• Flying Squid
    link
    English
    107 months ago

    That is an extremely narrow view of the First Amendment that goes against over two centuries of judicial precedent. Only a Clarence Thomas-level originalist would make such an argument.

    • @woelkchen
      link
      English
      -137 months ago

      That is an extremely narrow view of the First Amendment that goes against over two centuries of judicial precedent.

      Mandatory “one nation under god” pledge in school classes proves that establishing religion in the US is fine.

        • @woelkchen
          link
          English
          -117 months ago

          Those are literally not mandatory.

          Except when they are: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance#Legal_challenges

          • “the Pledge of Allegiance does not violate the rights of those who don’t believe in God and does not have to be removed from the patriotic message”

          • “As a matter of historical tradition, the words ‘under God’ can no more be expunged from the national consciousness than the words ‘In God We Trust’ from every coin in the land, than the words ‘so help me God’ from every presidential oath since 1789, or than the prayer that has opened every congressional session of legislative business since 1787.”

          • Flying Squid
            link
            English
            87 months ago

            I’m not sure what you think those quotes prove. Those quotes say nothing about it being mandatory.

            • @woelkchen
              link
              English
              -77 months ago

              I’m not sure what you think those quotes prove.

              That it’s perfectly fine to for the government to promote Christian religion, i.e. what the submitted story is about.

                • @woelkchen
                  link
                  English
                  -67 months ago

                  That would also be false: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceremonial_deism

                  Nah, that’s a bullshit excuse for religious indoctrination.

                  Now, will you admit you were incorrect about the pledge of allegiance being mandatory in schools?

                  No. If the pledge must be taught in school and some individual students can opt out of repeating that indoctrination, doesn’t mean that the pledge itself is not mandatory subject in school. I did not write that all students must recite it.

                  All your “ceremonial deism” reference proves is that there is a giant loophole for the federal government to indoctrinate on religion and not just state and lower levels.

                  • Flying Squid
                    link
                    English
                    87 months ago

                    If the pledge must be taught in school

                    This is also not a requirement. I’m just going to stop talking to you. Virtually everything you have said so far has not been true and you won’t even acknowledge any of it.