Why Is It So Offensive? I'll Tell You Why...
Sorry I'm stuck on this subject today, but I keep hearing such ridiculous statements about it. I’ve heard the question posed today of, why should some people take offense over having to recite ‘under God’ in the pledge? Personally, I believe it stems from the arrogance in the assumption that there is no problem with erroneously forcing the reality/beliefs system (ie: that there is indeed, the existence of a God) on everybody else. I actually heard Victor Boc (on AM 860) state this evening that the guy who brought this whole issue to court (his name escapes me at the moment) was ‘whacked in the head’ [ie: for nothing more than not sharing his erroneous belief in God]. I really think it’s a shame that in this day and age, some people are so closed minded that they’d actually think somebody’s ‘whacked in the head’ for not agreeing with their 'equally unproven’ truth or reality. It rather sad actually. Some would use the same term [ie: 'whacked'] for those automatomically assuming individuals possessing the opposing belief system. I personally feel that it’s so important in this world for everyone to OWN his or her own, personal belief system, and not to project it upon everybody else. I find it so ignorant to make a statement of truth in regards to something that has never been, nor probably never will be proven (at least in our lifetimes anyway). I wonder, would one feel the same way if the pledge required you to denounce the existence of God? I can’t imagine that the religious ‘right’ would sit by quietly under such a circumstance. ‘But, we use the term God all the time! It’s on our currency!!!’ What the hell does that have to do with anything? Illrelevant argument. I am turning off conservative radio now. I'm beginning to develop a headache.