Interesting, but yeah -- I've done just that stumbling over variant texts of the Nicene Creed. A good friend of ours from church, who's a gay clergyman's life partner and doesn't mind me mentioning it, has some radical notions about gender-inclusive language in re the Holy Spirit, Who with the Father and the Son... it could be a real nuisance reciting the Creed along with him. It's less trouble keeping the ancient and modern versions of the Lord's Prayer in order. But only less, not none.

How is that relevant?

Just out of curiosity, are you using this as a rebuttal to his argument by saying that just because something has been a certain way for a long time doesn't make it right?

Or are you attempting to explain a possible cause for his line of reasoning by implying that UG at some point in his life used a lead painted crib as a chew toy.:D It would explain so much.

Nah, just that being rather right of center, I'm more enlightened than the pigheaded, echidna-hearted Left. Admittedly, I'm rather setting the effect before the cause.

They hate that, and they hate having it shown them. Generally, too, the dumber they are the harder Left they hew. But the stupid really don't have an opinion that counts with the enlightened, now do they? Yet they insist they should, and get patronized for their regrettable presumptions. It's never good; it's always somewhere in the gamut running from dumb to contemptible.

Monkey, in that it's quite old enough to have its tradition -- it is not merely the speech of the arriviste.

So? The version without it is older.

And not recited in schools alongside the newer, for the newer superseded it. All in all, I just can't get bothered about including "under God." If anything, it adds a little something.

And I'm not going to go there to any stuff about "but, prayer in schools" -- I'm keeping in mind that as long as there are pop quizzes and tough tests... you know the rest.:cool:

I am saying "it has been this way for a long time" is always an inane/faulty/red herring argument with absolutely no substance.
Almost as much as "millions of people believe/feel it" is... not quite, that one is just stupid, but close.

"tradition" yeah, we sure loved McCarthy and all want to be just like him and his Knights of Columbus sycophants, LOL!
That is the only tradition it shows.

It is unfortunate that Senator McCarthy was not only a flawed man, but was suffering from a brain tumor. Unfortunate because he damaged the beautiful cause of anticommunism for so long after his death.

And whattaya know: Ann Coulter undertook to rehabilitate McCarthy to history -- and there are no adequate rebuttals made, either. Some hemipygian tries, but nothing adequate to rebut. Whether you're going to agree with her thesis or not, it's still worth reading. Was this devil to those inadequately equipped to defeat international Communism so very black as they painted him? This is a question open minds will look into, and closed minds will immediately try to shout down, thus demonstrating the inferiority of their thinking and the grotesque immaturity required to remain leftist.

Go ahead, leftist asswipes! Show your inferiority to the enlightened! Remind us why we aren't you!

The inane hysteria of the ebil of the pinkos in the US and what was done to American freedoms and their wiping their ass with the Constitution was wrong on all fronts.
Of course we are living in those times again with a president and cabinet that has no respect for the Constitution, Bill of Rights and the beliefs of the Republican Party.
Placing religion wherever they could fit it in, in complete ignorance of the wisdom of separation of church and state was, and is still wrong and ignorant. Both for the state and for the church.
Anyone who wishes to bring attention to that fact is doing a good thing.
I have read a great deal, from both sides, yes Communism was a threat and I have concluded the US did more harm than good when it comes to the spread of it.

McCarthy was nothing more than a propagandist possibly almost as good as Goebels. They both used lies and manipulations of the truth to promote their own adgenda. I can't believe you'd be silly enough to fall for it UG.

Thing is, I used to believe the more leftward accounts of what he was doing. Now I'm not quite so sure of their veracity, precisely because somebody's been raising fresh questions. Seems it's about time, too.

And Jews are just Christians that need "perfecting".

Well, a Jew wouldn't believe that. A Christian might believe that.

For me, monotheism of whatever brandname is really enough.

A Zen Atheist's opinion of this would seem a touch remote, no? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I suppose there's something in Zen that's important to you.

She is out of touch with social reality and probably does not understand the way others react to her just like McCarthy, of course she would relate to him.

Zenrage is a pun. But, yes I have studied it for a long time.

Theists have always been the strongest champions of the separation of church and state... the sane ones. McCarthy and the leadership of the Knights do not fall into that catagory... perhaps sane but not intelligent, same outcome.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...can0004hx3.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...ollarwide1.jpg