masses.

[Orrex]

21. Nuanced?

"Explicitly Unconstitutional" sound pretty straightforward to me.

If the public find such a direct phrase to be undigestably nuanced, then we're in far greater trouble than I feared.

[Ladyhawk]

33. Yes, but there are such things as flanking maneuvers.

This is a right-wing flanking maneuver to take focus off where the real battle is: tearing Bush down.

[Orrex]

35. I've heard that, and it puzzles me

Is the deciding judge a Bush operative? Is Newdow?

I don't understand how this issue, which has been in the courts for years, is a distraction.

When should the case be heard, if not now? Do we need to wait for a Democratic majority in Congress and a Dem in the Whitehouse and 9 liberals on the Supreme Court?

[jobycom]

16. Big difference

Nader was running, and there was no chance he would win any victory by running, and no chance he would do anything but hurt the cause that he had supposedly fought for his whole life.

This is a victory already won. There's a huge difference between catering to the middle to win an election, and throwing out or complaining about an actual victory for some future elections.

A court victory is as good as a legislative one when it does the right thing.

[Az]

32. Noticed the way things are going? We aren't winning battles

And thats using the DLC's appeasement tactics. Maybe what people want are politicians that stand for things. Maybe sometimes fighting a losing battle gives people some idea of the real things someone stands for.

[jobycom]

4. How about that big red spot on Jupiter?

Is that a good enough spot to keep us from offending someone?

[Orrex]

6. The big red spot is sometimes visible from Earth

Could you go a little farther away?

[jobycom]

9. Absolutely. Let me know

when I am no longer detectable from Earth. Maybe then I can win.

[arcane1]

7. I'm curious how was the timing decided

does the judge decide when to bring a case to court? Who or what is responsible for that?

[TheFarseer]

8. what do you mean right before midterms?

It's about a year and a half away. Other than that bit of nitpicking I think you are totally right. What's the difference if we say "under God"? Like Jon Stewart says, the best way to marginalize something is to have 5 year old recite it every day (or something to that effect). I can't for the life of me see the big deal here. I at least understand people who want gay marriage. I think we should respect state election results. If you don't like the results, educate people and try to change minds so you can try again later.

[Orrex]

13. Proposed amendment to the Pledge of Allegiance

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all except fags, who should be burned in the public square.

Surely that kind of recitation wouldn't be harmful, would it? If 5-year olds are reciting it, it must be a marginalized view, right?

[henslee]

14. Yeah, MT are a year and a half away but if I read correctly, this

case goes before another court and by the time that happens.... this fake issue, which is so conveniently simplistic, (THEY HATE GOD) will be fresh enough for a crack team of poltical media consultants to exploit.

[RaleighNCDUer]

23. Let me guess - you're religious, aren't you.

It's never a big thing for people who believe. But I've been told to my face that I can't be a real american because I'm an atheist. It's a big thing to me.

[MadHound]

15. And just when is the right time to stand up

For seperation of church and state? Or gay rights? Only in post election years? Only when it won't effect us in the polls? Give me a fucking break.

First off, the people who are going to go off frothing at the mouth about these issues are never, ever going to vote Democratic anyway, so what damn difference does it make? Secondly, standing up for what is right and fight for the powerless knows no time or season. If we had taken this approach that you recommend with the Civil Rights movement in the '50s and '60s, there would still be the Jim Crow system in place, and African Americans would still be in the back of the bus.

Right is right, and the time to stand up for it cannot be pre-determined ahead of time to occur when it is most politically advantageous to the Democrats. Never the less, issues such as this need to be addressed as soon as possible, otherwise they fade away from public conciousness and are never addressed. Besides, if we start allowing ourselves and our issues to be dictated by how we feel the other side is going to react, well guess what, they will have already won.

One must confront evil and injustice when one comes across it, and not put the fight off. Otherwise you are just as bad as the raving RWers.

[Caution]

25. Thank you for saying this more clearly then I would have been able to.

[Modem Butterfly]

17. How dare those parents who filed this suit not think of the DNC!

Honestly, the nerve of some people...

[Moochy]

20. great post :)

:rofl:

[henslee]

22. I'm not fauliting any parent nor do I expect them to be DNC ops, nor am I

a bigtime DNC fan. I just lament the inevitable results of this latest development. (ON EDIT) I just want to take back congress.

[Moochy]

26. Don't lament the future repercussions.

There are so many other big issues that will be dealt with, and if the remedy for your unease is to be more politically minded in the justice system, I can't advocate that.

In other words, what is your solution to this issue, since the judicial system is notably independent of the political machines. Sure they use the decisions as political talking points, but I guess I'm trying to understand what could be done legally about squelching these cases before they get to the 9th circuit?

Sorry for being snarky in my previous posts, I just think that you are worrying about a future reprecussion of this, without seeing that nothing can be done about it, nor should there be anything done to stop cases that are not politically convenient nationally.

Our system of government is set up this way to prevent politicians from doing just what you seem to be advocating, which seems to view the judicial system as part of the democratic party machine.

[RSchewe]

24. Sorry, but the whole claim of this thread sounds unclear.

The state of California has nothing to do with this per se. Even if you blame the judge how does that make sense? Judges don't start their own cases to make changes to law. The case has to be brought to the court for the judge to make a decision. If anything, criticize the person bringing to case to the court. Even on those grounds, I doubt anyone here is in a position to criticize his motivations, whether they are honest or political. It is highly unlikely anyone here knows this person personally to make that judgment.

[kweerwolf]

27. Reducing ourselves to navel-gazing ...

Seems like when this issue (or others like it) that might - oh no! - upset the fundies and the reich wing, we tear ourselves apart over it looking into our crystal ball and doing all sorts of navel-gazing to discern how the right will respond.

Geez, folks ... get over it!

Did the fundies and freepers implode worrying about what we thought when Pat ("The Assassin") Robertson issued his fatwah against Hugo Chavez? Are they wringing their hands over *'s potty note and what we might think of it?

Hell, no! They circle their wagons and defend their side. Meanwhile, the Democrats seem incapable of showing any sort of united front and break off into groups to say "about friggin' time!" or "tsk! tsk!" and are now in the second day of taking potshots at each other.

I hate the Repugnantcans ... but there are days I truly envy their ability to stay "on message."

[Pithy Cherub]

28. California is the State of the Brave. As we go so goes the nation.

Maybe kicking and screaming, but the nation is forced to respond. Those that are inarticulate or shy away from the debate do more harm than good. Separation of church and state is huge and I am happy that this puts it squarely on the front page or in the midst of a political debate. Let's debate political things that matter, not hide behind those things that are trivial that many politicians espouse.

[SoCalDem]

29. Amazing, isn't it? These "issues" always "seem" to rise up

JUST when the repubes need to 'remind' their faithful..makes you wonder....

These are faux issues really.. If repubes wated to repeal Roe v Wade, they have had YEARS to do it..

Truth be told..They want the ISSUES not the results they claim to want so much :)

Guns..never be outlawed

Gays..most repubes couldn't care less if they marry..it's about the MONEY rights that gay marriages would ensure for the couples

Abortion..Lots of repubes have HAD them or would suggest it to their female relatives..but the hyper zealots vote and repubes want their votes that badly

God in public schools.. another phony issue

[lyonn]

30. I think I get your point

We have at the moment larger issues than the pledge of allegiance, gay marriage, etc. In the last pres. election the repubs. exploited those issues and barely mentioned: the war; the economy where the rich are getting richer and getting even better tax breaks; supreme court nominees; plain ol' civil rights; torture; corps. telling this nation how much they can polute, on and on.

I am one of those that is too chicken to tell very many of the people I associate with that I don't believe in a higher power due to the hostility that brings out in the believer. They suddenly become by Superior. They pray for me. I'm sure there are many of you that get this same bs. One said, how do you deal with life without faith. Heck, guess I've just toughed it out when things haven't gone well, treated others as I wanted to be treated.....

Edit: Remember the outcry when S.F. and Massachusettes made strides towards gay marriage? That become the Repubs main battle cry.

[MisterP]

31. what spots do we pick then?

problem is, EVERY ISSUE is attacked by weenies as "helping" the right.
And midterms are a year away--so much for "timing"

[pitohui]

34. what time would be a good time

god has pretty much proved he doesn't give a shit abt us

i think there is really no better time than to yank "under god" out of the pledge

god has a lot of explaining to do if you ask me

so i'm fine w. the ruling

as far as the wingnuts, who even cares what they think or what they will say

[henslee]

36. Don"t know. I just dread campaigndollars wasted fending off attack ads.

And I pity dems trying to win in blue states who are forced to answer questions related to this non-issue.