Skip to main content

This is our opinion...maybe





Judge Stays Own 'Pledge' Ruling



A day after he shocked the nation by declaring the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional, a federal appeals court judge in San Francisco put his ruling on hold Thursday.
What, he's surprised by the typhoon he and the others created? I can see him now, mumbling to himself, "I'm not gonna take the heat alone. Let's get all 11 of us to vote! Why in God's (unconstitutional) name did I have to write that god(oops)damn opinion?!?"



I'm telling ya, this is one of the funnier political and judicial moments in US history.



Ron Barrier of American Atheists Incorporated in New York endorsed Wednesday's court ruling and said atheists are standing firm in the midst of the decision's criticism.



Barrier said the government needs to recognize that there are millions of Americans with no religious beliefs who still are patriots and citizens and taxpayers.
And many millions more who hold strong religious beliefs. Amazingly, all those in the Senate and in the House who in the past have cried "foul" whenever the notion of school prayer is brought up, are screaming against this decision. Hypocrits all.



Equally amusing is the reaction of Michael Newdow, the man who filed the original suit. His honest observation is that Congress is up in arms in order to garner votes, but then he makes himself look silly when he speaks about how listening to the Pledge "injured" his daughter. His second grade age daughter.



And it turns out he originally filed this suit in Florida four years ago.



Why can't he just admit he's using his daughter as leverage to get this thing into court? This crap about protecting his daughter from the ravages of religion is just nauseating.



He would be on firmer, better ground just quoting Eisenhower when he signed the bill that inserted "under God" into the Pledge, in 1954.



In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future.




The question is whether "under God" imposes a specific faith. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof[.]" What faith is invoked by the use of the word "god"? I can think of several right off the top of my head.



It's all so amusing, really. I think many are genuinely surprised by the uproar. They literally hadn't a clue.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

John Wick: Chapter 4

No sense in playing coy, this is a great film. I’ve seen it twice and while I don’t quite love it in the way I love the first, original John Wick , it’s my #2. It’s a little overlong, has some wasted space and time, has one absolutely pointless and useless character, and generally ignores the realities of firefights, falling, getting shot, hit, etc. All that notwithstanding, it’s a great action flick, has a genuine emotional core, and is well worth your time if you’re into that sort of thing. Like I am. Summary: John Wick (Keanu Reeves), last seen saying he was fed up with the High Table, goes to war to obtain his freedom. Some of the most incredible action scenes ever filmed ensue, culminating in a very satisfactory finale and a devastating post-credit scene. The first Wick film was a surprise hit. It was a simple, straight-forward tale of vengeance told in a simple, straight-forward manner. Where it stood out was its devotion to human stunt work, on exploiting long camera shots that ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Not the Hero We Deserve, But the Hero We Need

The Dark Knight is the best film I’ve seen in years. Not just the best “superhero” film, but the best film of any type. It’s not perfect, not quite a masterpiece, but it’s flaws are, to me, tiny and overwhelmed by the time the film ends. While relatively bloodless, it is consistently brutal, not just in what it depicts but in the themes that drive it. TDK is a film for adults, please leave the kids at home. Let’s deal with those “flaws” first, the largest being the character Rachel Dawes . In Batman Begins , I blamed Katie Holmes . Her acting was weak, to say the least, which is regrettable in that who she is and what she says and does are important to the film. Critics agreed and either for that or other reasons, Katie was replaced by Maggie Gyllenhaal , who is a better actress. Yet here she’s weak, real weak. Maybe it’s the character, not the actress, which is frustrating because Rachel is a pivotal character. The film,...
1 comment
Read more

Dune Part 2 (2024)

I have come not to praise Dune but to bury it. I am in a distinct minority. So be it. To explain why, there will be some minor spoilers ahead; sorry. The short version is #NotMyDune. Summary: Picking up where Dune Part 1 left off, we find the young Paul Atreides (Timothée Chalamet) hanging out with the Fremen. Plots to overthrow rival houses and empires ensue. Go here to see what I thought about Dune Part 1 (2021) . Overall, I found it to be technically brilliant, but lacking a human heart, an exercise in frenetic slow motion. D2 is more of the same, though with far more action. Acting-wise, everyone is doing a fine, more than adequate job. Absolutely no one or nothing stands out. The way the characters are written (adapted, actually), their back and forths and interactions, are all weak and unengaging. I generally hate when they speak. I've read the novel a ridiculous number of times, and these films are prompting me to read it again. I understand that trying to translate the n...
1 comment
Read more