Re: Something more scholarly to discuss . . . -- The Official Scholars' Message Board

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: [1] ]

Subject: Re: Something more scholarly to discuss . . .

Author:
Alex

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 12:13:02 07/03/02 Wed
In reply to: jeremyshagwell 's message, "Re: Something more scholarly to discuss . . ." on 11:48:00 07/03/02 Wed

Yes Jeremy, I agree. Eisenhower was responding directly to the "godless commies". Its pretty sad, but all of our foreign, and domestic for that matter, policy is that transparent. The problem is that church and state is not clearly delineated in the constitution. In fact, the constitution seems only to respond to English Anglicanism rather than creating an a-theist government. Personally, I never said the pledge. I alsways felt that it was the sign of an insecure, totalitarian government that makes school children pledge themselves to the country each morning. When will this puritanical country ever learn!

Alex

>Good topic, Mikey. I think it is about damned time
>for this to happen. Obviously most of you will
>disregard my statements because I am an ass and not a
>believer in anything, but the article explicitly cites
>Eisenhower's "mission statement", if you will, about
>children proclaiming evermorning their allegiance to
>their country and to the "Almighty". Clearly this is
>a meshing of church and state, and we can't have that
>if we are ever going to get an atheist for a
>president!!!
>O'Doyle RULES!! as does BLUE TEAM!!
>J

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]