Pledge! Now!

[Commissar]

SAN FRANCISCO

[Tiliqua]

I pledge that nationalism sucks.

 

One world, one people, in a secular, democratic government.

[Volourn]

No. I would not one some bozo half a way across the world enslaving me. No thanks. Take your one world gov't and go to a nother world where they still believe in slavery.

[LoneWolf16]

We've now got to say it every morning, and afterwards, a thirty-second moment of silence.

 

It's......annoying.

[Dark Moth]

The pledge is said simply as manner of respect to the country. Besides, if you aren't comfortable with saying the pledge of allegiance in schools, you don't have to. If this guy doesn't want his children to say the pledge, then they don't have to. But don't take away our own right to say it.

[kumquatq3]

The pledge is said simply as manner of respect to the country.  Besides, if you aren't comfortable with saying the pledge of allegiance in schools, you don't have to.  If this guy doesn't want his children to say the pledge, then they don't have to.  But don't take away our own right to say it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The original pledge (and for most of the pledges "life") the phrase "under god" did not appear. It was added later, despite the objections of the authors estate. No one would likely have a problem with the "old" pledge.

 

The current one is a clear violation of church and state. Give us back that seperation.

[Dark Moth]

Perhaps if more people were making a fuss about it, then I'd understand. But most people seem to be okay with it. Just because one person whines about it doesn't give them a right to declare it unconstitutional. Until more people come out of the woodwork and complain, it can stay, as far as I'm concerned.

[Commissar]

Perhaps if more people were making a fuss about it, then I'd understand.  But most people seem to be okay with it.  Just because one person whines about it doesn't give them a right to declare it unconstitutional.  Until more people come out of the woodwork and complain, it can stay, as far as I'm concerned.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Whether something is constitutional or not has nothing to do with how many people complain; the very basis of the Constitution is ensuring that the majority do not tyrannize the minority.

 

That said, I couldn't care less about "under God" in the Pledge. I don't think most atheists do, either. Might as well be "under figs" or "under sea boat" for all we care.

 

On the other hand, think about how many people would flip out if it were "Allah" or "Zeus" or "Mithras."

 

And for the record, most religious references that've made their way into government-related things are recent. I love how people justify fusing Christianity with the federal government by pointing at "In God We Trust" on our currency, as though the greenback of modern times is what Jefferson used to pay off his tavern debts.

[kumquatq3]

Perhaps if more people were making a fuss about it, then I'd understand.  But most people seem to be okay with it.  Just because one person whines about it doesn't give them a right to declare it unconstitutional.  Until more people come out of the woodwork and complain, it can stay, as far as I'm concerned.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

If something is unconstitutional, it is unconstitutional.

 

I fear for this country if people think there needs to be X number of people who get their rights violated before action is taken. That may be how it works in reality, but our principles should be set higher.

 

But I assure you, even if there is only 1% of the country who wants it changed, 1% is alot of people

[Dark Moth]

Perhaps if more people were making a fuss about it, then I'd understand.  But most people seem to be okay with it.  Just because one person whines about it doesn't give them a right to declare it unconstitutional.  Until more people come out of the woodwork and complain, it can stay, as far as I'm concerned.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Whether something is constitutional or not has nothing to do with how many people complain; the very basis of the Constitution is ensuring that the majority do not tyrannize the minority.

 

That said, I couldn't care less about "under God" in the Pledge. I don't think most atheists do, either. Might as well be "under figs" or "under sea boat" for all we care.

 

On the other hand, think about how many people would flip out if it were "Allah" or "Zeus" or "Mithras."

 

And for the record, most religious references that've made their way into government-related things are recent. I love how people justify fusing Christianity with the federal government by pointing at "In God We Trust" on our currency, as though the greenback of modern times is what Jefferson used to pay off his tavern debts.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Well, God is a generic term, so it can apply to more than just Christians. Christians, Jews, and Muslims all refer to their god as "God". Then you also have Hindus which worship gods as well. But as I said, if more people were upset about it, then I'd understand. But this whole thing seems to be narrowed to a small group of individuals who repeatedly press their own agendas.

[kumquatq3]

But this whole thing seems to be narrowed to a small group of individuals who repeatedly press their own agendas.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

If they are correct, they have every right too.

[Walsingham]

Separation of Church and state is a key part of the US constitution, isn't it?

 

'Before God' does rather violate that notion. Why does God have to come into it at all? As a matter of fact I'd have thought the US would object to a transnational entity, over whom they had no democratic oversight, despite paying milions to it's functionaries every year, telling them what to do. "

 

[julianw]

While I was in high school, it's never required. Most teachers preferred if you at least stand up to show some respect.

[Walsingham]

I do think an oath of allegiance is a neat idea, though. Possibly to avoid being put into a salt mine in phys ed class.

[julianw]

I don't understand why people complain when it's not enforced. Is it that they cannot stand the peer pressure? The situation must vary by school then since I have seen a pledge comes on TV while the teacher is reading newspaper and all the students keep on talking merrily among themselves.

[Walsingham]

I think a non-enforced pledge is worse than none. Sets a bad tone.

[Reveilled]

I would say that the pledge of allegiance itself is rather contrary to the spirit in which the USA was founded. The Founding Fathers didn't appear to rate the idea of allegiance to a country particularly highly, what with the high treason and all.

 

Why pledge allegiance to a flag or a state or a republic at all? Washington and Jefferson and the other leaders of the new republic didn't see fit to write a pledge. One might speculate that they thought the ideals on which they founded the United States sufficient to stand on their own.

 

If one must have a pledge, wouldn't it be more in the spirit of America to make said pledge solely to Liberty and Justice, rather than a flag or a nationstate?

"I pledge allegiance to the ideal of Liberty and Justice for all."

[Cantousent]

I don't think people should be allowed to pledge allegiance unless they mean it. I also think that children should not start saying the pledge until they know the proper words and can comprehend what those words represent. If someone doesn't feel fit to pledge allegiance to the country, that's their decision.

 

I forsee that this will probably come to nothing as well. As I understand it, no child is actually forced to recite the pledge and, should they choose to recite the pledge, they are free to pause during the phrase, "under God." The court will rule, so it's not exactly a grave concern for me.

 

I know many children who recite it without knowing the words. Try being a teacher for a while and you'll hear all sorts of stuff. Reciting the wrong words or treating the pledge as a joke in the first place seem far more damaging than outright refusing to say the pledge.

 

Finally, the pledge is a great idea, but I don't expect folks who secretly hate my country to have any problem whatsoever in reciting the whole pledge correctly in the first place. It's not the folks who bristle at saying the pledge that worry me.

[Shadowstrider]

I believe "under god" should be omitted. When I was in school, or when I was a marine, I omitted it and when questioned by anyone I would say that I didn't find it proper. I agree that if the pledge is said everyday, it should be enforced, but "Under God" should be omitted

[Dark Moth]

Let the people decide what they want. If the population wants to have it removed, then so be it. Heck, I don't care even if some people omit the "under god" part, but don't deny us our right to say it. If this is a democracy, then let the people decide, not some judge behind a desk.

[taks]

Separation of Church and state is a key part of the US constitution, isn't it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

not really. certainly the phrase does not exist, only the establishment clause which was originally intended (primarily) to keep government out of religion, not the other way around. the interpretation is certainly there in precedent over the years...

 

personally, i think that if we'd just drop the whole notion of federally funded, and required, detention camps for children, there'd be no "under god" issue at all. where in the constitution is it stated that children be required to go to state sponsored schools?

 

taks

[Shadowstrider]

Let the people decide what they want.  If the population wants to have it removed, then so be it.  Heck, I don't care even if some people omit the "under god" part, but don't deny us our right to say it.  If this is a democracy, then let the people decide, not some judge behind a desk.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Pure democracy = Tyranny of Majority

 

The United States is an Elected Republic, I believe most nations which people call democratic are actually elected republics. If the majority's say was all that mattered black americans would still be "seperate but equal."

 

No one is DENYING you from saying under god. Its the opposite, people are being FORCED to say under god. Were the roles switched I would be for allowing people to say under god, and against forced removal. Every day I pull a dollar out of my wallet, what do I have to look at?

 

"In God We Trust"

 

When I walk into a courthouse what do I see? The 10 Commandments.

 

No one is preventing you from believing such things, or saying such things. There is no ruling that PREVENTS you from saying or believing such things. Conversely, in order to properly recite the pledge of allegiance I MUST sware under God. The court's ruling isn't that you can't say "under god" the court's ruling is that you can't force me to say it, just because your mob is bigger and louder than mine.

[Gabrielle]

There is no god.

[julianw]

There is no god

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

but god.

[Lucius]

<--