 sj |
||
|
||
BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out!
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: SeanM Date: 27 Jun 02 - 03:35 AM To Jon G.: I don't know about court cases - but I can personally attest to getting abused (physically) by classmates for refusing to say it. This was about twenty years ago, BTW. For not saying the pledge in fourth grade (and arguing the point with the teacher), I was first made to miss substantial portions of my class day by standing in the hall for an hour for refusing to join in. I was hit, had things thrown at me and various other abuses by classmates. I eventually wound up getting disciplined by the school principle. I soon found it better to go ahead an pretend that I believed anything I said about 'the flag' (and yes, at that age, I HAD been putting thought into it) rather than continue being ostricized and abused. Yes, there is pressure to say the pledge. No, in most cases it is NOT societally OK to say "I'd rather not". I do NOT stand by the Pledge of Allegiance. The only "pledge" of that nature I have ANY allegiance to is the one that I swore when I joined the US Navy - and I'm done with that, thank you. M |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Banjer Date: 27 Jun 02 - 02:29 AM In a nutshell...I'm PROUD to be what I'm Proud to be, I will defend anyone's right to be proud to be what they want to be and any one that don't like it can K**S my A*S!! I will NOT, however push my beliefs on any one else and will not stand for anyone's beliefs being pushed upon me me, especially by the government! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Jon Bartlett Date: 27 Jun 02 - 02:17 AM Here's a solution: "... one nation, under Allah, ...". How do you like them pataters? Would the religious crowd go for it? (the word Allah merely means "God", doesn't it?) On a serious sociological note: a question for US residents: has there ever been any court case of a kid refusing? Does anyone have themselves a personal history of refusing? Did anyone in any school of yours refuse? What was the outcome(s)? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: katlaughing Date: 27 Jun 02 - 01:11 AM Hear, hear, BillD! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Amos Date: 27 Jun 02 - 12:37 AM And sure as hell don't try to pass no law on it!! A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Bill D Date: 27 Jun 02 - 12:22 AM ". You either believe that life, and everything in it is accidental, arbitrary, and essentially without any deeper meaning...or you believe that life and everything in it is purposeful, intelligent, and full of deeper meaning" ...well, not really... I can't prove either one, so I don't feel driven to 'choose'...I tend toward the first, but it is not necessary to believe that there IS no meaning just because a meaning was not built in! WE provide meaning by being complex being who care about living--and the meaning we provide takes VERY complex forms, because there is no one, simple answer. Kant believed that we could justify morality and construct guiding principles without recourse to religion...using logic alone....and I tend toward that view. I can't prove that YOUR notion of God is not correct, nor do I need to. I do believe the idea that "the burden of proof is on the assertor", so I assert very little..*smile*... I am happy, have no desire to commit suicide....and have no idea where the universe came from!....but it sure is fun looking..... and listening to those who think they do! I do not 'need' a surpreme being to live my life. If there is one, it doesn't seem to pay much attention to what we do...and if THAT is the case, it is almost the same as NOT having one. Except that all over the world people who DO think they know 'truth' are attempting to enforce their versions...and making a big mess in the attempt.!...and that is why the reactions to the Pledge of Allegience upset me... I do like your last line, LH....". Why can't people leave other people alone to do and believe what they wish to do and believe?" ...and that means ALONE...no public pressure to act, believe, follow, endorse..etc., any specific view. Go to your church, pray as you wish---and I will defend your right to do so....but do NOT ask me to give even lip service to it...'taint fair! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Haruo Date: 27 Jun 02 - 12:01 AM Ummm. I don't know, Khandu, who? "Jehoma" looks like a misspelling of "Jehovah" (itself a misinterpretation of the Hebrew-Bible Tetragrammaton), and "Williams" makes Baptist like me think of our illustrious Leader, Roger. Clarify, s.v.p. Liland |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Stilly River Sage Date: 26 Jun 02 - 11:48 PM Columbus knew that there was no religion in the New World because there were no church spires to be seen in the villages. Christian missionaries are still out in the world converting others to their religion, even if it means convincing hunting/gathering societies to sit still and grow sugar cane (that they won't eat) for money to buy things they don't need. I've always viewed those who simply must convince others to convert to their way of thinking as pretty uncertain of their own beliefs, and needing external validation. The "leap of faith" they require is that made by someone else. I stand silently during the pledge, and sit during prayers before meetings. Here in the South they abuse my good nature regularly by praying at governmental meetings. I told my kids to drop the "under god" part of the pledge, or to just stand quietly. DougR, where are your statistics about the U.S. population and their beliefs? Polling the checkout line at Walmart? I want to see some credible numbers. There are more people in the United States who believe the pledge should stand as it has for the past half century than there are who don't. You mix your references to the point that none of your arguments can be accepted or in fact argued. Statements about the majority in this case vs the majority in the Gore election are non sequitur. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: DonD Date: 26 Jun 02 - 11:20 PM As one who learned the Pledge the old way and rejects the gratuitous insertion of religion inro it, I have been reciting it a couple of times a month at meetings with a calculated pause while others say 'nder god', much as I pause while the sopranos hit the high notes in the Star Spangled Banner. I appreciated Spaw's link to Dr. John Baer's short history of the Pledge, but felt the need to take him up on his offer of more information. I want to know when and how Congress got involved in teh first place: is there some law that makes the Pledge and its wording official and legal, which has now been declared illegal, even if only temporarily? Or was it just a resolution that isn't enforceable? Isn't it just the specific school's policy and practice that's beem found unconstitutional? I hope no one hase to worry about being arrested for saying the Pledge any more than any one had to be worried about not saying it last week. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Little Hawk Date: 26 Jun 02 - 11:10 PM Banjer, I empathize with your sense of outrage over this issue, and I agree with much of what you have said. Particularly the part where you said: "If all these narrow minded idiots and those that support them would put aside their asinine bickering over trivial things like this and other issues that don't mount to a hill of beans and put their combined efforts to working together to make this world a better place to live in it would go a long way toward world peace." Exactly. Issues like this one are incredibly petty. You happen to like the Pledge of Allegiance...and I don't happen to like it much...but I agree that no one should be able to force you or anyone else to stop saying it if you want to. I was living in N.Y. State (as a Canadian) and was in school classes where everybody said it in the morning. I was not about to raise issues about it (I would have caught hell if I had...from both teachers and fellow students), but I simply stood there, hand on my heart, pretended to say it, and actually said NOTHING WHATSOEVER. And nobody ever noticed. I think those people who want to say it should be free to, and those who don't want to, likewise, without fear of harassment. I think the same about most things, as long as one isn't actually harming someone or stealing/damaging their property. That's freedom, isn't it? In the same respect, I think people should be free to grow and smoke marijuana if they so desire, but not necessarily to market it to others. I am increasingly dismayed at the tendency of special interest groups to sieze on a little petty issue of some kind, and to try then to get laws passed to FORCE everyone else to do it THEIR WAY. That is the opposite of what I term democracy. It is a dictatorship in the making. As for "religion", all people are in fact religious...some in the "church" sense...some in another sense entirely. Alas, the ones who are religious in a "non-church" sense (they worship not "God" but something else) do not consciously realize in the least that they are religious. They imagine themselves to be entirely free of arbitary beliefs and philosophies...but they almost never are. One can be fanatical and doctrinaire just as easily one way as the other, and fanatics are never content to simply allow other people to be different. No, they must get a law passed that forces others to be like themselves...or at least to ACT that way in public. Scary stuff. It's scary whether it is pushed in the name of religion or in the name of secularism. I detested the Pledge of Allegiance, and I similarly detest those who are now trying to outlaw it, simply because it contains the word "God". Talk about intolerance! Most of the great books ever written in the English language contain the word "God" too...shall we censor them now in order not to offend someone? This whole thing about "God" is an endlessly contentious subject, because people usually don't know what other people mean when they say "God". Here's my explanation. You either believe that life, and everything in it is accidental, arbitrary, and essentially without any deeper meaning...or you believe that life and everything in it is purposeful, intelligent, and full of deeper meaning. I believe the latter. I call that intelligence, purpose and meaning that is in everything "God". I regard that God as being larger and more universal in scope than ANY religion I have ever heard of or ever shall. All religions make an attempt (often a pretty primitive one) to approach an understanding of that God. So do almost all philosophies, except totally nihilistic ones...and there are a few of those. (Their own nihilism calls into question their very validity and utility...this seems to escape their notice, however.) So, to deny my idea of God...you have to believe that we are all here entirely by accident and that nothing means anything, nothing ever has meant anything, and nothing matters! If there's someone out there who actually believes that (and hasn't killed himself yet), then he may feel justified to go around outlawing things that have the word "God" (if it's the God I spoke of) in them...but if he really did believe that nothing matters...then why would he bother??? But he has got to believe that nothing matters in order to deny my concept of God. Ay-yi-yi!!! Of course...that's just my idea of God. His idea of "God" may be a much more limited one. So if he wants to ban the mirror image of his own type of narrow-mindedness, well...hey...I can see why he might want to do that! :-) It's all so damned silly. Why can't people leave other people alone to do and believe what they wish to do and believe? - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Coyote Breath Date: 26 Jun 02 - 10:41 PM Yeah, I too was unhappy about the insertion of 'under God' in the pledge and refused to make the pledge for the remaining two years I was in high school. It just didn't seem right. Later (I can't remember just when) the words 'In God We Trust' were added to our money (I recall that they had been on some coins before) and THAT bothered me even more until someone quipped; "In God we Trust, all others pay cash". I don't know how I feel about this right now, I agree we are in for one of those endless rounds of righteousness and turmoil ala Elian Gonzales and THAT I find more bothersome. I wonder if someone thinks these things up to distract us?! CB |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: khandu Date: 26 Jun 02 - 10:14 PM Who is Jehoma Williams? khandu |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Haruo Date: 26 Jun 02 - 09:58 PM As you can probably imagine, this is an exciting topic on my other main place to hang, baptistlife.com. A lot of rhetoric on both sides that amounts to "'Sez who?' 'Sez God!' 'Does not!' Does so!'" The difference is everybody there knows what the Pledge "is" (in the sense of what the text is and when it's employed), mainly because Baptists tend to be Americans at a higher rate than Mudcatters do, I guess. Amos, when I read "As for compelling the recitation of assertions of DIvinity by children, it may be argued they are not "people" yet (which would tie a knot in the tail of the Anti Abortion crowd), but if they are considered people then a simple issue remains: ..." my first thought was "Those blasphemous little twerps! Claiming to be God!" ;-) Art, what would the JWs have to say? They've been vindicated, but by a system they abhor. (For those of you who may not know this, the Jehovah's Witnesses have refused to recite the Pledge for many years. I am pretty sure that their objection is not related to whether or not the pledge says "under God", since as others here have pointed out "I pledge allegiance to the flag" is pretty idolatrous in its own right. Unless they've undergone a reform since I was a kid, they even object to celebrating their kids' birthdays on the grounds that birthdays are pagan holidays. Liland Baptist (we invented the separation of church and state!) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: kendall Date: 26 Jun 02 - 09:31 PM Doug, you talk about majority as if it was the right way to think; remember, slavery was condoned by the majority in the south. As far as the people coming here for religeous freedom, the first thing the puritans did was to hang some Quakers. The very first settlers raped plundered and murderd the natives by the millions. That wasn't fast enough, so, they gave them blankets infected with smallpox. Do't talk religeon to me. If you dont like what the constitution says, get that bunch of losers to change it. Fat chance. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Amos Date: 26 Jun 02 - 09:07 PM That's Art -- fishing for trouble as fast as he can cast... A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Art Thieme Date: 26 Jun 02 - 09:02 PM Are there any Jehovah's Witnesses out there who want to get into this thread???????????????? Art Thieme |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Bobert Date: 26 Jun 02 - 09:00 PM Well, ol' bobert ain't into pledging nuthin' to folks who I don't know. Yeah, call ornery ol' hillbilly, but until I know what's in a man's heart, no pledgin'. BUT, when I do know, and I like it, count me in. And when ya' count me in, I'M IN! Come Hell or high water... But this will be at least entertainin' with the Supreme Court. In basketball, there's somehting called a make-up call. That's when a ref really blows it he feels compelled to really blow it for the other side. Well, they really blew the election'selection and now they're thrown the other side a couple bones with the capital punishment decisions. Like I said, out to be enetertainin' at the very least... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Amos Date: 26 Jun 02 - 08:59 PM Actually the key thinkers among the Founding Fathers were freemasons and mystics; certainly not Christians in the sense that the writer quoted above wishes to imply. For one thing, Jefferson in particular as the paradigmatic example absolutely rejected any effort to enforce thought in an authoritarian manner. The Constitution states plainly that : Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Other interesting principles established by the same document are: Amendment IX The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Amendment X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Just in case anyone is not familiar with the actual texts. As for compelling the recitation of assertions of DIvinity by children, it may be argued they are not "people" yet (which would tie a knot in the tail of the Anti Abortion crowd), but if they are considered people then a simple issue remains: what part of "no law" don't you understand? This has nothing to do with liberalism or conservatism. It has to do with the fundametal boundaries of civil decency encoded in the Bill of Rights. (I understand it is only 'compelled' tacitly, not explicitly, and not by law. So it's only covertly illegal, I guess; but the law defining the Pledge is highly problematical in this context).) I'd like to see how much smoke and noise would get stirred up if some partisan bunch tried to change the Amendment itself! If you think this is a storm in a teacup!!
A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Banjer Date: 26 Jun 02 - 08:56 PM The American Civil War was fought from 1861 to 1865...The Pledge of Allegiance was not written until 1892. By that time folks had seen the error of their ways and despite differences, we the people, shall stick together as a nation. Kinda like kids...we'll squabble amongst ourselves, but woe to the outsider that attacks us....then we'll stick together like glue! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: robomatic Date: 26 Jun 02 - 08:50 PM Little Hawk wrote: Then it says that the USA is "indivisible". Patently untrue!!! The USA was divided for several years during the Civil War. Therefore it IS divisible! That has already been proven. It is also divided every 4 years by the farce that is called a "presidential election", and every 2 years in between by Congressional elections. Plus it's permanently divided at the Congressional level into 2 factions who detest each other most of the time.
Ha! I laugh at the indivisibility of America Glad we can be of amusement. It's a valid function. But the Civil War was fought precisely over the indivisible issue. One part of the country thought it was divisible and the rest thought it wasn't. War was messy but dicisive. We are one nation indivisible, and you better not mess with it. (But laugh all you want). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Bill D Date: 26 Jun 02 - 08:37 PM ...and how shall we know if he does, Banjer?..or doesn't? what do we do to NOT have divisions in a country of 250 million that brags about 'diversity'?' If that court had ruled that you **MUST** recite the Pledge, as written and amended by Eisenhower, how many Christians would be protesting? ahhh...I think I am wrought up over this...I'm gonna go do other things and let it rest awhile... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Banjer Date: 26 Jun 02 - 08:28 PM Then it says that the USA is "indivisible". Patently untrue!!! The USA was divided for several years during the Civil War. Therefore it IS divisible! That has already been proven. It is also divided every 4 years by the farce that is called a "presidential election", and every 2 years in between by Congressional elections. Plus it's permanently divided at the Congressional level into 2 factions who detest each other most of the time.
Ha! I laugh at the indivisibility of America |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Banjer Date: 26 Jun 02 - 08:15 PM All this is going to do is drive yet another wedge into and already highly factionalized society. Instead of pulling together we all seem to be pulling apart!! God (oh shit, there's THAT word again!!) knows the last thing we need is more divisions. GOD BLESS AMERICA!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Bill D Date: 26 Jun 02 - 08:08 PM my local radio station has a 'post your views' web page...here are examples of what is appearing.. "The Founding Fathers would absolutely turn over in their graves should they be alive today to see what has become of this great nation! Too often, the liberals of the world twist words and use them out of context to suit their own needs. The so-called activists say that this great land was founded on the freedom of religion and that by using "God" in our Pledge of Allegiance is offensive to some, and therefore it is now a violation of their "Constitutional Rights" to be forced to say these words. I am moved to speak up on these abominations of our nations foundation! The reason people came to this land was to be able to worship GOD in their own way, and the beliefs and principles that helped forge this great nation were CHRISTIAN beliefs and ideals. They were not atheists, Jews, Muslums, Buddhists, Islamic, or anything else. They were CHRISTIANS. Just has we have the God given right to make choices to belive in these ideals, so do the atheists and agnostics of our land. We do not have to like it, but that is their right as an American. However, when they impose on my right to express my faith in God, which our country was founded on, I say enough! I will pray dilegently for them, but will steadfastly stand my ground against their blatant attacks against my God. If they don't want to say "under God" during the Pledge of Allegiance, then simply do not say these words at that part of the Pledge. DO NOT, however, impose your heathenistic ideals on me and against our nation, and bring forth abominations against the very foundation of what makes this the greatest nation on the face of the earth! But they that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint. Isaiah 41:31" ________________________________________________________ "This does not surprise me in the least America is turning into a Godless nation lead by the Catholic church. It seems like since 911 America has been urning away from God instead of toward God. Satin is directing these actions and he wants to get God out of the public mind.. starting with young children. In my opinion this is just one more way to seal our doom." _______________________________________________________ "This ruling is absolutely ridiculous! First we take God out of schools and put sex in and now we want to eliminate our Creator all together! We are heading in the way of the Roman Empire and everyone knows what happened to them. I pray that God is not as disgusted with this country as I am." ...etc...(you would not believe some of the dumber ones!..Hate and prejudice and blind, sanctimonious drivel abound!)..well, except for one...one post says simply "Freedom of religion & Freedom from religion. " |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Bill D Date: 26 Jun 02 - 08:00 PM Doug...I have objected, ever since I was aware of the issue, of ANY attempt to make ANY statement about religion EXCEPT for the "freedom to bleieve as you will" part of the political arena. I do not personally NEED the Pledge, (as I said back up there)...but I do not object to it in general--as an opportunity to proclaim loyalty for those who wish to do it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Banjer Date: 26 Jun 02 - 07:51 PM If all these narrow minded idiots and those that support them would put aside their asinine bickering over trivial things like this and other issues that don't mount to a hill of beans and put there combined efforts to working together to make this world a better place to live it would go a long way toward world peace. I happen to like the Pledge of Allegiance and the American Flag flies proudly from a flagpole in front of my house. Any that don't like can just ignore it and my reciting the pledge or if it really bothers them they can move out of country! Why can't people just accept that we don't all think alike and stop trying to force ME to think THEIR way?? It ain't ever gonna happen!! I'm so FUCKING fed up with it all!!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: DougR Date: 26 Jun 02 - 07:45 PM Nope, Kendall, I don't recall our doing that when I was in school. Bill D: It is not clear to me if you object to the pledge itself, or to the words, "under God." Either way, you have a right to believe whatever you please, to participate when the pledge is said, or don't participate. I see no reason why the minority of the people should be allowed to dictate what the majority wants to do. If the majority is unimportant, why was there so much emphasis placed by my liberal friends on the fact that Gore won the popular vote in the last election? DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: kendall Date: 26 Jun 02 - 07:29 PM That change was made after I left school, but, I remember as a little boy reciting the pledge and having no clue what it meant. Doug, do you remember when we said the pledge with an outstretched hand toward the flag? They cut that out because it looked too "Nazi" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: artbrooks Date: 26 Jun 02 - 07:19 PM Personally, I've always figured that if Eisenhower can put those two words in, then I can take them out. The rest of the Pledge is perfectly valid and represents the ideals that we strive to attain. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Bill D Date: 26 Jun 02 - 07:19 PM "There are more people in the United States who believe the pledge should stand as it has for the past half century than there are who don't" ummm..but correct principle is not supposed to be a matter of 'majority rules' the 'principle' is supposed to be that everyone in the USA has the right to believe as they please and practice it in freedom..not that they are allowed to pressure those who do NOT believe by getting a 'majority' and weaving their idea into the very fabric of society's symbols! we can have a perfectly decent country that allows diversity without signs everywhere that say: "You have freedom to believe as you please...but the obvious RIGHT way is like this..." it happens all over the world in various ways...those who have strong beliefs easily get to the point that they are convinced that EVERYONE should agree with them and begin to build it into the polital system! We can see the flaw in that when it happens in Iran or Ireland, but not here..*sigh* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 26 Jun 02 - 07:06 PM Are there any other countries that have a Pledge of Allegiance of this sort, used on a daily basis? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: DougR Date: 26 Jun 02 - 06:43 PM Why am I not surprised to read these posts? Enjoy today folks, but I don't believe for a minute this decision won't be overturned. It is a fact that no one is forced to recite the pledge. If it makes some "uncomfortable" while others are reciting it, big deal. There are more people in the United States who believe the pledge should stand as it has for the past half century than there are who don't. Wait and see. This decision just won't fly. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: GUEST,leveller Date: 26 Jun 02 - 06:34 PM Isn't flag worship a kind of state established religion in itself? It could be argued that if the words "under God" were taken out that would make it even more so.
I would think that in a country where religion is so important to people there would be quite a few who might see it as a kind of idolatry. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Jim Dixon Date: 26 Jun 02 - 06:32 PM Pledging allegiance to a flag always sounded like idolatry to me, with or without "under God": "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them..." but I did it anyway, as a kid. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Little Hawk Date: 26 Jun 02 - 06:26 PM Darned right it will be BIG. National symbols don't die easily. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Bill D Date: 26 Jun 02 - 06:22 PM well, supposedly, no one is 'required' to recite the Pledge, but when 29 kids stand up and do, #30 feels the pressure! I don't see why we need it, but the body of it is supposed to be just an affirmation of loyalty, with the flag as a symbol, just as many countries revere their flag. The US, as a relatively new country, was constantly casting about for some ways to codify and define itself, and in a number of ways, we overdid the effort.... ...but as you shall see, many of the masses get VERY attached to their little symbolic rituals...this is gonna be BIG! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: GUEST,Fred Date: 26 Jun 02 - 06:21 PM McGrath, By 'over here' I assume you mean the UK? Of course 'they' won't The concept of God is slowly dying, the concept of nationalism is too, although at a slower rate. I wish I could be alive in 200 years time. God will doubtlessly thought about in the same way as witches were 200 years ago. People will think: 'How on earth could they have believed that?' Fred |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 26 Jun 02 - 06:10 PM What happens when someone has a principled objection to this kind of thing?
"Liberty and justice for all" is a great aspiration (so long as there isn't supposed to be an implication that it's been achieved already) and I'd have no problems woith "under God", though a lot of people would. But the rest...
I certainly hope they never try to bring in anything like that over here. I can't imagine anything more divisive in some places. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Little Hawk Date: 26 Jun 02 - 06:07 PM Jah - The pledge of alliegance is a short declaration that all American school children are expected to recite at the beginning of their school day. It goes like this: "I pledge alliegance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the country for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." Amazing isn't it? Hitler had a little pledge like this drawn up for all the German kids (and adults) to recite too, but the wording was different in certain particulars...it was called the "Loyalty Oath", I believe. A lot of people took it just as seriously as a lot of people take the Pledge of Alliegance. Now let's see... First of all, one is pledging alliegance to a flag. Yes, a flag! This strikes me as a bit silly. However, the Pledge goes on to make clear that the flag is a symbol for the country. Okay...fine...I can see someone making a case for that. Then it says that the USA is one nation. This is untrue. It's many nations. Politically speaking, it is mainly 2 nations...Democrats and Republicans, with a few other small and unimportant political nations thrown in. Culturally, religiously, racially, philosophically it is many nations. But legally it is one. Hmmmm... Lots to debate about there, isn't there? Then it says "under God". The flipheads who are presently objecting to it are doing so because of this one phrase, I gather! How utterly silly. How do they know that their idea of what "God" means is the same as someone else's idea of what it means anyway? As far as I'm concerned, nationalism and patriotism ARE religions...just as much as Catholicism or Hinduism are...though they are religions devoted to a different deity, that's for sure. Furthermore, "God" is not a word confined to the Christian religion, and it is not the exclusive property of the Christian religion...nor does saying "God" in any way deny "Allah", "Rama", "Vishnu", "Manitou", or any of the other words out there which are customarily used to describe....a divinity which has a million names in a thousand languages. The lawyers should have a field day with this one! Then it says that the USA is "indivisible". Patently untrue!!! The USA was divided for several years during the Civil War. Therefore it IS divisible! That has already been proven. It is also divided every 4 years by the farce that is called a "presidential election", and every 2 years in between by Congressional elections. Plus it's permanently divided at the Congressional level into 2 factions who detest each other most of the time. Ha! I laugh at the indivisibility of America. "With liberty and justice for all" That is the saddest part of the whole thing. It is so grossly untrue that there is little point in even refuting such a statement, given all the historical evidence already refuting it. It is a ritual designed to indoctrinate young minds and produce a new generation who will dutifully follow orders from on high...and assume that they are defending all that is decent and true. It's the same ritual a hundred other nations have foisted upon the masses over the last many thousand years. The reference to God is just a minor point, and should hardly serve as the focal point of the present debate, since most people can't agree on what "God" means anyway. What a waste of time and money this is going to be, as it winds its sorry way through the courts and the media. Yuck. Beam me to a planet that is sane, where people do not bow down to an idol made of cloth. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: katlaughing Date: 26 Jun 02 - 06:03 PM WOW!! A victory for today at least!! Thanks for the heads-up, Bill. There's gonna be a battle, though! Rog came home steaming mad the other day. His dad was a real, old time investigative journalist. Went out and beat the bushes for good stories. Anyway, the anchorman where Rog is chief engineer, the er...leader of the tv news says, "I want to be known as a Christian, not a journalist!" Rog darn near lost it. Can you imagine what that kind of newsperson is gonna do with a story like this?! It's enough to make me watch them, tonight! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Bill D Date: 26 Jun 02 - 06:01 PM I was in 8th grade, and said.."what?...why?..."...and ever since I simply refused to add those 2 words....even as young teenager I knew that it was insidious and 'pressure'
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: catspaw49 Date: 26 Jun 02 - 05:58 PM Bill said he does remember. In my case, it was something my parents talked about and I recall the discussions even at a young age. It had become law when I started kindergarten and many folks thought it a great idea, especially in "small-town, midwest" where conservative values adjoined Sunday church as well as Wednesday night services. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: GUEST,Jah Date: 26 Jun 02 - 05:58 PM Thank you Spaw I shall read the rest of this thread with interest, and won't butt in with stupid questions anymore Thanks Jah |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Bill D Date: 26 Jun 02 - 05:55 PM It is recited every day in some schools and at some events... ....and yes, spaw, I have my doubts about the Supreme Court ...wow...what an issue!...there will be more smoke & flames than in all the forest fires over this! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: catspaw49 Date: 26 Jun 02 - 05:54 PM It is spoken at the beginnig of many meetings and other events when patriotic ambience is needed, much like singing the national anthem. It is recited most days by children in school at the beginning of the day as well as at assemblies or whenever the flag is presented. Click Here for a Brief History Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Wesley S Date: 26 Jun 02 - 05:53 PM According to article I read the words "Under God" were added by congress in 1954. They were not always part of the pledge. Any of our older Mudcats remember the change over ? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Celtic Soul Date: 26 Jun 02 - 05:43 PM I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. And to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. It's the pledge most of us here in the USA grew up with at school |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: GUEST,Jah Date: 26 Jun 02 - 05:43 PM Thanks Spaw When is it used? On joining the army or becoming president I guess? Sorry if this is a stupid question, but I don't know Jah |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: catspaw49 Date: 26 Jun 02 - 05:40 PM The Pledge of Allegiance: I Pledge Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. The phrase "under God" was added during the Eisenhower administration. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US ...pledge of allegiance ruled out! From: Kim C Date: 26 Jun 02 - 05:38 PM Well, then, why don't they just take out the offending phrase and leave the rest? |