you seem merely to know the name of the FSM but have read none of the gospel. The FSM is NEVER annoyed or disturbed by us, whatever we do, and whether we believe or not.

and the sauce is sacred. Why would we put people we don’t like (if there were such people) in the sauce? it makes no sense. Also the Pastafarianism FSM does not have any defined sins (except maybe using the “Green Can” instead of real parmesean) so there is nothing to repent.

Go my child, and enjoy some ramen as a gift from God the FSM. and don’t be so quick to attack anyone…

Thanks for the thought-provoking take on this subject!

Now that I am older I think that the pledge itself is creepy in light of its socialist beginnings. In 5th grade my homeroom teacher had us recite the preamble to the Constitution a much more educational, meaningful, and appropriate recital in my opinion.

As for the “evangelical atheist” thing, I don’t know what the answer is. I often get tired of the assumption that I am a christian and that I want to pray, bow my head for grace, or whatever but I don’t feel the need to point it out either. So I guess I don’t qualify as an evangelical

Helmut replied: “Excellent point, Cynical! Pete Stark (D-California) is about the only “out” congressman at the federal level.”

Thanks, Helmut! I had no idea there were any elected atheists at the federal level. Minor miracle.

In the 20th century, atheists made up for 5,000 years of persecution, real and perceived, with the way that theists were treated by authoritarian, officially atheist regimes.

Chris M, you must be Canadian with that dry sense of humor.

One possible A: Because the whole thing is a disturbing threat to the nation as a whole, whereas the “under God” bit is a disturbing threat to one specific minority. America is a democracy, so tyranny of the majority is (theoretically) easier to pull off than tyranny against the majority.

By analogy, if the pledge spoke about “one nation under God and united in hatred of those Hindu scum”, you’d expect Hindus to be more worried by the specific section than by the entire pledge.

FWIW, I do like the melody of the national anthem (old English drinking song). I usually hum a bass line.”

Statist obv.

Stand-up comic Doug Stanhope speaks the truth regarding the pleadge and liberty.

Anyone wanna take a stab at why the founding Fathers might have left all that out?

I’ll clue you in… it’s about Freedom of Religion. To believe what you like, or not believe anything but the realities before you. It is MY choice.

The REAL question would be…”Why are those words STILL there?”

Excellent point, Cynical! Pete Stark (D-California) is about the only “out” congressman at the federal level. When he discussed this last year, it was major news in secular circles because it IS so rare. Most of our representatives feel the need to pander to religious folks, even if they don’t believe in anything (except for accumulation of power, perhaps). I guess I’ll put that on the growing list of reasons I’ll never run for public office (I’m a very strong agnostic).