Jump to content
An Old School Catholic Message Board

I Despise The Pledge Of Allegiance


Winchester

Recommended Posts

Because it gives fuel to the lie that the United States are one nation, and that secession is not a right.

Since lies are inherently sinful, the Pledge should not be recited in Catholic schools.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1351276467' post='2498028']
Because it gives fuel to the lie that the United States are one nation, and that secession is not a right.

Since lies are inherently sinful, the Pledge should not be recited in Catholic schools.
[/quote]
You can't re-write History. That question was answered in the late 1780's when they adopted the Constitution and superseded the Articles of Confederation. Franklin was never the Benevolent Dictator.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PhuturePriest

The States never formed a country in the literal sense. They formed a union, whereby they could each secede any time they felt was appropriate. But this is a forgotten detail that modern historians have tried to hide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='FuturePriest387' timestamp='1351277775' post='2498033']
The States never formed a country in the literal sense. They formed a union, whereby they could each secede any time they felt was appropriate. But this is a forgotten detail that modern historians have tried to hide.
[/quote]
Wrong. Read History and figure out what the difference is between the Articles of Confederacy and the Constitution are, when they were written, why a Constitution replacedthe Articles, and what they say.

Edited by Anomaly
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1351279163' post='2498042']
The South shall rise again!
[/quote]
And the North shall beat it back into its hole again!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

KnightofChrist

[quote name='Era Might' timestamp='1351279209' post='2498043']

And the North shall beat it back into its hole again!
[/quote]

Sounds like something a blue devil Yankee aggressor would say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there are days I would buy everyone a few beers and kick back.

This is one of those days..

except FP, he can watch Teletubbies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the articles of confederation actually contained the words "perpetual union", which were intentionally omitted from the Constitution so that the states would have the right to secede. in most instances the Constitution strengthened the federal union, but in the singular instance of the right to secession, it weakened it a bit, technically. it was to be a more perfect union, but still a union among sovereign states.

the Articles of Confederation required all of the states to come together to do absolutely anything at all. the Constitution replaced them by granting very particular and specific powers to a central government so that the basic functions could be carried out without the impossible task of getting all the states to come together on it. states' individual sovereignty was meant to be maintained. of course, Patrick Henry smelled the rat in the constitution from day one, realizing that eventually those very particular powers would spell the end to the sovereignty of the states (he was the Nigel Farage of the Constitutional Convention); the 9th and 10th amendments were meant to keep that from happening, but over the course of time it has happened anyway.

Edited by Aloysius
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1351277193' post='2498030']
You can't re-write History. That question was answered in the late 1780's when they adopted the Constitution and superseded the Articles of Confederation. Franklin was never the Benevolent Dictator.
[/quote]
I don't need to rewrite history; you need to learn it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Aloysius' timestamp='1351280787' post='2498058']
the articles of confederation actually contained the words "perpetual union", which were intentionally omitted from the Constitution so that the states would have the right to secede. in most instances the Constitution strengthened the federal union, but in the singular instance of the right to secession, it weakened it a bit, technically. it was to be a more perfect union, but still a union among sovereign states.

the Articles of Confederation required all of the states to come together to do absolutely anything at all. the Constitution replaced them by granting very particular and specific powers to a central government so that the basic functions could be carried out without the impossible task of getting all the states to come together on it. states' individual sovereignty was meant to be maintained. of course, Patrick Henry smelled the rat in the constitution from day one, realizing that eventually those very particular powers would spell the end to the sovereignty of the states (he was the Nigel Farage of the Constitutional Convention); the 9th and 10th amendments were meant to keep that from happening, but over the course of time it has happened anyway.
[/quote]Henry and other's lost the argument of the idea of a 'loose' union of individual states. It was addressing specific issues when the war was won and terms were being negotiated with England in conjuction with our relationship with France. It came up again during the Civil war. Like it or not, you're arguing with the reality of what is.

Want a different system? Revolution, not re-interpretation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, finally I can post this without everyone getting their panties in a twist. :smile3:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=618U-_8o31k

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...