![]() |
|
|||||||
| Current Events Help understand the world by talking about things happening in it |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#11 |
|
Hypercharismatic Telepathical Knight
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The armpit of the Universe... Augusta, GA
Posts: 365
|
Because the sentence, while seemingly ridiculous and based on little supporting argument, is not modified because of the commas, having been placed after the word, that are separators of ideas.
See, the "seemingly ridiculous" doesn't modify the... "sent..." wait. The "placed after the word" doesn't modify the... "comm..." wait. And the grammar confusion is also missing the point: the mentioning of a God in the pledge, on the money, in the schoolhouse, might not be the government supporting one religion over another... but it postulates the existence of god, and that there is only one of him. It's not demanding that I pray in school, but dammit it's one step in that direction... why the hell do we need it in there!? The only argument of defense is that it causes no harm. So what? Why is it in there? It wouldn't cause any undue harm to require all school teachers to wear funny hats... but if it pissed people off, why do it? You Christians and Jews would tell me that it wouldn't make you angry if we changed the pledge and money to say "One nation, under no god" or "In the gods we trust?" You can make every argument you want about it being OK, but if others don't think it is, why don't you just take the bloody thing out!? If it causes no harm either way, just let it be taken out. ...unless you think it helps us live in a more godly nation.
__________________
Hoocha, hoocha, hoocha... lobster. |
|
|
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|