One nation, under LOVE?

americanflag.serendipityThumb One nation, under LOVE?

Dems still wrestling with God

by NW Spotlight

Well, it looks like the Democrats’ struggle with God continues. First they threw God out of their national platform last year – and then put God back into their platform, after much criticism.

Now Oregon Democrats have replaced God with “Love” in the Pledge of Allegiance at the State Capitol.

At yesterday’s 2013 Opening Day Convening of the Oregon House, state Rep. Carolyn Tomei (D-Milwaukie), acting as the Dean of the House, recited the following Pledge of Allegiance, replacing God with “Love”:

I pledge allegiance

to the flag

of the United States of America

and to the Republic

for which it stands,

one Nation

under LOVE,

indivisible,

with liberty and justice

for all.

The colors were posted by the North Salem High School Jr. ROTC Color Guard.

To listen to Rep. Tomei’s modified Pledge of Allegiance, click here to download the audio from the Oregon House Chamber Jan 14, 2013 8:40 AM Session, and go about 3:40 minutes in [requires RealPlayer]. 

To hear Rep. Tomei’s modified Pledge only – in MP3, please click here.

tt twitter big4 One nation, under LOVE? tt facebook big4 One nation, under LOVE? tt linkedin big4 One nation, under LOVE? tt reddit big4 One nation, under LOVE?

Posted by at 01:16 | Posted in Oregon House | 169 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • George Katsinis

    INCREDIBLE! Rep. Tomei, you should be ashamed.

  • Susan

    Wow—does that mean these idiots believe they can just replace our “God-Given” Rights in our Constitution—for obama “rights”? Whoops—they already are taking away our “God-given unalienable Rights” with their health “care” unconstitutional “laws” which destroy our Freedom and create Death Panels.

    • http://www.facebook.com/nathan.brake.98 Nathan Brake

      i fail to see how this is taking away your right just because someone changed a word???? You know, they don’t control your lips, so, if you want, say “God” instead of “Love”, but doesn’t it say in the Bible that God is Love? So isn’t it referencing the same thing? My point is that no one is making you say Love in place of God, you still have the choice.

      • Susan

        Are you KIDDING? Marxists change the “meaning” of words all the time. Definition of “Love” today is NOT God’s definition of “love”. Yes, God is Love—but today’s Leftists/Marxists idea of the definition of “Love” comes from Satan.

        • 3H

          And who are the Marxists to whom you refer? You realize that the very vast majority of leftists are not Marxists? Unless you are simply using the term as a replacement for liberal/leftist. In which case you have simple striped the term of any useful meaning.

          Everyone changes language to suit their needs – not just Marxists. And, since Marxists are people just like you and I, I think they do know the meaning of the word, and it does not come from Satan. Except for those who are intellectually lazy and prefer to give power to labels rather than rational thought.

          • Susan

            Marxists don’t believe in God and God-given Rights. They think of YOU as a part of a collective—so they can kill you or eliminate you and control you –everything about you–what you are allowed to “think” or do or they will use the power of the State to eliminate you– for the “Common Good”. They make themselves god–creating “Rights” from Satan–themselves. There is no “Right” to abortion (killing babies). US Constitution is about “Individual Rights” (even for babies) NEVER collective Rights. You can’t kill me to improve the General Welfare. My Rights come from God, in this country. Well, they are suppose to—not from the State.

            I resent you saying Marxists are just like me. Marxists are Atheists—like ALL Leftists who believe they can create their own utopia and Right and Wrong and throw out the morality of thousands of years which created the Age of Reason and the Renaissance and most freedom for the most people in the history of the world.

          • DavidAppell

            This is just baloney. Marxism per se says nothing about “God” or any “gods” — it is a philosophy about the economic and class structure of society.

            Nor, for that matter, does capitalism require any particular thoughts about “God.” A society with no conception of “God” could be as capitalist as any other.

            You are conflating theology with economics and with government, and such intermingling is the real threat to society, and especially democracy.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1379679826 John Tapp

            um, are we forgetting that whole ‘religion is an opiate of the masses’ part? go back to school and get an education, lefty. Marxism IS enforced atheism.

          • DavidAppell

            Some versions of Marxism are atheistic, and some (like Maoism) tacked it on as part of a wider revolution. Marx and Engels did not think atheism was necessary for the implementation of their ideas, and in fact assumed religion would simply fade away on its own (which it is slowly doing).

            Nor is our country any better, with the government often promoting a specific religion that many do not believe (in violation of the 1st Amendment).

          • 3H

            That only proves that Marx was, most likely, an atheist. There are Christian Marxists. Perhaps you should go back to school and expand your learning beyond the narrow labels that some of you seem to favor.

          • Susan

            “Individual Rights” comes from Christian Theology. It is a major part of the Constitution–and underlines the Capitalism endorsed by Adam Smith. Capitalism can’t exist without the concept of individualism. Natural Law also is essential to Capitalism. The Laws of Nature means there is a Lawgiver. Natural Law Theory states there is a Designer of Nature–God.

            You seem to “think” ideas develop in a vacuum and not “evolve” from other ideas. Your understanding of Marxism and Capitalism is just STUPID. OMG. It is disgusting, but understandable if you graduated from our brainwashing Marxist university system. Dennis Prager stated that the universities beat the Common Sense out of the kids. You illustrate this point.

            Marxism calls for elimination of Religion and the Natural family. The State becomes god and mommy and daddy. “Religion is the opium of the masses.” But don’t believe me—read what this guy from the gulag states in his Harvard address. He should know the truth of Marxist ideology!!!!

            http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/solzhenitsyn/harvard1978.html

          • DavidAppell

            > “they can kill you or eliminate you and control you”

            You are forgetting that our country has often had military conscription, and that it once had slavery, and after that had states that denied basic rights to minorities, and still deny them to gays and lesbians, rounded up Japanese-Americans and imprisoned them.

            Abuses can occur in any state, under any political and economic structure.

          • David from Mill City

            Susan — You are entitled to your religious opinions, and while I will defend your right to have and express them I will also not let you impose them on me or any other person in this nation. Your assertion that human life begins at conception is a religious position. For while, fate or God willing, a fertilized egg may some time in the future become a viable human being it is in fact not one. It is not self-aware, sentient or independently viable and it will not be for a number of months. So it is up to the pregnant woman and her personal belief system as to whether or not an abortion is an option for her. Under the doctrine of the Separation of Church and State it is just as improper for you to use the power of the state to impose your religious views on her as it would be for the state to require you to pray 5 times a day facing east.

            I also understand as you are a member of a democracy, that you may hold a moral/religious obligation to change the structure of the government to fit you’re your personal religious belief system and as such will continue in your efforts to change what has been already settled, as that is your right. Just do not expect the rest of us to agree with you.

          • http://www.facebook.com/richard.keeney.94 Richard Keeney

            David, you’re kidding, right? Two cells contributed by humans meet and you say, “the fertilized egg MAY become a viable human being” (?) What do you think it’s going to become, a dog, a monkey? Good grief man, cows mate and have cows, chickens mate and have chickens, humans mate and have humans! That’s not a religious position! When those cells join and begin multiplying, you have life in any creature! You call the “Separation of Church and State” a doctrine? That’s a religious term. And if you will read your constitution you will see that your “doctrine” prohibits the government from establishing a religion and imposing it on the people. You finish by speaking as if Susan were by herself. No, the rest of us don’t agree with you. Get an understanding of what you say before you say it and you’ll garner a lot more credibility.

            Richard

          • David from Mill City

            It may also die, that is not become a viable human being. Or to put it another way every fertilized egg does not result in a live birth. Some point between fertilization and birth that egg becomes a viable human being. Where that point is on the spectrum of human development is a religious position. You and Susan are entitled to your own religious opinion, just as I am entitled to mine, but the Doctrine of the Separation of Church and State makes it unconstitutional for you to impose your religious opinion on me just as it is unconstitutional for mine to be imposed on you.

            Oh and “the Separation of Church and State is a political not religious concept.”

          • DavidAppell

            You do not have life, One of the definitions of life is its ability to reproduce, which a zygote does not have, and/or consciousness, which a zygote does not have since it possesses no nervous system.

            It is potential life, but not life as we commonly consider it. Living nonhuman animals like chicken and cows are “alive” in a way no zygote is.

          • 3H

            All leftists are Marxists? You are in serious need of some history and critical thinking. Most leftists are not Marxists. And those that are Marxists are just like you. In fact, quite a few are much less judgmental than you are. Not all atheist or agnostics are Marxists, by the way – take me for example, I am an agnostic, but I am not a Marxist (but I am a leftist). Not that expect this to penetrate – I think you are a victim of your own closed-loop thinking.

            You should study a little more closely the philosophy behind the Age of Reason. You’d be surprised at their take on religion. In fact, if you took the time to study the beliefs of many of your founders you’d probably consider them Marxists as well.

          • DavidAppell

            Religion and the Age of Reason has very little overlap. If Religion had its way we’d still think the world was created 6000 years ago, and other absurdities. Almost all progress over the last 4 centuries has come at the expense of the religious worldview, not because of it.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000088334633 David White

          It was written by a socialist. whoops!

          • 3H

            LOL. A Christian socialist – which in her mind are two concepts that cannot coexist.

          • Susan

            No–There can be no “Christian socialist”–it is an Oxymoron. This from Solzhenitsyn’s address to Harvard in 78. Google it—the whole thing is worth reading. In case you didn’t know—he spent years in the gulag:

            “The well-known Soviet mathematician Shafarevich, a member of the Soviet Academy of Science, has written a brilliant book under the title “Socialism”; it is a profound analysis showing that socialism of any type and shade leads to a total destruction of the human spirit and to a leveling of mankind into death. Shafarevich’s book was published in France almost two years ago and so far no one has been found to refute it. It will shortly be published in English in the United States.”

            BTW–can you please “think” on a more profound level. Your “thinking” is so superficial.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000088334633 David White

            So you deny the existence of Francis Bellamy, a Baptist minister and self described socialist? If he didnt exist, he couldnt have written the pledge of allegiance. If it doesnt exist, what are we arguing about, Susan?

          • Susan

            Just disregard “proof”, as all Leftists do. Shafarevich’s book is FREE online–his Reasoning trumps most people, including phony “Christians”. He was a trained mathematician, after all.

            Reason is thrown out by Marxists—since they have to deny the Laws of Nature and Natural Rights to force human beings into “group think” and egalitarianism–so quality and excellence is punished. Common Sense comes from Natural Laws—you know—Cause and Effect??????–that old philosophy of “Right Reason according to Nature”—what Cicero wrote so much about when developing the idea of “Rule of Law” and Roman Justice which the US courts adopted after it was refined by Christians and became Common Law–enshrining INDIVIDUAL rights (NEVER collective/socialism). Christianity is NOT about collective salvation—it is all based on individual salvation and individual responsibility.

            “Socialist Christian” is an oxymoron. You can’t believe in “Socialism” if you understand Human Nature (Total Depravity –Calvinism and Original Sin). Power tends to corrupt. That godless Rousseau philosophy–where human beings are “good” and you can have a “utopia” on earth, is anathema to Christianity.

            BTW, even the encyclicals of most good popes decry socialism because Catholic Theology believe in “subsidiarity” and individual rights and the autonomy of the family unit. Marxists/Leftists/Socialists deny freedom to individuals and the family unit and dictate what they can or can not do—-which always destroys their unalienable “Rights from God” as our forced educational system does today—forced government indoctrination centers will only make Slaves for the State (JS Mill). Lenin knew this and had “free” education also. Can you understand the concept of “Free”????? Is education “Free”????????? Ha–don’t tax your little brain too much.

            Socialism reduces adults to dependents (slaves of the State) (JS Mill)–always giving power to a few elitists who decide what is “right and wrong” for all. Every “law” restricts rights–FEW are Just—but most now are unjust, because we have socialism now and tyranny at the helm–and it always makes the families and friends of the politicians wealthy and privileged. THEY live like kings—and we become the slaves who have no time to spend with family, work two jobs to pay taxes or force the mother away from children so State can shape their thinking. We become slaves of the State—feeding the Leviathan which allows the Gores and obamas to live like Kings and we don’t have time for family. They have special “laws” for them–no social security like the little people. They have armed guards–paid for by the slaves.

            The producers are punished–wealth confiscated–and evil and Sloth is rewarded. Welfare/socialism destroyed the Black family unit….Read Thomas Sowell or Walter Williams. They document it well. Socialism always is unnatural and evil. The only time it works, is in monasteries but each person willingly gives up their Rights to property to serve God. People who have children can NEVER afford to give up their individual Rights and Responsibilities—it is evil.

            Government is required (in US) to promote public Virtue—because Justice is a always a Virtue. Socialism is evil, because it denies individual freedom and forces “mass conformity” which eliminates individualism—that which gives dignity and worth to every human being and makes them special. (Christian Theology).

            Take babies—defined as human beings at conception by ALL science, but “JUST” laws take away their natural right?????? and says evil–VICE–Abortion is a RIGHT?????? Where is the Right Reason—according to Nature which creates Just Law????? There is a Right to Life—God-Given Rights UNALIENABLE to each human being that can never be denied in “Just societies” which is stated in the Constitution of the US.

            For “charity” to exist (a theological virtue)—there never can be force. Government is always force using Rule of Law—the most oppressive force in nature, when they disregard Justice and individual Rights from God.

            Governments were the major killers of their own citizens in the most heinous ways—all Leftism—from the French Revolution through the Leftism of the 20th century (including the Socialist Nazis) where governments killed 100’s of millions of their own citizens. No God-Given Rights to those individuals because the State is god and Socialism gave them the right to dictate “THE GOOD for the COLLECTIVE” which always destroys individualism—makes some groups victims of the mobs mentality.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000088334633 David White

            So you are saying you know more about him than he himself? If he said he was a christian and a socialist, I’ll take his word over yours. You know, seeing how it’s him he is describing and you’re, you know, not him.
            You went a lot of trouble and verbosity to not answer my question though. Are you saying he didnt exist?

    • 3H

      *sigh* and back to death panels. Do you have medical insurance? Most likely there is a “death” panel deciding what will and will not be covered, and for how much and how long.

      Second, the much discussed “death panels” were nothing more than paying doctors to have end of life discussions with their patients… you know, things like should heroic methods be used, or if resuscitation should be attempted. Decisions that families, and their physicians, make every single day.

      • Susan

        Euthanasia “laws” in Oregon? Abortions paid for by “taxpayer” money? What don’t you understand about “unalienable” Rights to life–even for the most vulnerable? Yes–when government gets involved in our “private” business decisions, we lose freedom—you get death panels and unconstitutional “laws” and charity is non-existent in socialist countries. They “dehumanize” the population. What happens to the decision between just a doctor and patient with NO INTERFERENCE from government? NONE.

        • 3H

          We were talking about Obamacare and death panels. Perhaps in your haste you forgot that. How does Obamacare and your so-called “death panels” get between doctor and patient? How does it get into the “private” business decisions. I thought it was simply a mechanism to help pay for health care for those who can’t afford it.

          • Susan

            You have never read the Constitution, have you? You do not understand what “Free Market” means, nor understand the idea behind Federalization and State Rights.

          • DavidAppell

            Where exactly does the phrase “free market” appear in the Constitution?

          • Susan

            If you do not understand the philosophy of all the Founding Fathers—which included the philosophy of John Locke, Adam Smith, Montesquieu, Blackstone, Thomas Reid and Natural Law Theory—I can’t explain it to you. I do not have the time, nor desire. You can google it yourself, and take a few years to understand it. The underlying principles of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence are made especially clear by reading the Federalist Papers. The ideas of “Private Property” and “Natural Rights” and “God” are embedded in the very WORDS used in the Constitution. It enshrines individual “FREEDOM” and Property “RIGHTS” and Free Association. Such words like “the Laws of Nature and nature’s God” comes directly from Locke and Natural Law Theory. If you don’t understand Natural Law Theory–then you can’t even understand the Constitution. You have to understand the ideology that was prominent in the Age of Reason which merged with Calvinist Theology—in the Founding of this greatest country in the history of the World. The Founding Documents of the USA are the most brilliant political documents of all time–that is according to my philosophy professor of years ago. He was brilliant and I do agree with much research.

            Hint: Marx was not even around at the time of the Founding—and followers of Voltaire’s Atheism and Rousseau’s utopianism were in France—and you should know what ghoulish, evil , homoerotica happened to the headless bodies in France during their godless Revolution— with their ideology of egalitarianism, no private property and godless “rights” with Catholic Churches confiscated for homosexual orgies and Satanic worship.

          • DavidAppell

            While the Founders were influenced by a great number of ideas, they explicitly decided against attributing any rights to any gods in the one document that matters most — the Constitution. They added the 1st Amendment to make it clear that the government has no business with any religion.

            I think I will join 3H in bowing out of the discussion. You are a very poor ambassador for your religion, whatever it is.

          • Susan

            You are so ignorant if you think the Declaration has NO impact on the Constitution and the philosophy and the language used in the Constitution wasn’t dripping with underlying philosophy of Natural Law Theory and John Locke who embraced it…. and Thomas Reid’s school of “Common Sense”. All the signers signed the document after “in the year of the Lord” (that means Jesus) –which exists on the Constitution…. Remember, rampant atheism like Lenin’s and Stalin’s and occultism of Hitler were not in the mainstream of Western Civilization, yet. Darwin and Marx didn’t even publish until 100 years later–and Atheism didn’t take hold really until the 20th Century. We looked with horror on the ideology underlying the godless French Revolution which was the prelude to Marx.

            St. Paul was the most cited person by the Founders (the most influential in their thinking)—Blackstone was cited often, also—and he mentions God and Jesus Christ all the time, if you ever bother to read what that Christian “thought”.

          • DavidAppell

            Do you have any clue, despite your claims, how unChristian your comments read?

            (Are you a member of the Westboro Baptist Church?)

          • Susan

            I love Christian Theology—particularly Catholic Theology dating back to St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas. Love Boetheus and Anselm also. God is Love…..Westboro exhibit non-Christian rude actions.

            But as Pastor Bonhoeffer stated (the one killed by Hitler)- “Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.”

          • DavidAppell

            You might love the Christian philosophy, but you certainly don’t practice its teachings. You are as intolerant and judgemental as they come, and a great example of why some us want absolutely nothing to do with your religion.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000088334633 David White

            “I can’t explain it to you. I do not have the time, nor desire. You can google it yourself,”

            Translation: I dont know either. I’m just cut and pasting stuff Im finding on wikipedia and other websites I googled.

          • Susan

            Your translation is SOOOO stupid, because YOU think I could explain philosophies in this space????–ideas which take semesters for many people to just partially understand and which took the authors decades to formulate.

            Quit thinking in soundbites from your Marxist mentors and “thinking” you are so “wise”. Spend a year and digest some real Classical literature and throw out the ” Shades of Grey” mind-numbing trash which normalizes sodomy and Vice. Try “profound” thinking for a change. Use your brain, instead of your emotions, even though the Marxists OWS idiots and Alinsky-types expect “no thinking” from their ignorant useful drones filled with misinformation and “feel good” (non) logic.

          • truthwillsetyoufree

            Susan-yes I assume you have read the constitution, as have I and many others. When you say something like “You have never read the Constitution, have you?” it only shows your bias and ignorance and it is hard to take a nut jobs like you serious. Don’t assume just because someone has a differing opinion than you about the meaning of the constitution that they are stupid. The great thing about our constitution is it was written in such a way to create discussion. The Supreme Court has been “Interpreting” the last 200 plus years. If you don’t like the other side of the discussion then get out of the conversation! Your posts show an extremely narrow point of view and limited understanding of the constitution. But your in luck, this is the United States and your entitled to your opinion and your right to say it. It also give us the right to laugh at you while you do it.

          • 3H

            You do realize, of course, that the whole talk about Federalism was a marketing ploy.. that the Constitution that replaced the Articles of Confederation actually strengthened the National Government at the expense of the States?

          • Susan

            Ha—so, you think that we eliminated “States Rights” with very limited powers granted (enumerated) to a Federal Government, with added ‘separation of powers’ = in the Constitution of the US? Too many of the Founders knew of the DANGER and EVIL of centralized government!!! You HAVEN”T read the Constitution—nor the Federalists Papers, have you? You just understand the “Marxist” interpretation of our “Rights” which come from daddy, Marx,–whoops–I mean boma and the Statists. No God–No God-Given Rights, No Constitution! None.

          • 3H

            No, I do not believe that State’s Rights were eliminated. Feel free to re-read my post and pick up on what I really said.

            You forcing words into my mouth that I never said does not mean I said them.

            I have read the Constitution and the Federalist Papers…. have you ever compared the Constitution to the Aritcles of Confederation?

          • DavidAppell

            The Constitution says just the opposite — the rights come from the people, not any god(s):

            “We the People of the United States…do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

          • Susan

            The Constitution is a social compact. It is an agreement to be ruled by “Rule of Law” and a Justice system. It was never a Democracy where Majority Rules—which was more abhorrent to the Founders than a Monarchy.

            All are equal under the “Law”. Not stupid laws like homosexual “marriage”, an oxymoron and unnatural and irrational and immoral. But Just Laws! Unjust laws are Null and Void—this was stated by John Marshall and reiterated at the Nuremberg Trials.

            What does that mean? Justice. What is Justice goes back to Socrates. But to make it short…..Justice is a concept based on ETHICS–Right and Wrong—and in 1978–it was Christian Ethics which were Just and Right Reason which included Natural Laws which are embedded in American jurisprudence and Christian Theology, particularly Catholicism.

            Justice is the Queen of Virtues and that is what the preamble embraces for us—Justice (Virtue). Excellence. There are no “Rights” that are not grounded in Natural Law Theory which is where “Right Reason” originates. God is the Designer of Nature—there we go again. Back to Right from God—not from the masses or collective or dictator. Laws. God’s Laws.

          • DavidAppell

            Except there isn’t the slightest iota of evidence for “God” or any gods or Zeus or whomever. It’s all just a bunch of contradictory stuff written down by zealots like you, and it fosters hatred and intolerance, as you are amply displaying here.

            Laws and rights come from our intelligence and our social agreements and our desires to live in safety and harmony. That’s all. And that’s enough.

          • Susan

            The Founders worshiped the Judeo-Christian God. There was no other gods in the USA besides pagan gods of Indians, which were legally forced out of the Indians. Government had no problem in re-education of the tribes (savages) and hired missionaries to convert them to Christianity and bring them to the Age of Reason.

            There was no right to worship pagan gods. You are so devoid of any knowledge—Read Natural Law Theory and John Locke. 80% of the Constitution quotes him. It was the reigning ideology in 1776 in the USA. Common Sense (Thomas Paine)–that comes from the Laws of Nature, too, and Paine was not a Christian–one of the very few.

            Whose Reason? Muhammed?????Really???? How about Charles Manson? What makes him wrong?

            You are so ignorant—don’t even comment anymore–I am just erasing any notices of comments because of the complete stupidity of someone who doesn’t understand basic philosophy. Please educate yourself. You will love learning (you should).

            Can you imagine playing a Basket Ball game with just anyone changing the rules all the time–no set Rules of Right and Wrong (God)? If there was no set of rules—the game would end up in chaos and fights.

            We have an Ethic System in place for 200 years—it is Christian Ethics (not Hindu ethics/muslim/homosexual) since our Rights come from the Judeo-Christian God. Sophocles in “Antigone”—came up with the concept—there is a HIGHER LAW than man made-up (or king’s) laws.
            That concept in “Antigone” of a higher power was Zeus, then—-In 1700’s–“in the year of the Lord” stated on the Constitution—-it is Jesus–his laws which is the Decalogue. All documents of the Founders prove it. Read the Magna Carta sometime.

          • 3H

            “Government had no problem in re-education of the tribes (savages) and hired missionaries to convert them to Christianity and bring them to the Age of Reason.”

            But I believe native peoples did. Not that their opinion matters to you I suppose.

            How do you feel about theft? Native populations were forcibly removed and forced into concentration camps (reservations) while their lands were taken. I suppose to you that’s OK because Native peoples were pagan, and it’s OK to steal from pagans as long as you’re a Christian?

          • DavidAppell

            There is no more evidence of a “god,” or any “gods,” than there is of a Flying Spaghetti Monster.

            Hence, the concept has no legitimate place in governance.

          • 3H

            WOAH! Lets not get into the FSM. Us pastafarians are a peaceful folk, and hard to anger. But once we are, look out.

            Which reminds me… the solution to Global warming is simple: more pirates.

          • DavidAppell

            Ha. +1

          • 3H

            So what is your take on fish weirs?

    • Disgusted

      So sad. You’re so blinded by rage and hate that you think the replacement of “love” for “god” is an outrage. It’s not like they used the word Satan, or Odin, or Osiris, or some pagan spirit deity. Give me a break.

      So Obamacare is not “caring” or a “law?” What, do you think if you just put quotes around something that makes it go away? How crazy does one have to be to pen this missive?

      And, what, pray, tell freedom is being destroyed by Obamacare? Your freedom to not pay for insurance until you get cancer or heart disease and end up in the ER? Those would be my taxes funding you once you end up on the government dole. Which you will.

      • Susan

        I love God; I have no rage. Love defined by Satanists means a whole DIFFERENT set of “Rights” than that which comes from the Judeo-Christian God. My Rights—in the USA—comes from the Judeo-Christian God— not some Satanist/Atheist/Marxist who decides “Love” means giving up all the Laws of Nature and nature’s God.

        • 3H

          And, there are probably far fewer Satanists than there are Marxists. Unless you define as Satanist anyone who doesn’t believe the way you do. Your willingness to label and condemn people who do not believe the way you do is not love – it is rage and hate and ignorance.

          • Susan

            I certainly do condemn evil and sin and Marxism and Satanism–which ends up being so similar! All Leftism is abhorrent. (Read: Leftism Revisited). God commands us to hate sin and evil! Yes, Marxists can be the same as Satanists, since they do not believe in God and God-given Rights, and they make themselves gods and determine “Right and Wrong” according to whatever evil “urge” they have—-whether killing babies in the womb, fornicating, or killing men, women or children on altars or/and by torture—ask Solzhenitsyn.

            What is “Love” now-a-days among our Oregon Representatives? Ha—it now means you can sodomize other people, and kill your baby, which is a “sign” of “love” and a “Right”? Really? Poking body parts or objects in any body cavity or holes in the wall and this is labeled not only “Love” but a Right, as killing babies? Where is “Right Reason according to Nature” which is necessary for “Just Law”?

            Where would these “Rights” come from? Certainly, NOT the Judeo-Christian God of the Bible which uses the worst term to condemn those unnatural uses of the body. Certainly not the Constitution, since all the Founders condemned sodomy and abortion, vehemently, as did all judges for hundreds of years in the USA–because our “Rights” come from God.

            You think the State can FORCE religious businesses like Hobby Lobby to pay for promiscuous people’s irresponsible behaviors—and the killing of their babies?

            We are a country of “Rule of Law” which means there is a “Higher Law” than man-made up laws (arbitrary law). Arbitrary Laws (not based on Natural Law) are unconstitutional. “Higher Laws” mean God’s Revealed Laws—not Satan’s rules.

            Fascism/Marxism/Leftism/Progressivism/Leftism—whatever “ism” will state that the State can do whatever–there is no restriction. Our Constitution–based on God-given Rights–totally restricts the Federal Government, which has usurped the power–not only from the States, but from each citizen. It is all unconstitutional—and evil. Our government is a joke and irrational.

            This country is founded on the “Laws of Nature and nature’s God”? Where does those sick unnatural “Rights” come from—if not from Satan (and okayed by Marx since he loathed religion and mothers and fathers and the family)?

            All unnatural urges and acts of nihilism come from Satan, and Marxists endorse Satan because of their radical equalitarianism to destroy the Natural Family unit and Christianity. Read the Communist Manifesto sometime. It is Satanic and dehumanizes man. You are a total Slave to the State in Marxist/Leftist/Satanic societies.

          • DavidAppell

            > All Leftism is abhorrent.

            As is typical, those who proclaim their religion the loudest are anything but.

          • 3H

            And who claim to be loving, but spew the most hate.

          • Susan

            Hey—it was the creepy Democrat that was claiming “Love”. I abhor their definition of “love”—-that Sandra Fluke fornication or sticking objects into cavities that destroy the body— and forcing others THROUGH LAWS to pay for Vice! “Just Laws” have to promote Virtue! Unjust laws are unconstitutional.

            As I say—I LOVE Jesus Christ. I LOVE Christian Theology. It is so rational!!! Reason and Faith are never separated, by the way, though stupid Marxists think they are superior to the Christian because they just believe in Dialectical Materialism. HA! HA! Everyone has “faith”. Christians admit the Truth–that it takes Faith to believe in God. Marxists lie although no science has proven there is no God.

          • DavidAppell

            Do you realize how much damage your comments are doing to the Christian brand?

          • Susan

            All Leftism IS ABHORRENT! Worth repeating!!! Read “Leftism Revisited: From de Sade and Marx to Hitler and Pol Pot” by Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihin, Such evil philosophy “Leftism” is ALL godless, where “total depravity” ALWAYS results. All history shows this, and this book illustrates it so well.

          • DavidAppell

            “When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross.”
            — Sinclair Lewis

          • Susan

            Now, if you would quote C.S. Lewis, I would take note. I am certainly NOT a fan of the “Elmer Gantry” author—although I acknowledge his talent, he had a miserable philosophy on both life and religion.

          • truthwillsetyoufree

            O.k. enough bat shoot crazy for one night! I pray there are not too many people like our friend Susan but also know a small percent of our population is just like her.

          • 3H

            Actually, to be a Satanist you pretty much have to accept Christian theology and accept that there is a God.

            There are a great number of, and I hate to ruin your day for your, leftists who are also Christian (along with any other religion you care to name), just as there are Republicans and Libertarians who happen to be agnostic or atheist.

            Yes, read the Communist Manifesto, and while you’re at it, please be sure to put it in the historical context of of the revolutions of 1848.

            Rule of law, as it is understood in this country has been, historically, referencing laws passed by a legislature. That government is not based upon the whim of a King. THAT is what our founders meant by Rule of Law – they were not talking about biblical law, and the fact that they were willing to write in protection for ALL religious beliefs kind of contradicts biblical injunctions to only worship God, doesn’t it?

          • Susan

            Satanists don’t worship God—they demean Him. Their hierarchy is upside down and they believe Good is Evil and Evil is Good. Our country states that our Rights come from the Creator—who in 1776 in the US was the Judeo-Christian God–there were many pastors who were signers of the Constitution.

            The Founders did NOT acknowledge ALL “religions”—only Christian and the Jewish religion. Even Catholics were shunned because of the pope. If you were an atheist you couldn’t even be a judge or on the jury. Wicca would have been laughed at it is so irrational. Franklin had a list of what would “constitute” a religion. Christianity–as CS Lewis and D’Souza has proven in their writings–is the most “Reasoned” religion in the history of the world. That is why Christianity has produced the most free and superior civilizations in the world. Individual Rights come from Christian Theology. Common Law comes from Christian Theology.

            Worshipping no God or Satan was never a “Right” since our Rights come from the Creator—as in our Founding Documents.

            Leftist are not Christian. It is an oxymoron to say Leftist/Christian. Marxism/Leftist ideology is inconsistent which Christian Ethics because they use human beings as a “means to an end”.

            Can’t ever do that in Christian Ethics–it is NOT Christian. Leftists are stupid and don’t “think” critically, so, yes, people like Ted Kennedy who thought it is a “right” to kill babies and sodomize others or fornicate and forces taxpayers to subsidize immorality—are not practicing Christians. They are evil. They would be sinners. They will probably go to Hell, if God is Just.

            You can not treat human beings like objects–slaves and dependents and deny them their natural rights to life (abortion/euthanasia)— and be a practicing Christian.

            You also understand that Charity can never be forced. Welfare is theft and punishes producers and rewards sloth and encourages evil. Governments have to promote public Virtue—it is the fundamental reason for any government. This idea was even written about by Machiavelli in his Discourses. Justice is a Virtue.

            For governments to promote Vice–or arbitrary law–is unconstitutional since it destroys Justice–public Virtue.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000088334633 David White

            Ok, so we have no right to NOT be christian. Okie, what should be the punishment for anyone who is non-christian in your opinion?

          • Susan

            Christians are one of the few religions who allow *freedom* of religion, since Freedom is a fundamental right–a necessity for the idea of “Free Will”. It is what made our country superior in all ways to other governments. Even the Israelis state how “good” and “fair” America was— while it was a “Christian” nation. Even then, in 1910 Harvard put a 10% limit restriction on Jews in their college. But, we were by far, more free and “fair” than any other nations. No system is perfect, because man is imperfect.

            Although many States at the Founding had official churches—they did not force that religion on the people of the state. (A few towns tried for a short while). They did discriminate against Catholics and all “beliefs” which didn’t believe in a “God” because all official oaths had to require people to believe in an Absolute Right and Wrong–take an oath to God—because He is the guarantor of our “Natural Rights”.

            The Founders understood—if you remove God from “Given Rights”—-you eliminate all Natural “Rights”. Then, we are a Stalinist country–a godless one where the State becomes the granter of any “Rights”. Then you always get totalitarianism—it is the nature of the “Will to Power” in man. Power corrupts. Man is “totally depraved”……..Calvin’s philosophy was major in USA. You CAN”T trust man—it is why we have separation of powers which the Marxist in Chief ignores.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000088334633 David White

            You cant be a christian if you own slaves. Many founding fathers owned slaves. Ergo, the founding fathers werent christians? Do I have that right, Susan? Our country was based on their not-christian (by your own words) writings. Ergo, we are not a christian country. That sum it up?

          • Susan

            Ideas of Christianity is what “eliminated” the idea of “slavery is good” which was a universal belief–that Slaves were private property. Non-Christian countries today still have slavery. Slavery started in Africa. Slavery was considered “natural” for thousands of years by ALL cultures. Christians, like the Quakers and William Wilberforce and Thomas Clarkson, etc., etc. are the ones who led the idea that “Slavery is Bad”. They eventually normalized the idea. Lincoln idolized Wilberforce.

            It took generations to eliminate the ideology that “Slavery is Good” and it was Christians doing it in all countries. Christianity elevated women also. Look at history and cultures.

            Christianity gives dignity and worth to ALL HUMAN BEINGS, ALL RACES—including the unborn. All human beings deserve dignity, and as human beings—Freedom–that fundamental necessity for all human actions.

            Christian ETHICS reformed Western Civilization and led to the Founding of the USA–the most perfect political system ever created which gave human beings the greatest middle class with the most freedom for all. Most Charity–because of Christians–which founded hospitals, universities, orphanages, schools, etc.

            Men are not perfect—-Christians all are sinners—but even the Founders FREED their slaves, and the most brilliant–John Adams–has written extensively about the evil of the institution of slavery and never owned slaves. Because of the Democrats, they couldn’t do –as they all dreamed—get rid of the ugly institution of slavery.

            KKK and Margaret Sanger—Democrats— I would NOT call practicing Christians. Neither is Pelosi—they are evil. Pelosi should be excommunicated but that is another story. You can *judge* them by their *fruits*.

            The *fruits* of the Founders led to the end of importation of slaves to the US by 1808 and because of the crucial wording in the Original Documents and the word “Equal” and Natural Law Theory—-it was only a matter of time for slavery to be eliminated.

            All the Founders could have been excellent Christians-because they sacrificed their safety and wealth for the posterity of other people. They wanted freedom for Slaves but understood that the majority of people did not agree with it. They were all wanted by the British and would have been hanged if caught. Many ended their life in great debt.

          • DavidAppell

            Your attempt to rewrite history is shameful. The antebellum south was quite “Christian” — the Preamble to the Confederate Constitution includes the phrase “…invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God….”

          • Susan

            Christian Worldview eliminated Slavery. That is a fact. No other ideology could do it in all of history….because individual worth and dignity comes from Jesus Christ, who died for each of us. No other religion is as Rational and Universal and based on Natural Law Theory—because of St. Thomas Aquinas. Faith and Reason were one with St. Thomas as it always was until Marx. Only an atheist thinks human beings can exist with “no” faith (not possible). Faith and Reason make up man. You dehumanize man if you eliminate Reason or Faith.

            Now, the South ‘acted” like they were Christian, true, but they were not as “intelligent”. Their IQ—having the history of being convicts, etc., were not as educated as the North. Most centers of higher education and libraries were located in the North. Many non-Christians call themselves Christian–that doesn’t mean much—it is ACTIONS/ Works like Catholics would state–you can judge by their “fruits” , like Pelosi, whose actions and words prove she is a Luciferian—so “words” don’t mean much to a Marxist who twists all meaning. I am talking about the practicing Christians who lived the life of Christ and treated human beings—all human beings with dignity and worth.

          • DavidAppell

            You get more absurd with each comment. The Confederate South was a predominantly Christian territory — moreso even than today — and they believed slavery was justified by “God.” Deal with it.

            That contradiction didn’t exist only then. Even today the red states, which proclaim themselves more religious, have higher rates of divorce and teenage pregnancy.

      • Susan

        Welfare State–Socialism/Marxism–is unconstitutional according to our Constitution of the US. Read it sometime.

        • DavidAppell

          False. The Constitution specifics no particular economic system, nor forbids any.

          • Susan

            That is a lie—Our Constitution is about Freedom and We the People being our OWN masters and never slaves of the State. The only economic system which is conducive to Freedom comes from Adam Smith–whose system of “Free Markets” (Capitalism) were adopted by our Founders. It is the system that is systematically being destroyed by the Fabian Socialists.

          • DavidAppell

            Our founders adopted no economic system, wisely. Nor is socialism or Marxism any inherently less (or more) free than so-called free market capitalism. Freedom depends on how each is implemented, and freedom means a lot than just economics.

          • Susan

            I know our John Dewey-Fabian-Socialist education system tries to eliminate the Classical Theory of John Locke and Adam Smith from our Constitution and impose Marxism, but really!!!!!! Locke and Adam Smith were firmly embedded in the principles and thinking of the Constitution and by ALL the Founders. Please, read some non-Leftist history of the USA. Private Property Rights were *enshrined* and with that–the complete freedom to sell and acquire property–Free Market system (Capitalism) with no infringement on their property rights–especially by GOVERNMENT!!!!

          • 3H

            So… then how did slavery continue to exist under the Constitution for the first 90 years of our nation? If our Founders were explicitly adopting capitalism, how could they also allow slavery to exist and flourish?

            You’re about 100 years behind the time on the Fabians.

          • Susan

            Good Grief—many of the Founders hated allowing Slavery in the Constitution–Jefferson’s first draft wrote it out—but the Democrats loved it–would not agree to a Union, if they didn’t allow slavery, which the Southern Democrats had to have and GOT.

            Just like in Wilberforce’s world–it was the majority of ALL human beings on earth to “think” that “Slaves” were just property and a “Right”. That idea was common in ALL cultures–first eliminated by the English-speaking Christian countries which knew that Freedom was a Natural Right from God and evil. It was the Quakers in the 1600’s in America—who were first fighting for the end of slavery and Indian property rights.

            God-Fearing countries eliminated slavery and US followed—slowly because of the power of the States where Democrats had control. Many non-Christian countries STILL have slavery.

            First, we had to teach generations that slavery was not “natural”–not “normal” and not “moral”. That individual dignity of ALL men—comes from Christianity and didn’t exist in other cultures–even today. Collective societies (Democrats) do not believe in individual dignity of man. Individuals can be eliminated for the “good” of the whole–and there is no God-given Rights to all human beings (babies can be killed).

            But, I know you know that generations are taught by “culture” what is “normal” and most Democrats were racist, and thought Blacks were property in 1778, and that really hasn’t changed much, since, they are the party of Margaret Sanger, who wanted Black babies eliminated, the KKK, FDR, Johnson (Welfare dependency), Wallace, and Pelosi and believe that Blacks still need daddy government and “special” help because they are so “dumb” and can’t do it on their own—so the fathers are non-existent in Black families now with the “Great Society” HA!!!!!– to destroy the emotional health of the next generation of Blacks—to create addicts, low IQ, and dependents where they learn they are stupid and need government programs to survive (infantile)…..STILL Slaves…hmmm…. nothing really changes. Democrats—still party for Slavery.

            You Democrats HAVE always allowed Slavery to Flourish!!! Fabians are still around—-yes, Sugar Keynes (google that sodomite and pederast) and his socialist economic program adopted at Harvard in 1900 or so, was the start of the evil infiltration which took control of our schools with John Dewey in 1930. Conspiracy—you betcha!!!!! Evil, absolutely.

          • 3H

            And.. unless my math is bad, 1900 was a hundred years ago.

            And, many of our Founders accepted slavery. Cute try at pretending that the Founders were anti-slavery and Democrats were pro-slavery.

            I think I’ll have to stop arguing with you… you live in a very strange and insular world populated by half-truths and deliberate blindness.

            Good luck too you. I truly feel sorry for you that you feel that you are surrounded by evil people every where. I feel pity that you can’t see the good that is in the vast majority of people around you: Republicans, Democrats, Conservatives, Liberals, Marxists, Pantheists and only see good in those that believe as you do; most people do not deliberately try and cause hurt and most go through their lives leaving the world a better place.. I feel badly about the hate and ignorance that must eat at you like a cancer.

          • 3H

            Can’t seem to help myself, but there weren’t any Democrats in 1778. No wonder you get so much wrong.

          • Susan

            The Democrats evolved from the Anti-Federalists. True—words evolve—there were no REAL Leftist/Marxists/Socialists among ANY of the Founding Fathers. That Democrat irrational/fascist “thinking” would have been laughed at. Marx came later.

            Today’s Democrats have no relationship to Thomas Jefferson and that “Democratic-Republican” Party—but you can see the relationship to Fascism begin with the time of Lincoln—those slave holding Democrats who fought for their “private property”—“Black Slaves”. Those Democrats formed the KKK, Wallace, Margaret Sanger and other Black baby killers, like Pelosi, and Lyndon Johnson who created the “Great Society” of fatherless Black Babies to instill dependency and inferiority in the children of Black people. Then they socialized education with the Fabian Socialist John Dewey—“public forced education” “Free” education—so they could destroy the intellectual development of the masses and create “mass conformity (John Taylor Gatto) and good little non-thinking useful idiots for OWS and ACORN. Yes, Johnny can’t read—-and he definitely is unable to have a complex thought with a head filled with emotional garbage like global warming and dying polar bears and no idea of the thoughts of men like John Locke and Adam Smith–giants in history.

      • The REAL Disgusted

        Find your own alias.

        • NoLongerDisgusted

          lol, sorry!

  • http://twitter.com/PolitiGalOR PolitiGal Network OR

    Seriously messed up Oregon Dems! Why did all the Repuplicans just sit there – they should have walked out!

  • one person under GOD

    WOW, Lord don’t blame us for her

  • 3H

    LOL.. tempest in a teapot. Why do those of you commenting feel the need of governmental officials to acknowledge and validate your beliefs? The “under God” line wasn’t in the original pledge anyway, so why the angst? Bellamy originally wanted to and the word equality, but didn’t think Americans were ready for that. That might be a better addition, don’t you think?

    Good for her.

  • LeRoy

    The Pledge of Allegiance is a human invention. You will find no pledge like this in the Bible. Do you really think God cares at all about this? As a matter of fact, He might be quite pleased if we were a nation under and practicing love.

  • DavidAppell

    At least “love” exists.

  • Doug

    I wish all the Repubes would have walked out and just kept walking.

    • Kitznapper

      So should have the Demrubes.

  • David from Mill City

    If the Democratic leadership did not like the “under God” version of the Pledge of Allegiance then they should have used the original pre-1950s version that does not include the phrase. The wording change they made makes a significant change in the meaning of the text, one that is clearly not supported by a sufficiently large enough segment of the population to make it unacceptable as a unifying public statement.

    • 3H

      “If the Democratic leadership did not like the “under God” version of the Pledge of Allegiance then they should have used the original pre-1950s version that does not include the phrase.”

      Why? I don’t believe that it makes for a significant change in meaning, but if it does, so what?

      The fact is, as far as I know, the change is new and I’ve never heard it before and I don’t think you know to what degree it is, or will be, accepted. I wasn’t aware that you were so willing to defend orthodoxy against freedom of speech and thought.

      Should Carolyn bow to popular opinion in expressing herself or her conscience? The phrase she used is not abhorrent and I don’t see how it can offend anyone except those that look to be offended.
      It is, as far as I’m concerned, a non-issue that some want to throw up as an example of… well… I don’t know what. I guess an example of how they can be outraged by almost anything.

      • David from Mill City

        My objection is more a matter of time and place. She is entitled to make a change in the text and were she the only person making it to speak it in public to do so as often as she wishes. For that matter she is free to promote the new version in an attempt to have it accepted for main stream use. But the latter has not happened. It is changing incorporating the new version into a public ceremony that I do not think was proper. To make an unexpected change and thus putting the members of the audience in the position of either tacitly accepting the change, whether they agree with it or not, or making a scene is rude and disrespectful. It is after all a profession of allegiance. Something that some individuals take very seriously.

        • 3H

          “But the latter has not happened.”

          Don’t you think that we haven’t given it enough time? Would you expect the change to be instantaneous?

          It is still a profession of allegiance. And this time manages to include everyone, and not just those who believe in God. Or is that a bad thing to you?

          One line has been changed, and I don’t think you can come up with any really good reason why it’s a problem. I’m sure the audience will recover quickly, and if it makes them think about the pledge, what it means, and who it explicitly includes and excludes that can only be a good thing.

          I think the timing and forum where appropriate. I think if it makes the Susans of the world stop and think for a minute, that is a bonus.

          Again, a tempest in a teapot and just underscores, from the comments on this site, how easily some people are offended, and how many of them expect everyone to conform to their views.

          No harm was done; some good may have been accomplished.

          • David from Mill City

            I am not aware of any public discussion regarding a proposal to change the wording of the Pledge of Allegiance other then the one we are having here. At this point I do not have a firm opinion on whether the new wording is better then the old. What I do know is that it is not a simple change, and definitely not one I would want to be forced to evaluate in public on the fly as the rest of the House had to.

            As to the change itself, a reasoned discussion about it is worth having.

          • 3H

            Why not? Because some people might be offended? It seems to me to be the perfect forum. It started a discussion here, and elsewhere… who knows?

            It’s not as if she had said anything truly offensive. I think much of is fueled, as I said, those who look to be offended. Who don’t appreciate any thing out of the norm that challenges their perception that their views are the only ones worthy of public acknowledgment.

        • DavidAppell

          Some individuals take it seriously, and some are offended by being expected to promise fealty to something they do not think exists.

          • David from Mill City

            And when an individual does not wish to make a pledge for what ever. they should be permitted to sit quietly till it is over, without any public comment being made regarding their non-participation. Unfortunately, in this political climate a public official does not have that option in regards to the Pledge. Which is why I think the Speakers actions were rude and disrespectful.

          • DavidAppell

            Why? Why should someone who does approve of the Pledge simply accept it in silence? Their opinion is a good as anyone else’s…. It seems to me the real complaint about Tomei is that her action was very effective in challenging the status quo.

  • Disgusted

    What a DFM she is.

  • Aestro

    Are you so up in arms because you believe in God but not love?

  • Bob Clark

    Is there Justice in Love? After all, isn’t there a saying which goes: All’s fair in Love and War. God for better or worse has been tested through millennium, but the Soviet-Harvard types who have the reins currently are too good for things well tested; rather the latter love mostly untested theories about achieving utopia. Boy, I am just wishing Americans of all stripes wake up soon from the drunken parties being thrown by the Soviet-Harvard types.

    • DavidAppell

      God didn’t exactly put in a good showing over the last millennium (and let’s not even mention the last century). It was enlightenment, rationality and science that saved it from being a complete horror show, and God will be lucky to survive this millennium with any skin left at all.

      And, yes, you can partly thank the Harvard people for that, though I don’t think the Soviets, nor do I see any connection at all despite your hyphen.

    • 3H

      So we should ignore the parts of the Bible when Jesus talks about Love?

      And, if you’ll notice, the part about justice for all was left in, so I’m not sure what you’re talking about.

  • http://twitter.com/jordanolling Jordan Olling

    I’m one of approximately four people here with an actual avatar. I also don’t like that God was replaced with “love”, even though love is a good thing.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000088334633 David White

    We shouldn’t mess with what the Founding Fathers meant when they wrote the Pledge. Whoops, except they didn’t write it. It was written in 1892. Ok, we shouldn’t mess with the official Pledge that was established in 1892. Whoops, it wasn’t adopted as official until 1942 and that was after 3 changes. Ok ok, we shouldn’t mess with the 3 times amended Pledge as established 1942. Whoops, we changed it again in 1954 to add “under God”. So, here we have a recitation that was written over a 100 years after the country was established and changed 4 times already. But, we cant stand for it to be changed again. Oh, and Francis Bellamy, the man who wrote it in 1892? Yeah, he was a socialist. So, how dare we change the quadruple amended socialist recitation to reflect the ongoing change in American beliefs! The nerve!

  • http://www.facebook.com/stuart.heinrichs Stuart Heinrichs

    I live in Oregon, and have for the last 50 years. Yes, this is the kind of garbage that has infiltrated our state. When Californians taxed themselves into bankruptcy, they moved here. Now they are doing the same thing to this state. These liberals are like a virus. They consume everything eventually killing the host, then move on to their next victim.

    • 3H

      Actually Stuart, Californians started moving here in great numbers after they limited their property taxes and decimated their public services.

  • Sock it Tomei

    Was it ‘legal’ for Tomei to change the declaration or simply acting out in accordance with something she sees as her right to do so?
    Thereto, how many in the assembly followed suit?

    Meanwhile, a couple of rifle-toting chaps recently kerfuffled observers in Gresham and Sellwood by openly, albeit legally expressing themselves.

    Odds for certain, the current POTUS, already over bearing with a record number Executive Orders, quite likely to extend his Oz behavior here, too.

    • DavidAppell

      FALSE on Executive Orders. “[Obama] has signed slightly fewer orders than President George W. Bush during this point in his first term, according to the University of California, Santa Barbara, which tracks executive orders.”
      – Factcheck.org, Sept 2012
      http://www.factcheck.org/2012/09/obamas-executive-orders/

      • Sock it Tomei

        How many executive orders did Mr Obama sign today, Mr DA?

        OMG, you’re gunnels are so Port sided over…even Foshter Brooks might relish a happy hour from where you’re Tomei-ing in on.

        • DavidAppell

          23, I think. It is still less than GW Bush in his first term (or Reagan, or Clinton, or many other Presidents), which puts the lie to your claim of a “record.”
          http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php

          • Sock it Tomei

            You seethe to be a left wing uff-da. Lord pithy on you if what’s good or blog for our Constitution rolls over for your gnu whorld odor blather.
            Nuts!

          • DavidAppell

            I think a bigger threat is people who believe anything they read on the intertubes, and then pass it on, without bothering to check its truthfulness.

          • Sock it Tomei

            DA, You appear to be a very left wing wish for a New World Order and wannabe pharisee. With any pluck, your drivel will reconstituted in the cess pool of your schemes and porta pouted out to chase the Marshall Applewhite travail. You’re no friend of US and that’s the toot. sure.

          • DavidAppell

            Clearly, being called out for an incorrect fact makes you angry — which makes you a natural conservative.

          • Sock it Tomei

            You lie, DA! Much like your boss whenever it suits his teleported agenda.

          • Sock it Tomei

            In anticipation of what Mr DA will out next…what seems to be of ‘matter’ in his mind…is of HIS being recognized as an oracle for what’s left of US – and what’s right be con-DEMned in the name of whatever Zootsuits this gadfly.

          • DavidAppell

            I simply pointed out your fact was wrong. I don’t see why that should send you into a sputtering tailspin, but in any case — your fact was wrong.

    • DavidAppell

      Executive Orders after 1st term:

      GW Bush: 173
      Barack Obama: 144

      Source: The American Presidency Project, UCSB
      http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php

    • 3H

      How would it not be legal? Do you think people should be arrested for changing the pledge to suit their beliefs?

    • DavidAppell

      People have a right to be kerfuffled; the police took no action against these “chaps,” except to ask them not be immature truculent a-holes. (They refused.)

      • Sock it Tomei

        ‘Right’ or blight you left wing shmoozy? What an appearing d’oh bawl you appear to be!

  • Ron Glynn

    Let us recognize this situation for what it is really about. It is not Democrat versus Republican. it is not Liberal versus Conservative. In God We Trust is our national motto and this was reaffirmed in 2011 in the House of Representatives by a vote of 369 to 9. Also, the Supreme Court has ruled in the past that it was allowable for the Federal Government to recognize a Supreme Being as the Founders set up this Country to be one without a state church, but one with belief in God. Hence, there is no separation of God and State. Moreover, each citizen can believe in God in their own way or not at all. Apparently, Tomei is apparently doing her own thing in regards to the pledge. Her doing so was in extremely poor taste and it was completely outside our societal norms. I have been repeating the pledge for at least 55 years with other Americans of different stripes and never once did someone change the words of the pledge. Tomei climbed out on a limb and the cut the limb off.

    • Ron Glynn

      The last part is “then cut the limb off.”

    • 3H

      “I have been repeating the pledge for at least 55 years with other Americans of different stripes and never once did someone change the words of the pledge.”

      And we have stood there politely and respectfully when a pledge is recited that doesn’t entirely include us. And the one time, the one time, a pledge is offered that might be inclusive of our beliefs as well, you have a small melt-down. After 55 years of having it your way, is it too much to ask that you reflect on a pledge that is more inclusive of more people? Is it to much to ask for you to politely accept this pledge? Are you and other conservatives so rigid that you only are accepting of beliefs that mirror your own?

      You hear a slightly different pledge after 55 years, and it bothers you. Do you have any empathy for the people who have felt disrespected and ignored for years through thousands of pledges? For the most part we have been silent, patient, and respectful. Don’t you think you could do the same? Don’t you think it’s time to stop the inward thinking and realize that there are other beliefs and views, and that we are just as important as you are?

      • Ron Glynn

        You just don’t get it. I am not bothered at all. I was just observing what is a fact about that almost all Americans say the pledge as it now written. I could care less even if people pledge allegiance to Martians. Jehovah Witnesses do not say the pledge. I am completely okay with that. So get off your high horse.

        • 3H

          Of course it bothers you, otherwise your post would have said, “I don’t care, this doesn’t bother me at all.”

          If it didn’t bother you, you wouldn’t have said this: “Her doing so was in extremely poor taste and it was completely outside our societal norms.”

          You weren’t just stating that it’s different from how most Americans say the pledge, you made a value judgment on what she said as well.

          You are obviously not okay with that. Ya can’t have it both ways.

  • Damascusdean

    Well, we all know GOD is on the side of Republicans. They tell us that constantly, and it is so obvious because HE keeps helping them win elections.

    Or not.

  • Rupert in Springfield

    So what if she did some dopey pledge thing. Marisa Tomei was pretty sexy in My Cousin Vinnie and if she wants to change the pledge, that’s all right by me.

    You know how many times I have had to listen to gigantic women pledge and pray to “The Goddess”? A lot.

    Do you know how little I would care if a height weight proportionate babe like Marisa Tomei switched out “God” for “Love”? Not at all.

    Bottom line – Over 100 comments on something as dopey as this when one look at Marisa Tomei, who is a stone cold fox, would have shut everyone up.

    • 3H

      “You know how many times I have had to listen to gigantic women pledge and pray to “The Goddess”? A lot.”

      And you wonder why Republicans lost the election? Are you being deliberately offensive and misogynistic, or does it come naturally?

    • guest

      CAROLYN nee Tomei, 77 @ Sunset ought not Strip any more accustomed language if she knows what’s God for her.

  • Pingback: Dems continue to struggle with God | The Oregon Catalyst()

  • Pingback: Top 10 Oregon Catalyst 2013 stories | The Oregon Catalyst()

  • Pingback: kuplyu monetyi sochi 2014()

  • Pingback: Where to buy center()

  • Pingback: Where can i buy()

  • Pingback: Where to buy center()

  • Pingback: Where can i buy()

  • Pingback: pioneer ts w259s4 champion single watts b004hw6fa6 4829()

  • Pingback: i need a personal loan and have bad credit()

  • Pingback: payday loan solutions()

  • Pingback: american lending partner()

  • Pingback: advance cash experts()

  • Pingback: multifamily financing()

  • Pingback: real estate loan companies()

  • Pingback: Trackback()

  • Pingback: nomination bracelets()

  • Pingback: .co.uk} is a nice Search Engine()

  • Pingback: nixon headphones()

  • Pingback: a4 paper()

  • Pingback: piaa wiper blades()

  • Pingback: leotards()

  • Pingback: where to buy cinderella glass slippers()

  • Pingback: where to buy center()

  • Pingback: where to buy center()

  • Pingback: Bing is a gread Search Engine()

  • Pingback: google.com is a nice Search Engine()

  • Pingback: Yahoo is a nice Search Engine()

  • Pingback: Cheapest Price Best Travel Backpacks For Kids()

  • Pingback: Google} is a great Search Engine()

  • Pingback: Yahoo is a nice Search Engine()

  • Pingback: Yahoo is a nice Search Engine()

  • Pingback: google.de is a nice Search Engine()

  • Pingback: google.com is a great Search Engine()

  • Pingback: Bing is a gread Search Engine()

  • Pingback: Yahoo is a nice Search Engine()

  • Pingback: Bing is a gread Search Engine()

  • Pingback: Yahoo is a nice Search Engine()

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)