ah, semantics (more on the pledge)

[dradamsapple]

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "chanteuse thalia chaunacy" 
<thalia at a...> wrote:
> having not known about said case (father vs national anthem) i 
assumed 
> his children were being forced to say 'under god' which really 
really 
> irks me, as it does most of us. so we were saying the same thing, 
just 
> really back-asswards of each other. ;) thank you for not smacking 
me. :)
> 
> 
> (all quotes from anna)
> 
> > I also feel that the phrasing should be changed. <


thalia asks,
> which phrasing? 'god' to 'good'? or did i miss something?



Anna responds,
Well, since Steve showed us that the Pledge has been changed already 
more that once through out its history, why not change it back  to 
its original state, thus, leaving out "under God"?  It's one 
suggestion anyway.



> > Now, do his rights as an athiest overide mine because I want to 
say the 
> pledge? I don't feel that they do, but he does have a point.



thalia asks,
> first off, i really don't know about him being an atheist. i'd 
rather 
> that wasn't such a quick assumption. could be just concerned about 
choice 
> and freedom, like the rest of us.
> 
>
thalia, 
I found this on cnn.com.  Perhaps it will answer your question about 
the man who started the debate;

www.cnn.com/2002/LAW/06/27/pledg.allegiance/

I hope this is the correct address; just scroll down a bit and it 
mentions the "California father", as I have been calling him.


Anna . . .