 |
|
|
|
|
September 9th, 2013
03:29 PM ET
Fox News host: Atheists 'don't have to live here'By Daniel Burke, CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor (CNN) - Fox News pundit Dana Perino said she's "tired" of atheists attempting to remove the phrase "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance, adding, "if these people really don't like it, they don't have to live here." The co-host of Fox's "The Five" was referring to a suit brought by the American Humanist Association in Massachusetts, where the state's Supreme Judicial Court heard a challenge to the pledge on Wednesday. The group's executive director, Roy Speckhardt, called the suit "the first challenge of its kind," but Perino begged to differ. Perino, who was White House press secretary for George W. Bush from 2007-2009, said she recalled working at the Justice Department in 2001 "and a lawsuit like this came through." The former Bush spokeswoman added that "before the day had finished the United States Senate and the House of Representatives had both passed resolutions saying that they were for keeping ‘under God’ in the pledge." "If these people don't like it, they don't have to live here," Perino added. David Silverman, president of the American Atheists, called Perino's comments "bigotry." "I, for one, am tired of those Christians, like Ms. Perino, who think that equality is somehow un-American," Silverman said. "If Ms. Perino doesn't like being only equal, it is she who will have to leave America to some other country that doesn't value religious liberty." READ MORE: Famous Atheists and Their Beliefs In 2002, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with atheist Michael Newdow who argued that the words "under God" in the pledge amounted to an unconstitutional government endorsement of religion. The Supreme Court overturned that ruling. Congress added the words "under God" in 1954 amid the red scare over the Soviet Union. In November 2002, after the Newdow ruling, Congress passed a law reaffirming "under God" in the pledge. Greg Gutfeld, another co-host on "The Five," continued the discussion after Perino, saying the Pledge of Allegiance "is not a prayer, it's a patriotic exercise. In a sense, it's basically saying: Thanks for giving us the freedom to be an atheist." The Massachusetts case, which was brought by an unidentified family of a student at a school in suburban Boston, will be argued on the premise that the pledge violates the Equal Rights Amendment of the Massachusetts Constitution. READ MORE: Behold, the Six Types of Atheists It is the first such case to be tried on the state level: All previous attempts have been argued in federal court on the grounds that "under God" was an unconstitutional violation of the separation of church and state. CNN's Kevin Conlon contributed to this report. soundoff (7,255 Responses)« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 Next »
Next entry »Who gets to judge Anthony Weiner?
« Previous entryS.E. Cupp: `Conservative atheist' is not a contradiction
|
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
So according to Fox, equality means preserving their right to discriminate and impose their way of thinking on everyone – or leave. Wow.. they need to be put in museums..
Yep, just like the liberal agenda being spewed from NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, etc.
Has anyone on those networks suggested that those who disagree with them should just leave?
Intolerant Christians don't have to live here either if they don't want atheist neighbors (this from a tolerant Christian)
They can leave and live in Syria.
They? Do you mean the Fox News idiots or atheists?
Either way, your bigotry is showing.
I think it's quite telling that the phrase "under God" divides "one nation" and "indivisible" in the pledge.
Well spotted sir!
Godless Vagabond
Maybe they worded it that way on purpose!
Can't we just all agree to change it to "under Allah?" Or Vishnu, or Zeus, or Odin? I'm an atheist, but I wouldn't mind if we changed it to any of them, I'm just tired of it always being the Christian one. How about if we rotate them yearly? That way ALL Americans get represented, not just the ones who believe in the resurrection of some bronze age carpenter who lived on the other side of the world 2,000 years ago..
I'm a school teacher, and I'm forced (in that my boss and Board expects it of me) to recite this pledge every morning. I stand, I recite – But I stay silent when the "under God" bit comes. I will not, as part of a solemn oath, state something that I firmly believe to be false and divisive.
My students witness this – Its not as though I hide it. Some of my students do the same thing. They and I are, therefore, set apart – discriminated – as a result of this religious policy.
The United states of America was founded by people who promoted the concept of equality for all, with freedom from religious persecution. Ms Perino, you are welcome to leave along with those who wish, like you, to force the rest of us to lie or play along to avoid your persecution, and I and my atheist children, friends, and students will remain right here in the home of the free – free of people like you.
Thank you. I am glad to see that there are some sane teachers left in our schools. Hopefully more will surface as reason, logic and science lead the way into the future.
Sue your boss and board, man. If you teach Bio, you're a science guy. We're the brains of the world man, we have to do something to steer the rest of the flock.
He shouldn't have to sue to see common sense prevail, and if he does, there will be such a frothing of fake outrage and haste to "save Jesus" from him that the students will suffer, and probably have a Creationist science teacher next year. You can't fix these poor people; as the Catholics say, give me a child until age five and I will own the man he becomes.
Ok. Congress takes it out. You say the pledge with a big smile on your face the way you want to and some poor kid, the only one in the class, says "in God we trust". Isn't he now being persecuted for his beliefs? Ridiculous double standards.....when will it end?
Glad someone else sees the double standard here. If we're going for what's easiest (which some say is to just take it out), it's much easier for someone to just stay silent for 2 words than for someone else to add words where no one else does. How awkward would it be for someone to say "under God" while everyone else is on "divisible"? Wouldn't it make more sense that that person would be discriminated against or even punished for being disruptive? It's just hard for me to believe that anyone is being mean to or even notices when someone else just doesn't say 2 words. Unless maybe you make it a specific point so that everyone knows you're not saying it? Shouldn't you then receive the same punishment for being disruptive? In that case, if I were in that class, I would yell the words "under God" just to prove a point, even if I didn't believe in God. I wish everyone would just have some type of tolerance for others and stop trying to make everything a bigger deal than what it is.
It's easy to tell someone else to stay silent, isn't it, Kat?
But when Christians get told their deity isn't wanted or needed, the screams of persecution begin.
'if I were in that class, I would yell the words "under God" just to prove a point,'
yes, i am sure you would, though what point do you think it would be you would be proving?
Simple solution...remove the pledge altogether and no-one worries about who is offending who.
I think you're missing the point: There is absolutely no reason to include ANY invocation of a deity, or a pause, at that point in the Pledge. No one – Atheist, Buddhist, or whatever – should be singled out by our National Oath. The pledge was just fine for the men and women who fought in WWII without that reference. Its a Political pledge, and should never have had a religious component in a free society.
'Isn't he now being persecuted for his beliefs?'
No because they are not being asked to decide whether or not to NOT say something in the pledge. They would just be asked to recite the pledge.
Well said and a credit to our next generation. 🙂
Thank you. As a former teacher, I am grateful that thinking for oneself is still being taught. You are a credit to the profession. May you have many rewarding years educating our future generations.
As Christmas and more specifically Santa are, for all intents and purposes, guilt-inducing tools to use on children to elicit a desired behavior; and as Christmas is simply a more childish version of the religion that spawned it, it stands to reason that religion is simply a guilt-inducing tool to use on adults to elicit a desired behavior.
To use guilt in such a way, at least with me, has always had the opposite effect. It is a weapon wielded by those who typically hold the most shame, against those who are generally good people but are weak-minded enough to allow that person's shame to become their own.
More than anything else, religion raises my sense of non-conformity to its highest level.
I was one of those kids who "got it" instantly when I found out Santa was actually my parents; the rest of it isn't real, either. It's something we do for the younger kids to try to teach them some morals and ethics while they are still impressionable. Some people never catch on, and they want us to move away because we think Santa's not real.
We have never tried to hide that santa isnt real to our 5 year old. If he asks we just tell him that santa is a representation of peace and goodwill for the holiday season.
It's a free country...and I'm not being flippant. If you want to, say "under God". If you don't want to, don't. Just because Congress added them and later reaffirmed them doesn't mean you have to believe in them or speak them. I have the right to utter those words, and you have the right not to. Period.
Read the article.
I did, and stand by my statement. Did you?
Why are you fools so fearful of the law being repealed? Go ahead and say God in the pledge, but we don't need a law for it.
@What is going on? FREEDOM – Read my posts below...didn't I state exactly that? (and I didn't resort to name calling to make my point...kind of nullifies your credibility when you feel the need to do so)
What's wrong with you? You should know you're not allowed to be reasonable and make sense on a CNN forum!
Then the standard should be _WITHOUT_ under God. You can add it if you like. Neutrality starts with taking no side. Not tying the pledge to a God (or Gods, or whatever) seems neutral to me. If you want to add "under the spaghetti monster" feel free to. That shouldn't be in the federally-sanctioned pledge though.
Fine, I have no problem with that position. Doesn't make a difference in what I believe or what anyone else may not believe.
Try doing that when you are a kid in a room full of bullies, with your Christian teacher the biggest one. "WHAT DID YOU SAY? Well, well. Class, we have a little Muslim here. Think you're SMART, don't you? Well, we'll show you some of GOD'S LOVE!!!" and then they are all screaming and hitting you.
You're joking, right?
Unfortunately, no.
I didn't say everyone felt the same way I do, just saying we'd all be much happier if we'd worry about ourselves more and let others do the same.
The phrase "under god" being in our pledge is a violation of the 1st amendment. Period.
Let's take those words out and anyone who wants to add them can. That way, no one is offended.
Fine, as long as "no one is offended". But I rather doubt atheists (at least the vocal ones) would let it stand at that and would insist that no one utter them.
and if/when Congress changes to under Allah, how shall you proceed then?
I agree – and I'm tired of those who want to have traditions changed, as well as spending hundreds of thousands of my tax dollars to defend those traditions. If you don't want to celebrate Christmas, don't celebrate it. But leave the millions of us that do want things the way they are alone. Our millions of voices are more than your thousands (or even hundreds of thousands) that want changes. This is America – a democracy where majority rules.
It is a Democratic Republic troll
The majority once voted to keep women from voting. The majority in the south once kept blacks from voting. The majority in Germany 1940 led to the exermination of millions of Jews. Majorities do all kinds of things that are still wrong.
...with liberty, and justice...for the majority? Is that how it goes?
"and I'm tired of those who want to have traditions changed, as well as spending hundreds of thousands of my tax dollars to defend those traditions."
I'm tired of those who wish to illegally indoctrinate children into believing that humans were "created" with mud and fairy spit, in a science class, in public schools, using billions of my tax dollars.
'and I'm tired of those who want to have traditions changed'
Traditional does not mean right. Even traditions were new once, they arent untouchable.
Sorry – but although it may seem trivial, I believe this is just another fine adjustment of the doctrine of separation of church and state trying to settle into place, ingeniously designed to be adaptable for and applied to situations that its authors could not foresee.
As children, they are being indoctrinated by peer pressure and fear of retribution for abstaining. It is confusing for them to essentially be forced to say this at school through peer pressure but have a family that doesn't believe in a god.
Children aren't as fragile or lost as you make them out to be. They're resilient. You and I were both children once and being taught or introduced to concepts that were new or opposed to what I'd been taught only helped me learn. A little confusion is fine. Learning to abstain or resist peer pressure are also important lessons that begin in early childhood. As long as they can come home and feel comfortable asking questions and talking about their experience there is no need for concern.
It's a lot harder to resist peer pressure when the teachers, principals and administrators are the ones pressuring you.
So you go home and talk it out with your parents and they help fight the battle if it's necessary. Conflict happens all the time in the process of education and it's okay for children to have to learn to deal with that, even if it is someone in authority.
Can I not say those words without you wanting to punch me in the mouth for insulting Jesus?
It's arguments like this that make me understand why the human race isn't ready for anything life changing. You know why the government wouldn't want us to know if there were other life in the universe? Religious zealots would go bananas about it. Somehow they would be the devil or saviors or God's themselves.
Why can't we have technology that could cheaply and quick move us around the world? Religious fanatics would be able to easily move around and do crazy stuff.
This is why we can't have nice things. Please throw your religion in the trash and be a humanist. You can keep your spirituality, just toss out your religious books and thoughts.
Why can't we implement population control? Why can't we give women the right to choose? Why can't we stop helping people who continually have children without the means to pay for them? Why can't we stop bombing the sandbox or being bombed by insurgents?
Religion.
You know, despite not believing in gods, I don't feel the need to flip out or claim "oppression" when I see or hear those words, nor when any religious observance is done in a public forum. I can even say those words. They just ring hollow to me, but if it makes the theists feel better to be "under God" or to hear the President say "God bless the USA," good for them. I don't understand the need to pick a fight over such meaningless issues. For every little fight we pick, we make the zealots even more angry and crazy. Best to let the little things go.
A voice of reason in the wilderness...
You just feel comfortable remaining voiceless. Or are just apathetic to the idea.
I'll happily add my voice to a conversation that needs it. But non-issues like a couple written words in a pledge or on money, or verbalized with no malice behind them are not worthy of any rational person's time.
We can't just change peoples thoughts from antiquated religious thinking towards more logical, humanist, beneficial-for-all-mankind thinking overnight. We have to start small, man.
No religion in government.
If there's no malice intended, then why such vitriol when some people say "no thanks."
Why the compulsion to throw their good intentions back in their faces?
"Baaa, baaa, I'm a good little sheep, and I let my betters tell me what I can say out loud."
Better a sheep than a petulant lamb.
Both taste really good. Dammit guys. Now I'm hungry.
I do find it more than a little disconcerting when the leader of the free world refers to imaginary things.
You should see someone about your anxiety problem. There are things that actually merit anxiety, rather than a few words meant to bring comfort, not malice.
Like the leader of the free world and their administration being simultaneously in control of the worlds largest military, stockpile of weapons and economy while actually believing in imaginary things?
As long as those imaginary things aren't telling them to push the button I'm not concerned. Every President has uttered those words and so far we're all still here. It's a poor, tired argument. There's a difference between a person with religious observances or belief in god and a crazy zealot. I'm only concerned with giving power to the latter group.
"I trust God speaks through me. Without that, I couldn't do my job."
"I'm driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan. And I did, and then God would tell me, George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq… And I did."
– George W. Bush
New Atheism is a reaction against the last three decades of christian extremism/ fundamentalism that have slowly but surely crept their way into government and legislation. If we don't stand up to them now, then when? The words "under god" should have never been added to the pledge of allegiance and due to the absurd Supreme Court precedent, if we don't conplain now, the SC will aks us why we didn't have a problem with it before. It's the principle of the matter that is important. We live in a secular country and any school sanctioned ritual/event that encourages/acknowledges theism has no place in a public school. I wish they would simply remove the pledge from schools entirely.
Right, we don't HAVE to live here, ... but we doooooooooooooo! (****devilish laugh goes here****)
Wow, just when you thought Fox News could not be anymore bigoted, hateful, and socially ignorant, these freaks top even themselves!
It's safe to never assume Fox News is done being retarded.
Air head church ladies don't have to live here either.
Wow. I never want to belong to a religion any Fox News idiot belongs to.
God is a myth. Get over it.
You mythspoke.
religion:
– a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects.
cult:
– a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal.
Used to be it was just sort of tricky to tell the difference between these two….these days, it’s virtually impossible.
Religions start as cults. If these cults last long enough and gain enough followers their status gets elevated. I'm not sure who makes this call.
The ability to rise from the dead gives an immediate jump start.
What about the person who wants to say one nation under God, if this is taken out does that deny them their right to say this? Where does it stop. Why say one nation say divided nation because that is what we have become.
Then we should change the pledge to "one nation under Allah". And those will be the OFFICIAL words you need to recite. You cool with that?
I don't know why this is so hard for people to understand. If you take "under God" out, it becomes NEUTRAL. YOU can add under God if you like. You can add under Allah if you like (that is the same word, but whatever). You can add "under the all mighty Zeus" if you like.
We as a nation should not be involved in anything religious. We should be neutral. As stated before, if I forced you to say "Under almighty Ra the Sun God" instead of "Under God", would you be upset?
Typical religious arrogance – if things can't be designed and set up specifically to cater to religion and its followers that means it's an attack on our beliefs and the country is doomed!
The sheer amount of illogical thought that goes into religion must be so overwhelming to the human brain that it can't think for itself after enough time passes because it's so busy constantly trying to come up with illogical justifications for what it believes in.
its divided now because as it is forces a group of people to make the choice as to whether that say part of the pledge or not. It is not divisive to remove any reference to god as to make it religious neutral, it would not stop anyone from saying the complete pledge.
christian people are extremely stupid and dangerous
People who stereotype and are as narrow minded as you are even more stoopid and dangerous
Some of them are good people. Ideally, they try to improve themselves and get along with others and actually love all mankind, even the mean ones. In practice, they love their family and congregation, and the rest is optional, no need to "love" or help strangers. They are only human and there is actually no invisible spirit guiding them, so often they say stuff like "I prayed about this and I still say black people are inferior, and God agrees with me." But you can't blame them for believing stuff they've been taught.
When I say the pledge I leave out the words our predominantly Christian Congress inserted in 1954. I like the original better. Congress needs to get a life. Too bad so sad.
Agreed. fI a predominantly non-Christian congress took those words out, I would still say them and not complain about it. Don't people have more important things to fill their lives with?
When do you say the pledge of allegiance? It is primarily impressionable school children that are told to recite this.
Every high school sports event. The crowd has to stand up and salute the flag and worship God or the team might lose.
Tell your kid not to recite and to tell you if the teacher or others give them grief about not saying it. You could get that teacher fired in a second.
"You could get that teacher fired in a second." Haha, not in this country. Your kid will be in a world of hurt. Westboro Baptist will camp on your lawn. Laws aren't for atheists, you know.
So what you tell your kid a lie? The lie begins with your brainwashing children to see themselves as organic matter responding to chemical stimuli when in fact human life exhibits creative wonder far in excess of meaningless spasms.
The next lie is that we are not one nation under God. We are one nation under God with the exception of the godless. Please hang a sign on your kid that says I am godless if you don't like it go to hell.
@ fred
You're so cute when you try to science.
doobzz
I feel sorry for kids that are forced into godlessness. 75% of church going kids that go to college to not attend church after college. At least their parents allowed them freedom to be themselves. Freedom to experience God and experience a free choice not to believe.
'fred – So what you tell your kid a lie? The lie begins with your brainwashing children to see themselves as organic matter responding to chemical stimuli when in fact human life exhibits creative wonder far in excess of meaningless spasms.'
sorry but that is what we are. we can show that pleasure, fear, love etc releases chemicals into the body that affects how we behave. You cannot change that basic fact.
cedar rapids
Not everything is limited to biological functions even though we can trace many organic responses. There exists a uniqueness about creativity of man that is very different from all other animals. If there is not something more than the physical why do we search for that which is not physical. Why would we look for something if we know it does not exist. Man has searched for God universally since early cave drawings.
" If there is not something more than the physical why do we search for that which is not physical. Why would we look for something if we know it does not exist. Man has searched for God universally since early cave drawings."
On the one hand, jeeeeez does that sound dumb. Why do we believe in love spells if they don't exist? Mankind's been going to the witch for magic since forever. Why do we search for Bigfoot? He MUST exist, because we search. Magical thinking.
But you are not wrong about intelligence being more than just chemical reactions in meat; one piece of meat will stand up and sing and clap its hands where another will lie down and cry. Life is strange, there are ripples when no stone is thrown and no wind blows, and there are still more of us who will save and nurture a child than ones who will harm it. You try to claim only the religious love and feel and need, and I say you need to get out more; life itself is ecstatic and wonderful even if it's only an accident on a tiny planet.
Does the Prez offer quarts of Colt 45 when he invites ya fer a beer??
No, i'm sure he has a selection of local micro-brews on hand, you disgusting racist pig.
Jump to conclusions much?? My preference in beer trumps his invite. If he won't offer it, I ain't comin'.