0 votes

Ron Paul vote on House Res.131

I just want to put this out there and ask if anyone can explain why Dr. Paul would oppose this. The U.S. Capitol Visitor's Center is a boondoggle and, as Congress found out, it completely distorted American History. One of the glaring omissions, in fact lies, was it declared that the official motto of the U.S. is "E Pluribus Unum" The real motto of our nation is "In God We Trust". Another omission was that nowhere in this giant structure was any mention made of the Pledge of Allegiance. After this came to light, Congress actually addressed the issue and these two items are to be given prominent display as a result, being engraved in stone at the entrance.

Here's the weird part. Ron Paul voted against this! I can understand voting against he Visitor's Center, but what could he find unconstitutional about including these omissions after the fact?

I'm really upset by this and I hope someone can explain why he would oppose this declaration of truth in the otherwise banal project.




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I can't figure out why he doesn't like the commie pledge

either. I mean a perfectly nice member of the Socialist party wrote it and the original gesture was identical to the heil hitler thing, but it's patriotic to pledge unwavering support for a symbol.
The pledge is a big part of the deception and makes people think reverence to a piece of cloth is patriotism---IT AIN'T!!!
Get over it Peal, the don't call him "Dr No" for nothing.

I never pledge to the flag

the pledge was penned by the avowed socialist Francis Bellamy. the pledge promotes state supremacy and idolatry.

Sorry I didn't post link before...

but figured everyone would be able to find it easily by going to youtube's ron paul pages...however for those of you who need the link supplied for them:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXBBQeQW9fE
Comes at the end of part 1 and and continues on part 2 (You can find part 2 link on the page of part 1)
_____________________________

*What you don't know CAN hurt you.*

_____________________________

Defend Liberty, for Liberty
Vote for President Ron Paul 2012
http://ksa4liberty.com

And one more time, look at

And one more time, look at the origin of the Pledge. RP prefered that the Declaration of Independance be inscribed there.
All clear now?

lol

Owned.

To be perfectly clear I refer to the original poster and not yourself--
Nice one.
*high five*

He also does not like the

He also does not like the word " indivisible" in the pledge, for obvious reasons.
I know all this because he explained his vote last weekend when he spoke at the C4L.

For one our motto is not in

For one our motto is
not
in god we trust....and as somone said prior to me, the pledge of allegiance was changed in '54...

Ron Paul does not like the "

Ron Paul does not like the " Pledge of Allegiance to The Flag". Look at the origin. He would rather have seen the Declaration of Independance inscribed there.

I'm not sure

where you find that the official motto of the us is IGWT. "E Pluribus Unum" has been on the seal of the US since its inception. I understand that Congress changed the motto in the 50s but the original still appears on just about every seal and document the gov does.

--DELETED--

--DELETED--

As for the cost of the Visitors Center:

Do you believe the Government buys $900 hammers? That was only on paper. The money goes elsewhere "and for other purposes".

I worked across the street from the Capitol building for over a year and know that complex better than the AOC (Architect Of the Capitol). Since the AOC only "works" 4 1/2 hours a day for 3 days a week, the real work is done by subs, like me.

Trust me. That project was not over budget and was ON SCHEDULE. It had little to do with visitors. That was the smokescreen. What it did have to do with were tunnels, escape routes and defense of the Capitol building itself.
And that's cool with me as long as Ron, Rand, Peter, RJ and Adam get out safely when the blowback hits the fan.

I could go on but I don't need a "visit" from anyone. The Capitol must be defended from ALL enemies - Foreign AND Domestic !

I never knew that!

Now it all makes sense.

The addition of "Under God"

While the phrase "under God" was officially incorporated into the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954, it had been in earlier use. The man to first initiate the addition of "under God" to the Pledge was Louis A. Bowman (1872-1959).

'Once you become knowledgeable you have an obligation to do something about it!' — Ron Paul

https://www.facebook.com/dave.lamarand

Battle rags

don't deserve a pledge of allegiance. The Constitution however, is another matter.

Go read about in god we trust at the us treasury site...
http://www.ustreas.gov/education/fact-sheets/currency/in-god...

I think Paul did the right thing

THE MORE I LEARN ABOUT GOVERNMENT
THE MORE I LOVE MY GUNS
FourWindsTradingPost

THE MORE I LEARN ABOUT GOVERNMENT
THE MORE I LOVE MY GUNS
FourWindsTradingPost

What happened to separation of church and state ?

Might as well build a Moses statue holding the 10 commandments between pearly gates at the entrance. To remind the visitors that this is "God's" chosen government.

Would you like to see the stars on the flag replaced with 50 little Christian crosses too ?

Get off my coin, please.

In God We Trust, our national motto

It's on every coin and in every courtroom. There is nothing in the Constitution about "separation of church and state" which you should know if "you've seen it".

And you should know that the

And you should know that the government doesnt print the money!!! It is most certainly
not
our nations motto....

So your for

the Church being the State? And the bible the final authority in this Republic?

I think I've attracted the wrong element

with my question. You really want to fight, don't you?

no

He's right, you're clearly upset about the religious aspect of the issue. There is a reason those things were not on the building to begin with. Ron Paul likely voted againt it because it's an unnecessary waste of money.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ." The phrase "separation of church and state" is generally traced to an 1802 letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists, where Jefferson spoke of the combined effect of the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.

'Once you become knowledgeable you have an obligation to do something about it!' — Ron Paul

https://www.facebook.com/dave.lamarand

You are absolutely right!

I am definitely upset about the religious aspect - that was my whole point! I know of the origin of the phrase, yet all agree the context was not as our activist Supreme Court later ruled. And it is certainly NOT law. My point is, for anyone who cares about the Christian heritage of our nation, that RP was opposed to this much needed (IMO) resolution. that just bothers me because I love RP. The Resolution passed anyway.

As others have

stated, there could have been something in the resolution he opposed. Or he didn't like the federal gov. paying for it. Not all taxpayers are christians.

It's not characteristic of a free people

to 'Pledge Allegiance' to anything! Indeed, it's antithetical in it's nature. Therefore, the more appropriate question is 'Why should it be added?'

The pledge of allegiance has a somewhat scary history and also reveals a bold form of propaganda that emerged at the beginning of the progressive era (of course). In fact, most people never question it because it's introduced to us at such an very early age and we're forced to accept it along with most of what we learn in public schools.
More about the pledge:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance (take note of the picture of children pledging with their hands outstretched)

I agree the pledge creeps me

I agree the pledge creeps me out. Be careful sharing this feeling with other people though because it is so enmeshed in our society that you'll get some funny looks if you say anything bad about it. I would maybe be willing to pledge allegiance to the ideals that our country was founded on but never to a country itself as a country can changed drastically over its history...which it has.

Being foreign born, I

Being foreign born, I completely agree with you.

When I first met my wife, who´s american and raised through the system here, we were in Iceland around my friends. And the discussion went into why do people in the US accept the brainwashing propaganda that is the Pledge, my wife got very irritated with all of us and would in the following months often recall about how me and my friends just didn´t understand the importance of respecting our country.

I agree,

but what about the motto, should the left-wingers have it all their own way and not give the slightest acknowledgment to our Christian heritage after lying about nearly everything in that building? Anyway, I'm interested to know what RP's reason was and if ksa4liberty had included a link, maybe he actually said why.

He was probably against that part of the resolution and as

result had to vote no on it's entirety. In the past he's supported displaying referrences to 'God' in courthouses and public places.

http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=694

THAT is a helpful suggestion

Thanks

Well he said...

Many times on all of these issues, that it's a states rights issue. Maybe he just flat thinks the Federal Government should stay out of it and let the states decide as normal, as normal policy. Funny I agree, let them decide.

I agree.

The federal government should not be deciding state issues.