|
|
|
|
'Under God': T-D Readers Weigh In on the Pledge Editor, Times-Dispatch: I write in response to Michael Thomas' recent letter concerning the controversy over the religious reference in the Pledge of Allegiance. I, like Thomas, think that the "God" reference in the Pledge is trivial, and that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals should be focusing on things such as ensuring that there are liberty and justice for all in this country. However, since the court has made the decision it has made, I agree with it in that. Years ago, there was class-wide recitation of the Lord's Prayer in school, and the courts struck it down. That was the right thing to do; I don't know anyone who would question that. However, what is the difference between the Lord's Prayer (an affirmation of the existence of God and praise to Him) and a reference to a "god" in the Pledge, which all of us who attend school listen to every morning, that essentially does the same thing as the Lord's Prayer (affirms the existence of a god and implies that the reason we live in a great nation is by divine grace)? If people would like to keep affirming the existence of God in school and praying to Him, that's fine. But if that is so I (a Buddhist) would like to have time during school to meditate and pray. Kerry Lambertson. Richmond . Editor, Times-Dispatch: The current debate regarding the Pledge of Allegiance illustrates how farcical the idea of separation of church and state can become whenever this sacred "wall" is attacked. Our country was in fact founded by Christians; our Constitution is in fact based upon the Bible; more than 96 percent of the original signers were in fact Bible-believing Christians; and Thomas Jefferson's letter to a small Baptist Church did not argue in favor of a wall of separation between church and state, but did in fact state his opinion against a national Christian denomination. Why any of this bothers anyone is a mystery, although it does go to show how lazy and uninformed Americans have become. It was because of our overt expression of dependence upon God that our nation has been blessed by Him - the source of our freedom. Our intense desire to seek and maintain peaceful relations with other countries while simultaneously maintaining vigilance in our defense has been based on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. And the perpetual cry to "give us your tired, your poor . . . " is based solely on the Christian ministries of hospitality and servanthood. Has our Christian nation ever denied admittance to a Jew, a
Muslim, a Buddhist, or an atheist? No! And may it never be so! Yet why are we
biting the Hand that has fed us for 226-plus years? The reason is the difference
between liberty and license. We have been given one but we want the other. The
expectation that we can do anything in Rick Lewis. Richmond . Editor, Times-Dispatch: Catherine Kaufman fears that those who want to retain "under God" in our Pledge may cause our nation to become "fascist" - and you honor her as Correspondent of the Day! She believes that the free exercise of religion guaranteed by the Bill of Rights does not include "under God" because the reference may offend those who believe in "goddesses, multiple gods, a higher power, or atheism." Our Constitution puts only one restriction on religion: That there should be no establishment of a national religion. Our forebears recalled the wars between Catholics and Protestants and wanted no part of that here. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say there should be a separation of church and state. Two characteristics stand out about those who signed the
Declaration and drafted the Constitution: They were from If there is one truth that is self-evident about the formation and development of our Republic, it is that we were founded as one nation under God. Dolores F. Wood. Richmond . | |||||||
|
Send mail to boballey@comcast.net
with questions or comments about this web site.
|
