Pledge of Allegiance

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by carbonmotion, Jun 15, 2004.

  1. carbonmotion macrumors 6502a

    carbonmotion

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #1
    What do you guys think about Pledge of Allegiance in schools; should we have it or not? What do you think about the "under God" and its conflict with the constitution's policies of church and state. Hit me back :)
     
  2. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #2
    I'll just keep saying it the way I always did... one nation, yadda yadda yadda, indivisible...
     
  3. Laslo Panaflex macrumors 65816

    Laslo Panaflex

    Joined:
    May 1, 2003
    Location:
    Tokyo
    #3
    Just to let you know, I think they added the "Under God" part after WWII, in the late 40's early 50's. My classes rarely did the pledge of allegience in elementry school, and never did it in middle or high school. The Star Spangled banner however . . . it was sung by every boy and girl that "thought" they had a good voice, at every prep rally and assembly in high school. I don't think the pledge is bad, but I can see how some people could want the "under God" part out.

    Personally, I don't really care either way.
     
  4. numediaman macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago (by way of SF)
    #4
    Those who don't know about the history of the pledge might find this interesting:

    The Pledge of Allegiance
    A Short History

    by Dr. John W. Baer

    Copyright 1992 by Dr. John W. Baer

    Francis Bellamy (1855 - 1931), a Baptist minister, wrote the original Pledge in August 1892. He was a Christian Socialist. In his Pledge, he is expressing the ideas of his first cousin, Edward Bellamy, author of the American socialist utopian novels, Looking Backward (1888) and Equality (1897).

    Francis Bellamy in his sermons and lectures and Edward Bellamy in his novels and articles described in detail how the middle class could create a planned economy with political, social and economic equality for all. The government would run a peace time economy similar to our present military industrial complex.

    The Pledge was published in the September 8th issue of The Youth's Companion, the leading family magazine and the Reader's Digest of its day. Its owner and editor, Daniel Ford, had hired Francis in 1891 as his assistant when Francis was pressured into leaving his baptist church in Boston because of his socialist sermons. As a member of his congregation, Ford had enjoyed Francis's sermons. Ford later founded the liberal and often controversial Ford Hall Forum, located in downtown Boston . . .

    http://history.vineyard.net/pledge.htm
     
  5. Thanatoast macrumors 6502a

    Thanatoast

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Location:
    Denver
    #5
    i plead alignment, to the flakes,
    and the unprincipled snakes of america,
    and to the republicans, for which they scam,
    one nacho, underpants,
    with licorice and jugs of wine for owls.

    (thanks go to matt groenig)

    my only objection at the moment would be that it claims "liberty and justice for all", a standard we no longer live up to.
     
  6. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #6
    I'm not a fan of rote exercises, patriotic or otherwise.

    I don't have strong feelings about the "under God" part of the Pledge, but I do hope that the next Constitutional case is brought by a religious non-monotheist (such as a Buddhist), not another atheist. I think the Supreme Court would have a much harder time issuing a smug decision if they had to look into the eyes an American person of faith that doesn't happen to believe in the Judeo-Christian conception of God, and to tell them that Congress by making this law wasn't in any way establishing religion.
     
  7. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #7
    Children should be taught the history of our nation, warts and all, along with the ideals embodied in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. When kids reach the age of majority and they have a basis for making an informed decision and they then want to pledge allegiance to a symbol - then I would have no problem, not before. It might have some meaning other than a silly exercise to satisfy those among us who fear a terrorist (communist, anarchist, take your pick) under every bed.
     
  8. Neserk macrumors 6502a

    Neserk

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    #8
    I"m as much against the Pledge itself as I am the "under God" part.

    Why? Well the "under God" part should offend all. It should offend Christians, Jews, Muslims, etc. who believe in God because God's name is being taken in vain on a regular basis. It should offend those who don't believe in God because their children are being forced to say something that they don't believe in . It should offend Hindus, Buddhists, and Wiccans because they don't believe in the god of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam.

    I am also against it because it violates the freedom of speech of children. It would be one thing if Adults had the right (and the place) to say the pledge, at will, before work. They actually know what it means. But children don't. More often than not I see, as a teacher, children saying the pledge than batting at as they walk out the door. I can't even tell you how many times I've seen it disrespected. Don't get me wrong: I'm all for buring the flag in protest against the American Government. It is just that when you disrepsect it should (imho) be intentional, not part of a game.
     
  9. Don't panic macrumors 603

    Don't panic

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Location:
    having a drink at Milliways
    #9
    as I mentioned in the other thread (maybe they should be merged), in my opinion the pledge is an act of propaganda and brain-washing.

    The fact that it is IMPOSED on CHILDREN is disturbing. it's something that belongs to a regime and not to a mature democracy, especially in the current format. It's not different in essence to when chinese kids were forced to learn songs about the marvels of maoism, or italian kids to recite how great Mussolini was.
    Well, the US are not maoist China nor fascist Italy and shouldn't resort to such sad gimmicks to promote liberty and justice (and, btw, what about equality?)
    And it is particularly said in times like these, when to so many people around the world the american flag comes to symbolize anything BUT freedom and justice (thanks to the warheads in charge in DC)
    Worshipping the flag (any flag) is only conductive to ultranationalism and oppression.

    As for the "under god" appendage is so obviously wrong and unconstitutional that I am appalled that it's even discussed. the recent decision (IMO) reflects the fact that this is obvious to the supreme court justices too, so they used this manouvering to stall the necessary decision.
     
  10. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #10
    I'm unpersuaded by this particular argument. A lot of things are "imposed" on children in schools, such as spelling, grammar and the times tables (though judging by many of the posts I see here, perhaps the first two aren't so widely imposed anymore). I'm not defending the Pledge, but school it seems to me is by definition an "imposition" on children, so it's much more a matter of what we impose, rather than whether we impose.
     
  11. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #11
    Imposing a particular politico-religious creed is very different from imposing the 10x table.
     
  12. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #12
    Well sure, if you're going to spin it that way. I suspect you were required to sing one or two patriotic songs during your school days, but I doubt you took it as an imposition on your tender sensibilities. As I said before, I'm not a fan of rote patriotic exercises, nor am I defending the Pledge specifically, but I am finding some of the arguments against these little national ceremonial displays to be kind of insubstantial. Issues of real substance are in play here, so we should keep our eyes on them.
     
  13. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #13
    Does "Floreat Etona" qualify? :rolleyes:
     
  14. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #14
    I don't know -- you tell me. ;)

    (An anthem to Eaton College, I presume. I had in mind some more typical exercise in patriotic merry-making, such as "God Save the Queen" or "Jerusalem.")
     
  15. diamond geezer macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2004
    #15
    What other countries feel they need to brainwash/indoctrinate their youth in such a manner?

    China?
    NAZI Germany?

    Yanks spend to much time with their heads buried in their flag
     
  16. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #16
    Too much lip-service. Words, words, words.
     
  17. Chip NoVaMac macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #17
    In general I have no issues with the Pledge other than the Right having their way back in the 1950's adding the "under God" reference.

    As a Christian (by way of the Catholic Church), I understand that we are a nation founded under Christian beliefs. We as a nation have removed ourselves from that as we have accepted many other faiths in our great fabric.

    We are not talking about a store that may have the Ten Commandments displayed. I can choose to accept or reject that stores principles. As a government we need to realize that others may find a reference to a singular or Christian God offensive. If we want to hold a Constitutional Convention to rewrite ourselves as a religious State, that is a whole different matter.

    "Under God" and "In God We Trust" are IMO endorsement by the government of the christian belief. And borders on the establishment of a government sanctioned religion.
     
  18. Neserk macrumors 6502a

    Neserk

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    #18
    Yes, imposing math and reading is a means to getting them to have the power to be able to reason for themselves and making their own decisions as adults. The pledge is imposing a a psuedo-patriotic belief system on them.
     
  19. Neserk macrumors 6502a

    Neserk

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    #19
    '
    The good news is: it doesn't work. As I said some where I did it from Kinder through the end of elementary school and it had no strong effect on my inability to criticize my government or believe that burning flags is a valid form of protest.
     
  20. Neserk macrumors 6502a

    Neserk

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    #20

    No offense, but you understand incorrectly. We were not founded under Christian beliefs. The founder fathers were primarily deists.

    Edit: spelling error
     
  21. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #21
    That's "deists", teacher ;)
     
  22. Neserk macrumors 6502a

    Neserk

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    #22
    :p
     
  23. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #23
    you meant
    "it didn't worked with _you_"
    you know if "it doesn't work" was 100% true ...then the world would have quite a few problems less (yes even in the US) ;)

    addition:
    "god is with us" ("Gott is mit uns") was written on the belts of the prussian army and later german "reichswehr" of WW1



    but after all..i am biased....you know we had an catholic-fascistic regime from 1934 untill 1938....so it's pretty clear why i am against such "god references" in governmental things...
     
  24. Neserk macrumors 6502a

    Neserk

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    #24
    true. I thought about adding that but was too lazy. I hate to think I'm the exception but you never know.

    Even so, I'm still against forcing children say something that is meaningless to them and they don't really have the right to refuse.
     
  25. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #25
    i think she meant to say that they were all on diets
     

Share This Page