California, Hotbed of Intolerance

The Supreme Court will take up “Under God” in the pledge of allegiance. It began with a California atheist suing the Sacramento school district and winning, thus appeals have brought it all the way up the legal ladder to the Supreme Court.

Next we’ll have someone suing to change the name of:

Los Angeles – literally: the Angels

Followed by lawsuits agaianst the following cities named after Saints:

San Bernardino
San Bruno
San Carlos
San Clemente
San Diego
San Dimas
San Fernando
San Francisco
San Gabriel
San Gregorio
San Jacinto
San Jose
San Juan Bautista
San Juan Capistrano
San Leandro
San Lorenzo
San Luis Obispo
San Marcos
San Marino
San Martin
San Mateo
San Pablo
San Pedro
San Rafael
San Ramon
Santa Ana
Santa Barbara
Santa Barbara-by-the-Sea
Santa Clara
Santa Clarita
Santa Cruz
Santa Fe Springs
Santa Margarita
Santa Maria
Santa Monica
Santa Paula
Santa Rosa
Santa Ynez

Oh, and Sacramento, where the lawsuit was first filed, is Spanish for Sacrament.

13 thoughts on “California, Hotbed of Intolerance”

  1. I’m so sick of hearing about this issue…All religions believe in one form of a god or another.
    There are more important things to worry about in this world than “religious” vocabulary!

  2. The original full name:

    El Pueblo de Nuestra Senora la Reina de los Angeles de Porciuncula (The Town of Our Lady the Queen of the Angels of Porciuncula) Porciuncula means “little portion,” and is the name of the little church that St. Francis rebuilt.

  3. I think they should just use a symbol for L.A. and they we could all call it “The city formerly known as The Town of Our Lady the Queen of the Angels of Porciuncula”.

  4. Ayyy Don, Don, Don,

    The mere fact that you actually worship what you chose to worship is testament to the freedom you are afforded by your country. Thus, all the more reason for your allegiance to same.

    Now, Baal, if I am not mistaken, in ancient language means “master” or “lord.” Can it not be said that then you, too, worship God? So my questions is, what is the big deal? Dont want your child to worship God, in any way shape or form, then tell him or her not state the “one nation under God” line. Still worship one master or another, then teach your child that when he or she states “God” in that line they are professing their respect for Baal.

    You anti-establishment types are just beyond absurd in your nitpicking. Like a shitty neighbor always making a big deal about the music being too loud.

    Live and let live man for crissakes.

  5. “Y’know, freedom of religion also means freedom FROM religion.”

    Does freedom of speech mean freedom FROM speech? Actually, no, that would be the exact opposite. That rherotical point aside, I’d suggest you look at the actual words of the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause: “respecting an establishment of religion”. Respecting as in, addressing the subject in one way or another. The underlying purpose of the Establishment Clause was not the wall of separation between church and state mentioned in a letter by Jefferson (who had nothing to do with drafting the federal constitution), but preventing Congress from DISestablishing the official churches that existed in most states at the time.

    Non-sectarian civic invocations of divine providence go back to the very beginnings of this country and were commonplace in the language of those who drafted the very Establishment Clause that I assume you must be relying upon to advance an argument for official, governmentally-imposed atheism; to suggest that that language actually requires such a thing, I’m sorry, just doesn’t pass the laugh test. The Pledge of Allegiance is a statement that the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment guarantee no one can be required to recite, so the idea that simply including the two words “under God” in it is ridiculous.

  6. That should read “so the idea that simply including the two words ‘under God’ in it establishes a national religion is ridiculous.”

  7. I’m an apatheist, but it doesn’t bother me to keep my frinkin’ mouth shut when it gets to the words “Under God” in the pledge. I just don’t say ’em.

    Seriously, is this worth spending thousands of dollars and using up court time for?

  8. I think that forcing millions of schoolchildren to mindlessly parrot a loyalty oath to the capitalist power structure…

    Funny, I dont remember anything saying “capitalist power structure” in the oath of allegiance. Maybe I was in recess or something when they taught that part of the oath. I do remember it saying “to the United States of America” though. Seeems to me, Don, you may be living in the wrong country. I also think it’s quite arrogant of you to try to enforce your will on how others should raise their children. Perhaps some DO want my child to believe in God and love their country. Then, when they get older, they can opt for themselves who and what to worship. I hardly think the term “One nation under God” is ramming religion down ones throat.

    …to worship some mythical patriarcal figure…

    And Baal isnt a mythical patriarchal figure?

    You know, if you don’t like this country and what it stands for, you can live elsewhere. It’s allowed, promise.

  9. I guess my opinion here is a little bias since I am a teacher and do witness my students echo the Pledge and the Star Spangled Banner every morning without knowing the true meanings of the words they speak, however, I do think that the words “under God” do not represent an obligation to believe in God, but it is simply a symbol/a reminder of theory that helped found this country. The founders of the USA believed they were protected by God and built their political system upon that belief. Although many who live here now dont believe in God, it does not mean we should erase it from our history. This is coming for a catholic who respects all religions but values “under God” as a symbol of the foundation of this country.

  10. I’m soooooooo happy to be a Mexican!!!! Wanna know why? Because Don Myers is not my countryman. Fiuuuu, what a relief! 🙂

Comments are closed.