KHS Uniform Committee Meeting

[Guest Guest]

More Loony Leftist Logic: 1. "If you decline to stand because you think that makes an "important point", then you are "free". Real nice !!

2. Disrespecting our fallen military who died to protect the flag is OK as long as you make an "important point" in your feeble leftist brain.

3. Our military sacrifice their lives for our flag and our country, 4. Matthew and other leftists won't sacrifice their "important point" to honor them.

5. That Paul supports this disrespectful behavior so junior can be "free" is disgusting, he needs to reassess his priorities (or maybe he already has).

1. It's the truth. When you can express yourself, you are free. When you cannot express yourself, you are not free. There are limits on expression, but this is not one of them. The people must be free to criticize and even turn their backs on the government's symbols. The flag is one of the government's symbols. The alternative to this is what happened under Hitler.

2. He's not disrespecting them. That has been pointed out repeatedly, and explained. Your unwillingness to think about it doesn't mean it isn't so.

3. Our flag and our country are two different things.

4. He is honoring them. Here again, this has all been explained to you.

5. It's not just about Matthew's freedom. Matthew and Paul both have made this very clear. It's about your freedom, too, only you're too blind to see it.

You're not advancing the argument. You're just making the same claims over and over without supporting them.

The lesson here is: You can't discuss something with someone who's not listening.

[Guest Senior Kearny Resident]

More Loony Leftist Logic: "If you decline to stand because you think that makes an "important point", then you are "free". Real nice !!

Disrespecting our fallen military who died to protect the flag is OK as long as you make an "important point" in your feeble leftist brain.

Our military sacrifice their lives for our flag and our country, Matthew and other leftists won't sacrifice their "important point" to honor them.

That Paul supports this disrespectful behavior so junior can be "free" is disgusting, he needs to reassess his priorities (or maybe he already has).

I support your comments 100%. I served in WW2 and saw many friends die in combat against the Nazis. An American flag was a cherished

symbol in that war that was protected and guarded. When I read where some people won't stand for the pledge of alleigence because they're

not free if they do, it saddens me. It still makes me proud to stand for the Star Spangled Banner and it always reminds me the friends I lost.

[Guest Paul]

More Loony Leftist Logic: "If you decline to stand because you think that makes an "important point", then you are "free". Real nice !!

Disrespecting our fallen military who died to protect the flag is OK as long as you make an "important point" in your feeble leftist brain.

Our military sacrifice their lives for our flag and our country, Matthew and other leftists won't sacrifice their "important point" to honor them.

That Paul supports this disrespectful behavior so junior can be "free" is disgusting, he needs to reassess his priorities (or maybe he already has).

"Patriot," you are one of the many people who are incapable of seeing past their own biases. You've made up your mind that certain things are of utmost importance, and cannot abide that anyone else should see it differently. When someone challenges your view, you can only fling back insults and unthinking conclusions, unsupported by any thoughtful consideration of what is actually happening.

Making it worse, the things you've chosen to worship have nothing to do with building or preserving the kind of country most people would want to live in. That traps you in your frustration because you think other people are crazy. What you don't realize is that the problem is in your own approach to things.

Your only way out is to challenge yourself to see if there is another way to look at it. So I'll repeat post 143:

I’m willing to have this discussion with you, but you must listen and engage. Unless both sides listen and engage, no discussion is possible.

I’ve posted several times stating why Matthew did what he did, and he has explained it himself.

http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...ost&p=86109

http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...ost&p=86016

http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...ost&p=85790

http://barnson.org/node/640

Read these posts, respond to our main points directly, then we’ll talk. Until you acknowledge our reasons, you cannot evaluate them; and until you evaluate them, there can be no intelligent discussion.

"Many of you may not agree with me. However, when you declare my protest out of bounds, you feed the process by which societies have destroyed their own freedoms and created tyrannies. You may think we Americans are different, but we are not. There is nothing new about this. We are no different than any society that has ever gone through its own tragic undoing. American "unity" is looking more and more like the "unity" that has led to every tyranny the world has ever known. It is reactive, unthinking, and contemptuous of dissent. It shouts slogans and reviles those who decline to participate in its rituals. It employs pretty symbols like yellow ribbons to make people feel good about an ugly war. It demands unquestioning conformity.

"Whether a group is standing for the Pledge or raising an arm and shouting "Sieg Heil!," the process is exactly the same. You may not like that comparison. I do not like having to make it. You cannot reasonably acknowledge the evil of torturing people for dissent, and then on the other hand complain that dissent is out of bounds. A freedom is meaningless if no one ever uses it. If the current attitude continues to prevail, our freedoms will continue to be eroded, and we will become the very thing we have so long opposed.

"I do not sit because standing is too hard, or because reciting the Pledge takes too long. It would be much easier to stand and not have people telling me I am "unpatriotic," a Communist, or spitting on America. Most of these comments have not been made by students, but teachers and staff members, the adults who are supposed to be teaching us citizenship! Standing would indeed be a small act. Sitting is the big one.

"My protest is to save my freedom and yours. The minute my protest is no longer respected is the minute all our freedoms begin to disappear.

"That is why I do it. If you wish to criticize me for it, the least you can do is not misrepresent my reasons."

Those are his reasons. You must address them if you wish to have this discussion.

See also:

http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...ost&p=86070

You will remain trapped in your own biases until you learn to acknowledge and evaluate the other person's point of view.

[Guest Guest]

More Loony Leftist Logic: "If you decline to stand because you think that makes an "important point", then you are "free". Real nice !!

Disrespecting our fallen military who died to protect the flag is OK as long as you make an "important point" in your feeble leftist brain.

Our military sacrifice their lives for our flag and our country, Matthew and other leftists won't sacrifice their "important point" to honor them.

How about you sacrifice the unconstitutional "under God" phrase, hypocrite?

[Guest Melanie]

"Patriot," you are one of the many people who are incapable of seeing past their own biases. You've made up your mind that certain things are of utmost importance, and cannot abide that anyone else should see it differently. When someone challenges your view, you can only fling back insults and unthinking conclusions, unsupported by any thoughtful consideration of what is actually happening.

Making it worse, the things you've chosen to worship have nothing to do with building or preserving the kind of country most people would want to live in. That traps you in your frustration because you think other people are crazy. What you don't realize is that the problem is in your own approach to things.

Your only way out is to challenge yourself to see if there is another way to look at it. So I'll repeat post 143:

I’m willing to have this discussion with you, but you must listen and engage. Unless both sides listen and engage, no discussion is possible.

I’ve posted several times stating why Matthew did what he did, and he has explained it himself.

http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...ost&p=86109

http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...ost&p=86016

http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...ost&p=85790

http://barnson.org/node/640

Read these posts, respond to our main points directly, then we’ll talk. Until you acknowledge our reasons, you cannot evaluate them; and until you evaluate them, there can be no intelligent discussion.

"Many of you may not agree with me. However, when you declare my protest out of bounds, you feed the process by which societies have destroyed their own freedoms and created tyrannies. You may think we Americans are different, but we are not. There is nothing new about this. We are no different than any society that has ever gone through its own tragic undoing. American "unity" is looking more and more like the "unity" that has led to every tyranny the world has ever known. It is reactive, unthinking, and contemptuous of dissent. It shouts slogans and reviles those who decline to participate in its rituals. It employs pretty symbols like yellow ribbons to make people feel good about an ugly war. It demands unquestioning conformity.

"Whether a group is standing for the Pledge or raising an arm and shouting "Sieg Heil!," the process is exactly the same. You may not like that comparison. I do not like having to make it. You cannot reasonably acknowledge the evil of torturing people for dissent, and then on the other hand complain that dissent is out of bounds. A freedom is meaningless if no one ever uses it. If the current attitude continues to prevail, our freedoms will continue to be eroded, and we will become the very thing we have so long opposed.

"I do not sit because standing is too hard, or because reciting the Pledge takes too long. It would be much easier to stand and not have people telling me I am "unpatriotic," a Communist, or spitting on America. Most of these comments have not been made by students, but teachers and staff members, the adults who are supposed to be teaching us citizenship! Standing would indeed be a small act. Sitting is the big one.

"My protest is to save my freedom and yours. The minute my protest is no longer respected is the minute all our freedoms begin to disappear.

"That is why I do it. If you wish to criticize me for it, the least you can do is not misrepresent my reasons."

Those are his reasons. You must address them if you wish to have this discussion.

See also:

http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...ost&p=86070

You will remain trapped in your own biases until you learn to acknowledge and evaluate the other person's point of view.

So-called "Patriot" lives in an imaginary world of absolutes. That is why he cannot tolerate even one person not going along with his favorite rituals. It upsets the little world he has constructed inside his head.

When people think like that, they no longer care about things that are real. All they're interested in is whatever gives them some sense of comfort. He's not interested in whether these things actually make the country stronger. They makes him feel better, and to him that's all that matters.

That's why he can support a president who talks about supporting the troops, but then forces them into multiple tours of duty, won't provide them with adequate protection in the field and ignores their needs when they return home. What's real doesn't matter to people like this, and Bush knows it; that's why he was able to get away with it. The entire Bush administration was built on the fantasy world of people like this. And now all of us have to pay the price.

For so-called "Patriot," comfort is in the myth that everyone is standing and pledging allegiance every day, and that it means to them exactly what it means to him. It's not true, of course, but he doesn't care. Just don't upset his little fantasy world, and you'll get along with him fine.

[Guest Melanie]

I support your comments 100%. I served in WW2 and saw many friends die in combat against the Nazis. An American flag was a cherished

symbol in that war that was protected and guarded. When I read where some people won't stand for the pledge of alleigence because they're

not free if they do, it saddens me. It still makes me proud to stand for the Star Spangled Banner and it always reminds me the friends I lost.

If you cherish something, especially something that stands for freedom, then you must not force it on people. As soon as you do that, you destroy its meaning.

It's like a marriage. Two people may love and cherish each other, but the minute they start making too many demands, they begin to destroy what made the marriage work in the first place.

Matthew is sitting out the pledge because of your attitude. He sees that attitudes like that are more consistent with Naziism than democratic freedom. He values the flag, but he values his country and its people more. That's a very good set of values.

There's no free ride for you here. If you want to preserve freedom, then you must continue to do the things that give it room to live. Get rid of your attitude, pay attention to what freedom really means, and Matthew probably will change what he does.

[Guest Guest]

How about you sacrifice the unconstitutional "under God" phrase, hypocrite?

Something tells me that even if the phrase was removed Matthew still wouldn't pledge.

[Guest Patriot]

"Patriot," you are one of the many people who are incapable of seeing past their own biases. You've made up your mind that certain things are of utmost importance, and cannot abide that anyone else should see it differently. When someone challenges your view, you can only fling back insults and unthinking conclusions, unsupported by any thoughtful consideration of what is actually happening.

Making it worse, the things you've chosen to worship have nothing to do with building or preserving the kind of country most people would want to live in. That traps you in your frustration because you think other people are crazy. What you don't realize is that the problem is in your own approach to things.

Your only way out is to challenge yourself to see if there is another way to look at it. So I'll repeat post 143:

I’m willing to have this discussion with you, but you must listen and engage. Unless both sides listen and engage, no discussion is possible.

I’ve posted several times stating why Matthew did what he did, and he has explained it himself.

http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...ost&p=86109

http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...ost&p=86016

http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...ost&p=85790

http://barnson.org/node/640

Read these posts, respond to our main points directly, then we’ll talk. Until you acknowledge our reasons, you cannot evaluate them; and until you evaluate them, there can be no intelligent discussion.

"Many of you may not agree with me. However, when you declare my protest out of bounds, you feed the process by which societies have destroyed their own freedoms and created tyrannies. You may think we Americans are different, but we are not. There is nothing new about this. We are no different than any society that has ever gone through its own tragic undoing. American "unity" is looking more and more like the "unity" that has led to every tyranny the world has ever known. It is reactive, unthinking, and contemptuous of dissent. It shouts slogans and reviles those who decline to participate in its rituals. It employs pretty symbols like yellow ribbons to make people feel good about an ugly war. It demands unquestioning conformity.

"Whether a group is standing for the Pledge or raising an arm and shouting "Sieg Heil!," the process is exactly the same. You may not like that comparison. I do not like having to make it. You cannot reasonably acknowledge the evil of torturing people for dissent, and then on the other hand complain that dissent is out of bounds. A freedom is meaningless if no one ever uses it. If the current attitude continues to prevail, our freedoms will continue to be eroded, and we will become the very thing we have so long opposed.

"I do not sit because standing is too hard, or because reciting the Pledge takes too long. It would be much easier to stand and not have people telling me I am "unpatriotic," a Communist, or spitting on America. Most of these comments have not been made by students, but teachers and staff members, the adults who are supposed to be teaching us citizenship! Standing would indeed be a small act. Sitting is the big one.

"My protest is to save my freedom and yours. The minute my protest is no longer respected is the minute all our freedoms begin to disappear.

"That is why I do it. If you wish to criticize me for it, the least you can do is not misrepresent my reasons."

Those are his reasons. You must address them if you wish to have this discussion.

See also:

http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...ost&p=86070

You will remain trapped in your own biases until you learn to acknowledge and evaluate the other person's point of view.

I've read all your Leftist remarks; "My protest is to save my freedom and yours" ?? , "The minute my protest is no longer respected is the

minute all our freedoms begin to disappear" ?? I don't know what world you and junior live in but it's not the world of reality. It appears junior

sees himself as some sort of superhero saving the western world with his heroics. There must be something lacking in his dilusional life to make him

think he's saving anyone or anything. My guess is he has a need to feel important so he acts out by not standing for the pledge. You can spin

this however you like but there's nothing noble or gallant in his actions, it's just an attention-seeking kid that's been brainwashed.

[Guest Guest]

I support your comments 100%. I served in WW2 and saw many friends die in combat against the Nazis. An American flag was a cherished

symbol in that war that was protected and guarded. When I read where some people won't stand for the pledge of alleigence because they're

not free if they do, it saddens me. It still makes me proud to stand for the Star Spangled Banner and it always reminds me the friends I lost.

People like me don't stand for the pledge, not out of disrespect, but in protest of how it has become corrupted. On the contrary--it is nothing but respectful to all of those servicemen and women to exercise the freedom of dissent that I have to make a silent statement against the current pledge, which has been tarnished by McCarthyist paranoia.

It's not that I or Matthew feel like we're not free if we stand for the pledge, but it is true that if the reason someone is standing and reciting it is because they are being forced or pressured to do so, then it is the exact opposite of freedom to do so. When people can't choose whether or not to stand for the pledge without being given a hard time for making the 'wrong choice', all of the meaning behind standing goes away.

Bring back the original pledge, and see how many people continue to not stand.

[Guest Guest]

More Loony Leftist Logic: "If you decline to stand because you think that makes an "important point", then you are "free". Real nice !!

Disrespecting our fallen military who died to protect the flag is OK as long as you make an "important point" in your feeble leftist brain.

In your feeble brain, standing for the pledge makes up for supporting an administration that treats Iraq veterans like shit.

You have no idea what being a Patriot means.

[Guest Guest]

"Patriot," you are one of the many people who are incapable of seeing past their own biases. You've made up your mind that certain things are of utmost importance, and cannot abide that anyone else should see it differently. When someone challenges your view, you can only fling back insults and unthinking conclusions, unsupported by any thoughtful consideration of what is actually happening.

Making it worse, the things you've chosen to worship have nothing to do with building or preserving the kind of country most people would want to live in. That traps you in your frustration because you think other people are crazy. What you don't realize is that the problem is in your own approach to things.

Your only way out is to challenge yourself to see if there is another way to look at it. So I'll repeat post 143:

I’m willing to have this discussion with you, but you must listen and engage. Unless both sides listen and engage, no discussion is possible.

I’ve posted several times stating why Matthew did what he did, and he has explained it himself.

http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...ost&p=86109

http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...ost&p=86016

http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...ost&p=85790

http://barnson.org/node/640

Read these posts, respond to our main points directly, then we’ll talk. Until you acknowledge our reasons, you cannot evaluate them; and until you evaluate them, there can be no intelligent discussion.

"Many of you may not agree with me. However, when you declare my protest out of bounds, you feed the process by which societies have destroyed their own freedoms and created tyrannies. You may think we Americans are different, but we are not. There is nothing new about this. We are no different than any society that has ever gone through its own tragic undoing. American "unity" is looking more and more like the "unity" that has led to every tyranny the world has ever known. It is reactive, unthinking, and contemptuous of dissent. It shouts slogans and reviles those who decline to participate in its rituals. It employs pretty symbols like yellow ribbons to make people feel good about an ugly war. It demands unquestioning conformity.

"Whether a group is standing for the Pledge or raising an arm and shouting "Sieg Heil!," the process is exactly the same. You may not like that comparison. I do not like having to make it. You cannot reasonably acknowledge the evil of torturing people for dissent, and then on the other hand complain that dissent is out of bounds. A freedom is meaningless if no one ever uses it. If the current attitude continues to prevail, our freedoms will continue to be eroded, and we will become the very thing we have so long opposed.

"I do not sit because standing is too hard, or because reciting the Pledge takes too long. It would be much easier to stand and not have people telling me I am "unpatriotic," a Communist, or spitting on America. Most of these comments have not been made by students, but teachers and staff members, the adults who are supposed to be teaching us citizenship! Standing would indeed be a small act. Sitting is the big one.

"My protest is to save my freedom and yours. The minute my protest is no longer respected is the minute all our freedoms begin to disappear.

"That is why I do it. If you wish to criticize me for it, the least you can do is not misrepresent my reasons."

Those are his reasons. You must address them if you wish to have this discussion.

See also:

http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...ost&p=86070

You will remain trapped in your own biases until you learn to acknowledge and evaluate the other person's point of view.

Most of us do not agree with you. Most of us do not spend our waking hours worrying about the next fight to pick, author or teacher to attack. Most of us have normal lives. Please do me a very big favor: "do not try to save my freedom", my world is fine and does not need the likes of you to screw it up. And do NOT misrepresent me.

[Guest Guest]

"Patriot," you are one of the many people who are incapable of seeing past their own biases. You've made up your mind that certain things are of utmost importance, and cannot abide that anyone else should see it differently. When someone challenges your view, you can only fling back insults and unthinking conclusions, unsupported by any thoughtful consideration of what is actually happening.

Making it worse, the things you've chosen to worship have nothing to do with building or preserving the kind of country most people would want to live in. That traps you in your frustration because you think other people are crazy. What you don't realize is that the problem is in your own approach to things.

Your only way out is to challenge yourself to see if there is another way to look at it. So I'll repeat post 143:

I’m willing to have this discussion with you, but you must listen and engage. Unless both sides listen and engage, no discussion is possible.

I’ve posted several times stating why Matthew did what he did, and he has explained it himself.

http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...ost&p=86109

http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...ost&p=86016

http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...ost&p=85790

http://barnson.org/node/640

Read these posts, respond to our main points directly, then we’ll talk. Until you acknowledge our reasons, you cannot evaluate them; and until you evaluate them, there can be no intelligent discussion.

"Many of you may not agree with me. However, when you declare my protest out of bounds, you feed the process by which societies have destroyed their own freedoms and created tyrannies. You may think we Americans are different, but we are not. There is nothing new about this. We are no different than any society that has ever gone through its own tragic undoing. American "unity" is looking more and more like the "unity" that has led to every tyranny the world has ever known. It is reactive, unthinking, and contemptuous of dissent. It shouts slogans and reviles those who decline to participate in its rituals. It employs pretty symbols like yellow ribbons to make people feel good about an ugly war. It demands unquestioning conformity.

"Whether a group is standing for the Pledge or raising an arm and shouting "Sieg Heil!," the process is exactly the same. You may not like that comparison. I do not like having to make it. You cannot reasonably acknowledge the evil of torturing people for dissent, and then on the other hand complain that dissent is out of bounds. A freedom is meaningless if no one ever uses it. If the current attitude continues to prevail, our freedoms will continue to be eroded, and we will become the very thing we have so long opposed.

"I do not sit because standing is too hard, or because reciting the Pledge takes too long. It would be much easier to stand and not have people telling me I am "unpatriotic," a Communist, or spitting on America. Most of these comments have not been made by students, but teachers and staff members, the adults who are supposed to be teaching us citizenship! Standing would indeed be a small act. Sitting is the big one.

"My protest is to save my freedom and yours. The minute my protest is no longer respected is the minute all our freedoms begin to disappear.

"That is why I do it. If you wish to criticize me for it, the least you can do is not misrepresent my reasons."

Those are his reasons. You must address them if you wish to have this discussion.

See also:

http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...ost&p=86070

You will remain trapped in your own biases until you learn to acknowledge and evaluate the other person's point of view.

Stop saying most people. You're wrong. Most people don't want to live in the type of country you and Matthew are trying to promote. You are the minority. You don't like it, but that's the way it is. Taking away people's Christmas displays isn't going to change anything. You don't even see how petty you are.

[Guest Guest]

Most of us do not agree with you. Most of us do not spend our waking hours worrying about the next fight to pick, author or teacher to attack. Most of us have normal lives. Please do me a very big favor: "do not try to save my freedom", my world is fine and does not need the likes of you to screw it up. And do NOT misrepresent me.

He didn't claim to represent you. He has every bit as much right to fight for what he believes as anyone else. At least he has the guts to do it.

How normal his life is, is none of your business, but he seems like he's doing pretty well.

Of course, you don't have a single word to say about any of the points they raised.

[Guest Guest]

Stop saying most people. You're wrong. Most people don't want to live in the type of country you and Matthew are trying to promote. You are the minority. You don't like it, but that's the way it is. Taking away people's Christmas displays isn't going to change anything. You don't even see how petty you are.

It's not petty. You don't understand the law. The law is a set of principles. There's no such thing as a small breach when you're talking about setting legal precedent.

And it's not taking away people's Christmas displays. It's making sure that the government isn't the entity putting them up so as to favor or disfavor any religious group or point of view. That's why a Nativity scene is allowed on public property as part of a display including other religions, including Humanism and atheism; but not allowed alone, because then the government would be promoting Christianity above all other religions.

Either you don't understand what would happen if those principles were tossed aside, or you don't care. Maybe you'd like to live in an officially Christian country, but that wouldn't be a country in which everyone was free and equal under the law. Take your choice, but you cannot have it both ways.

[Guest Guest]

Something tells me that even if the phrase was removed Matthew still wouldn't pledge.

You don't know that, and you're not answering the question:

QUOTE (Guest @ May 12 2008, 10:25 PM)

How about you sacrifice the unconstitutional "under God" phrase, hypocrite?

[Guest Guest]

Stop saying most people. You're wrong. Most people don't want to live in the type of country you and Matthew are trying to promote.

Why, then, has support for Matthew always been in the majority from the first day the Paszkiewicz story hit the media and made it a nationally-known topic?

YOU are the one who is wrong. Most people DO want the Constitution preserved, as well as personal liberty. Yours is a dying breed, thank God.

[Guest KHS Alumnus]

Most of us do not agree with you. Most of us do not spend our waking hours worrying about the next fight to pick, author or teacher to attack. Most of us have normal lives. Please do me a very big favor: "do not try to save my freedom", my world is fine and does not need the likes of you to screw it up. And do NOT misrepresent me.

Maybe most of the hicks in Kearny don't, but most of the country DOES agree with him.

You're the one doing all the misrepresenting. Maybe you don't want Constitutional values to be protected, but he does, and he has every right to act to that end. If correcting errors or preserving the Constitution is the same as 'screwing things up', then I truly pity you.

[Guest Paul]

Stop saying most people. You're wrong. Most people don't want to live in the type of country you and Matthew are trying to promote. You are the minority. You don't like it, but that's the way it is. Taking away people's Christmas displays isn't going to change anything. You don't even see how petty you are.

I would like to live in a country that fully lives up to the founding principles of this country: freedom and justice for everyone, equality under the law, dedication to common purpose and the common welfare under a system whereby all people are free to pursue happiness in their own ways. I would also like our country to leave people free to practice the religion of their choice, government staying completely out of it.

Maybe we disagree on those core principles. You tell me.

Or maybe we see the means of their attainment differently. That seems more likely.

As a lawyer, I understand how legal systems work and how they fall apart. The area of law we’re discussing is constitutional law, a field that is especially built on legal principles. I say especially because even though most of the law is based on legal principles, this is nowhere more true than in constitutional law.

Most Americans right now have the mistaken notion that you can violate separation of church and state in small ways without paving the way for bigger violations. What they don't understand is that legal principles are set by precedent; once the courts break a principle, it is broken, regardless how "big" or "small" the case was that broke it.

To me, it’s very simple. There’s no reason for government to promote or discourage religion, which does fine on its own. So there’s no reason for “In God We Trust” to be on our currency, because that view does not speak for the growing minority of us who do not believe in God as traditionally conceived. This is not something we need the majority to rule on. If we have a motto or other statement on our currency, it should be acceptable to all of us regardless of religion. There’s no reason for “under God” in the pledge, because in that context it’s not true. Every good American should be able to recite that pledge because. "Under God" makes that impossible for many millions of us, and growing. When you shove your religion down the throats of us who don’t want it, you diminish the integrity of this country’s founding principles in practice – and there’s no reason for it.

The usual excuse is that these are just civic exercises, not promotion of religion. Yet every time one of these issues comes up, pandering politicians shout “under God” as loudly as they can, making it abundantly clear that they are on the side of God-believing folk and against those of us who disagree. Interest groups make it clear that what they really want is to declare this nation to be a Christian nation, or a God-believing nation. You can’t do that and maintain a free and equal country. You must choose between pushing your religion on an unwilling minority, versus letting religion flourish in the hearts, minds, churches, temples, meeting halls and synagogues of those who freely choose to practice it. When you let religion flourish freely, both it and the nation are better for it.

You have the power to choose inequality, which is what you have been doing. You have the power to refuse to vote for political candidates solely because they do not believe in what you call “God” or, even more restrictively, are not Christian - just like our forbears had the power to take the land from the Native Americans and enslave Africans whom they transported here on ships against their will. You don’t like the comparison, and I don’t like making it. You have the power, but not the moral right.

You may not like it, but I will argue this case because it is the truth. I am proud and grateful to live in a country that allows me this freedom, but at the same time I expect no less. It is the right thing to do.

[Guest Paul]

Most of us do not agree with you. Most of us do not spend our waking hours worrying about the next fight to pick, author or teacher to attack. Most of us have normal lives. Please do me a very big favor: "do not try to save my freedom", my world is fine and does not need the likes of you to screw it up. And do NOT misrepresent me.

Obviously you do not understand our system of government. You may be in the majority, but we in the minority have the right to argue our case passionately and zealously. That is what I will do.

You also don't understand what Matthew and I are trying to accomplish. This isn't just about your world.

I know you don't spend your waking hours thinking about these things. You make that very obvious.

[Guest Paul]

Most of us do not agree with you. Most of us do not spend our waking hours worrying about the next fight to pick, author or teacher to attack. Most of us have normal lives. Please do me a very big favor: "do not try to save my freedom", my world is fine and does not need the likes of you to screw it up. And do NOT misrepresent me.

By the way, I think you're confusing a "normal" life with an uninvolved life. That is not what our revolutionary forbears and Constitutional framers had in mind.

[Guest Parent]

You don't know that, and you're not answering the question:

QUOTE (Guest @ May 12 2008, 10:25 PM)

How about you sacrifice the unconstitutional "under God" phrase, hypocrite?

I thought this was about uniforms at the high school?

[Guest Guest]

You don't know that, and you're not answering the question:

QUOTE (Guest @ May 12 2008, 10:25 PM)

How about you sacrifice the unconstitutional "under God" phrase, hypocrite?

When you get a majority to have the phrase changed then so be it.

[Guest Guest]

He didn't claim to represent you. He has every bit as much right to fight for what he believes as anyone else. At least he has the guts to do it.

How normal his life is, is none of your business, but he seems like he's doing pretty well.

Of course, you don't have a single word to say about any of the points they raised.

Let me see. His exact words and I quote were: ""My protest is to save my freedom and yours. " If that is not representing me then I do not know what is. Either you are his mother or his wife. I haven't figured that part out yet. But if you consider him being paranoia and schizophrenia normal then you do deserve one another. Kearny is a simple place much like most of America. If you think its normal for someone to always be looking for a fight then that is your prerogative. As far as his points they are all pretty useless to me, much like your response to me.

[Guest Guest]

It's not petty. You don't understand the law. The law is a set of principles. There's no such thing as a small breach when you're talking about setting legal precedent.

And it's not taking away people's Christmas displays. It's making sure that the government isn't the entity putting them up so as to favor or disfavor any religious group or point of view. That's why a Nativity scene is allowed on public property as part of a display including other religions, including Humanism and atheism; but not allowed alone, because then the government would be promoting Christianity above all other religions.

Either you don't understand what would happen if those principles were tossed aside, or you don't care. Maybe you'd like to live in an officially Christian country, but that wouldn't be a country in which everyone was free and equal under the law. Take your choice, but you cannot have it both ways.

Then maybe Paul should fix the law instead of constantly whinning here about it. Maybe living in a Christian country is what the founding fathers wanted, but since they are all dead, we cannot ask them. Maybe religion is a good thing, just maybe. People cling to it for faith and hope that this world will be a better place. Maybe that is not a bad thing.

[Guest Mr. T]

Stop saying most people. You're wrong. Most people don't want to live in the type of country you and Matthew are trying to promote. You are the minority. You don't like it, but that's the way it is. Taking away people's Christmas displays isn't going to change anything. You don't even see how petty you are.

The reason our country is in so much trouble is that idiots like this have been controlling our elections for a long time. Politicians pander to the least common denominator, and people like this, Patriot, 2smart4u and others are the least common denominator. They're ignorant and proud of it.

Paul has asked excellent questions. These idiots will never answer them.

1. They don't understand them.

2. They've been trained by the likes of Limbaugh, Coulter and their babbling fundamentalist preachers that belief is truth. They don't respect learning or education or accepted methods of reason. "I believe it, end of story." That's how they think.

They're going to kill this country if we don't stop them.

That's why what Matthew is doing is so important.

Go get 'em, Matt and Paul. Intelligent people are behind you. But we need a majority.