Friday, December 10, 2010

Fox News: 'Efforts to Replace Allegiance to God with Allegiance to Government'


December 10, 2010 on Fox & Friends

30 comments:

  1. Proud to be a warrior in the war against Christianity. Take that Haysus!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I will gladly fight religion until an Atheist president is elected. When that happens I will no longer take the stance I have now. Until that day comes, I will never relent. 

    ReplyDelete
  3. Pfft. People have been told for years since Bush that you're either with us or against us, screened before townhall meeting, silenced in media or fired, free-speech zones, sport events are started with the natioanal anthem, religious indoctrination through the military etc..

    ReplyDelete
  4. Just more fearmongering from Fox "News". And it' a double-whammy for the far-right Christian "conservatives" - not only is it about removing 'God' from the pledge of allegiance, but god is being replaced by the guberment! Oh noes! That's big government! That's communism! Christians are being persecuted!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Well this is actually honest in some regards, but it makes two critical errors:

    1) Not all atheists are big government fans and not all Christians are for small government.

    2) It claims that there are more restrictions on Christianity than other eligions.  There are not.

    My suggestion is that if you do not want government interfering with what can and cannot be said by chaplins and such, then I will gladly support that, as should all honest people.  All that we require in return is that religion gives up its tax exempt status.  If he and people like him (who supposedly being against government meddling in the free market of ideas) are being honest, then they should have no problem with that.

    ReplyDelete
  6. If you look at the last graphic- it said "stimulus bill- no funds to religious facilities" I thought this would be non-questionable or controversial because of the separation of church and state!!! Fox noise= biggest shit stirrers

    ReplyDelete
  7. Government Christ!!!

    ReplyDelete
  8. these types would instantly change our constitution as they have our pledge of allegiance to fit in their "god" fix. they will not be happy until we all fit into their delusion and jabber on about what a great godly nation we are and that all we do is for gods glory. foolishness!! and remove the reference to god from our currency while your at it!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Lincoln and Jefferson could have both been considered atheist, depending on how you parse their writings and the definition of atheist.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Let's talk about what it would mean for us to replace 'allegiance to God' with 'allegiance to government'.

    First, allegiance to government is what?

    Well, what is government? Our government is made up of Americans. They are often the most successful Americans, and even sometimes the most corrupt Americans, but they are Americans and we vote for them. They are us: the best representation our votes and our system that we designed can come up with, for better or worse.

    With that view, isn't allegiance to government literally allegiance to our fellow Americans?

    What's wrong with that?

    ReplyDelete
  11. "Oh noes ppl are worshipping teh gubmintz nao!??!!?"


    This pathetic, schizoid mewing brought to you by the very same people who oafishly rammed the phrase "under god" INTO A GOVERNMENT PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE a mere 60 years ago.

    ReplyDelete
  12. We ALREADY pledge allegiance "to the Republic for which is stands, one Nation, with Liberty, and Justice for all". If that's not pledging allegiance to our Government, then there's no need to bother because the Government ought to be pledged to all that stuff.

    It's a literal crime that in the middle of that is 'under God' because of the scared Christians of the 1950's trying to be the opposite of 'godless' Commie. Meanwhile the Russians remained as religious and superstitious as us.
    Freedom (liberty) and Justice should mean you do NOT have to pledge loyalty to a goddamn GOD.
    Plus the 1st ammendment says this as well. The world just is not right when things like this remain, and because the supreme court is tilted 5/4 to conservative idiots. Same ones who stopped Florida from counting that Gore won the popular AND electoral vote!
    The best government ever...is still screwed up.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Schools should not be Jesus or AMSOC factories. Get rid of the goddam pledge.  It's got a really disgusting history which seems to have been forgotten today. I can see why though: who'd want to admit this shit?

    Link: The Original Pledge of Allegiance Salute (I don't know anything about this web site; I just used it to show some pics.)

    Link: Francis Bellamy at Wikipedia.

    The U.S. has had, and still has, a great deal going for it. Mindless nationalist indoctrination bullshit like the pledge is unneeded and ridiculous since kids have little real knowledge of what they're pledging allegiance to. Allegiance should be conditional and come from an understanding of facts--not from some ritual.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Getting rid of the separation of church and state is, to my mind, a variety of statist (big) government. Getting rid of separation means that the gov would have the power to tax and spend for religious ends and would have the power to enforce religious rules. The fucks would make a whole bunch of rules yet still have the balls to extol "freedom"--like Orwellian doublethink.

    ReplyDelete
  15. 80% of Americans believe in Jesus?  Well, hell, that might include me as well.

    There is arguable evidence for a historical character Jesus, a wise and loving man who preached love thy neighbor, good works, and charity.

    But then, he died.  No raising from the dead, no floating up into heaven, and no BS about loaves and fishes, wine into water, and all the other fairy tales.

    So, yeah, I think I may be among this 80%, just none of that son o' god crap.

    ReplyDelete
  16. neither is a good option

    ReplyDelete
  17. I was going to have some well thought out remark but I almost punched by screen at by 1:20 so I stopped. Only Fox news ever makes me anywhere near this fustrated...not even slow walking people

    ReplyDelete
  18. Please cite this historical evidence, preferably contemporary and outside the bible (which obviously isn't contemprary).

    ReplyDelete
  19. Does it matter?

    ReplyDelete
  20. Uhm... Isn't it called the Pledge of Allegiance?

    ReplyDelete
  21. The parade he refered to in Tulsa never had christmas in its name.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Ah, FOX News.  The whole argument is just very odd.  First, atheists and agnostics tend to lean liberal.  Liberals also tend to distrust the government and tend to be against US' wars overseas.  Which, in turn, causes FOX News to label liberals as unpatriotic and anti-American.  Now, we're supposed to believe that the same people who are "unpatriotic and unamerican" are the very same people trying to increase allegance to government? Isn't this the same FOX News who suggested that NPR was part of a jihadi plot *against* the United States?  It's well known that liberals tend to be "think for yourself / anti-authoritarian" type of thinkers, while conservatives are constantly pushing the authoritarian, top-down model favored by the police, military, and business.

    And the "permit" issue that he raised (about 1:30 into the video) is another out-of-context story that's supposed to support his point.  I remember when that happened.  A guy was leading a weekly Bible meeting, where he'd have "40 to 60 people" (according to a neighbor) show up at his house.  (O'Leary says "10 or 15 people" in the video above.)  A neighbor's car was hit by one of the attendies, and the neighbor called the police to complain about the excessive traffic.  The police showed up and told them they needed a permit to have a religious gathering of that size.  The police later backed down saying that no permit was needed and it shouldn't have been requested.  Sounded to me like a police officer just trying to appease the neighbor.  Not a big deal, but O'Leary wants to turn this into a "they're outlawing Bible Studies!" freakout.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Ah, FOX News.  The whole argument is just very odd.  First, atheists and agnostics tend to lean liberal.  Liberals also tend to distrust the government and tend to be against US' wars overseas.  Which, in turn, causes FOX News to label liberals as unpatriotic and anti-American.  Now, we're supposed to believe that the same people who are "unpatriotic and unamerican" are the very same people trying to increase allegance to government? Isn't this the same FOX News who suggested that NPR was part of a jihadi plot *against* the United States?  It's well known that liberals tend to be "think for yourself / anti-authoritarian" type of thinkers, while conservatives are constantly pushing the authoritarian, top-down model favored by the police, military, and business.

    And the "permit" issue that he raised (about 1:30 into the video) is another out-of-context story that's supposed to support his point.  I remember when that happened.  A guy was leading a weekly Bible meeting, where he'd have "40 to 60 people" (according to a neighbor) show up at his house.  (O'Leary says "10 or 15 people" in the video above.)  A neighbor's car was hit by one of the attendies, and the neighbor called the police to complain about the excessive traffic.  The police showed up and told them they needed a permit to have a religious gathering of that size.  The police later backed down saying that no permit was needed and it shouldn't have been requested.  Sounded to me like a police officer just trying to appease the neighbor.  Not a big deal, but O'Leary wants to turn this into a "they're outlawing Bible Studies!" freakout.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I don't think there's any evidence that needs to be cited.  I think it's pretty clear that over 80% of Americans *believe* that Jesus existed.  And that includes a lot of atheists as well.  It's just that atheists think he was a real man who wasn't divine.  There's no need to "cite evidence for the historical existence of Jesus" when the question is simply whether 80% of Americans believe he existed.

    ReplyDelete
  25. <span>Yes, sorry, I wasn't clear.  I certainly don't have one scintilla of evidence on the actually existence of jesus, I simply meant that the whole giant hoax of christianity must have some kernel of some distant truth, and a charismatic figure like jesus is certainly plausible.</span>
    <span> </span>
    <span>The "80%" figure for "belief in Jesus" might be a bit lower, but sadly not by much, if Americans were asked "do you believe in your heart of hearts that Jesus was the son of God who save us from our sins."</span>

    ReplyDelete