Pledge of Allegiance

[matriarch]

Agnostic, atheist or simply non-believer, everyone should have their head.

The problem I've got is how a country that founded itself on repressed religious beliefs, took the 'storm tossed, huddled masses', now wants to act like a Soviet state and prevent people from pledging under the most powerful oath they know.

We began with the Puritans, and, in our favor, we have added every color, race and religion to our melting-pot. Every move to stop free expression is a step towards totalitariatism. "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Please, oh, please can we have Xmas concerts in schools, Hannukah and Hindu celebrations. Kids don't understand if you tell them religion is important and the state tells them to keep it hidden. We are failing the next generation through our intransigence.

Sorry, flame over.

In English schools we do.

It is a required part of the citizenship, moral and social education curriculum, that children learn about other faiths. Not only learn, but in a lot of cases take part, celebrating the great feasts and days of the other great religions.

 

[Honey123]

Seems the issue is separating Religion from Public Schools.

*Preparing to be thwarted....

But, first prayer was taken out of public schools and now "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance ~

I think no matter what religion you have (or don't have) there is a "god" you talk to, ask for help from.

In times of horrible disasters, I doubt anyone would say a Prayer to the President or leader of their Country....imagine that....

 

[Couture]

Doesn't make much sense to pledge to a flag anyway. What if the Mexicans invade us and they cloak their army in American flags .... most are made in China anyway? Do we still have allegiance to the flag or do we defend ourselves. I can think of 51% of this country that might be confused in this instance.

Wouldn't it be better to say, "I pledge allegiance to the United States of America!"

While we are editing - let's do away with this while United States business once and for all. States rights have been so thoroughly thrashed, they are nothing more than really big counties. They start reading this pledge and they may start getting all uppity and try reading the bill of rights. Lord help us if that happens.

So now we have it down to "I pledge allegiance to America. Let there be liberty and justice for all."

 

[Alex756]

Doesn't make much sense to pledge to a flag anyway. What if the Mexicans invade us and they cloak their army in American flags .... most are made in China anyway? Do we still have allegiance to the flag or do we defend ourselves. I can think of 51% of this country that might be confused in this instance.

"

Ahhh yes, I knew we wouldn't get far without insulting everyone who voted for the current president. I guess I pledge allegence to the flag of Dumbfuckistan doesn't sound right.

And arguement or a debate on an issue has alot more weight when people refrain from arbitrary insults.

-Alex

 

[impressive]

So now we have it down to "I pledge allegiance to America. Let there be liberty and justice for all."

Hell, if we have liberty and justice for all, who needs allegiance?

 

[Boxlicker101]

Agnostic, atheist or simply non-believer, everyone should have their head.

The problem I've got is how a country that founded itself on repressed religious beliefs, took the 'storm tossed, huddled masses', now wants to act like a Soviet state and prevent people from pledging under the most powerful oath they know.

We began with the Puritans, and, in our favor, we have added every color, race and religion to our melting-pot. Every move to stop free expression is a step towards totalitariatism. "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Please, oh, please can we have Xmas concerts in schools, Hannukah and Hindu celebrations. Kids don't understand if you tell them religion is important and the state tells them to keep it hidden. We are failing the next generation through our intransigence.

Sorry, flame over.

The country was not founded on repressed religious beliefs. Some of the colonies were founded by religious groups that perceived themselves as being persecuted. Basically, they came to America so they could be in a position to persecute anybody who disagreed with them. One of the colonies, Rhode Island, was founded by a group who were fleeing persecution by the Puritans.

The Puritans weren't the first. The first colony was Virginia and Plymouth, the home of the Puritans was begun in 1620 and was later absorbed by Massachusetts.

I don't think anybody on this forum or in Lit. wants to suppress freedom of expression. What some of us, including me, want to do is stop requiring that children express beliefs toward a Supreme Being, whether they belive in it or not.

When I was a child, we had a Christmas program every year, on the Friday before Christmas and I don't think it harmed anybody. On the other hand, we were all Christian, at least ostensibly, so there was nobody to take offense. I don't think it would have been right to force children of other religions to participate in rites that were opposed by their own religions. At the same time, I see nothing wrong with studying comparative religions, including the rites peculiar to them.

Colly, I have to agree that rejection or not of the words, "Under God" might seem not woth an effort but I think of their inclusion as being part of the efforts of some to turn the US into a theocracy. As such, I believe it is worth fighting, and damn the backlash.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Colly, I have to agree that rejection or not of the words, "Under God" might seem not woth an effort but I think of their inclusion as being part of the efforts of some to turn the US into a theocracy. As such, I believe it is worth fighting, and damn the backlash.

Box, the inclusion of the words hasn't made us a theocracy. Nor would they.

The people who will profit from this pollitcally WOULD like to see us a theocracy. And they just might succeed.

There is an old proverb about only a fool fighting in a burning house. In my opinion, the political gain the right just got is going to help bring the whole structure to the ground while the people who are fighting this battle pour water on a match in the midst of the inferno and congratulate themselves.

It's a stupid fight to be fighting at this juncture. Ya'll don't seem to grasp that you're pouring gasoline on a fire. And nothing I say is likely to make it clear.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Me, I'd like to pledge my alliegence to that goofy pyramind with the eye in it that's on our dollar bill.

What's with that, anyhow?

 

[impressive]

Me, I'd like to pledge my alliegence to that goofy pyramind with the eye in it that's on our dollar bill.

What's with that, anyhow?

*snicker* You've not read Angels & Demons, then.

 

[Couture]

Ahhh yes, I knew we wouldn't get far without insulting everyone who voted for the current president. I guess I pledge allegence to the flag of Dumbfuckistan doesn't sound right.

And arguement or a debate on an issue has alot more weight when people refrain from arbitrary insults.

-Alex

Oh come on now...that was a funny.

 

[LadyJeanne]

I remember saying this pledge during the younger elementary grades, and it honestly meant nothing to me. At all. Made no impression whatsoever. No one ever explained anything about it; we just did it every morning. I always thought it was just the teachers' way of getting us settled and quiet before we started class.

Personally, I don't understand why American children are pledging anything in school. What are they being taught? To mumble a bunch of words that are mostly meaningless? To mindlessly stand at attention and talk to a flag because the teacher said so? To indoctinate loyalty to God and country?

 

[Couture]

I remember saying this pledge during the younger elementary grades, and it honestly meant nothing to me. At all. Made no impression whatsoever. No one ever explained anything about it; we just did it every morning. I always thought it was just the teachers' way of getting us settled and quiet before we started class.

Personally, I don't understand why American children are pledging anything in school. What are they being taught? To mumble a bunch of words that are mostly meaningless? To mindlessly stand at attention and talk to a flag because the teacher said so? To indoctinate loyalty to God and country?

Well...at least they stopped making them raise their right hand up and out in salute.

Nothing warms my heart as much as the sight of young kids goosestepping around the classroom.

 

[Couture]

[When Bellamy wrote the Pledge in August, 1892, he never considered placing the word, "under God," in his original version of the Pledge of Allegiance. In 1954 David Bellamy, his son, sent a message to Congress in 1954 politely stating that his father would not like this addition by Congress.. His granddaughter and greatgranddaughter have made similar statements..

Bellamy had used the words "Divine Providence" and "Divine care" in writing the July 1892 Columbus Day proclamation for President Benjamin Harrison. When he was writing his Pledge in August, 1892, he also was aware of the Balch flag salute for the New York City public schools and that this Pledge included the words, "to God and our Country."

Bellamy wrote the draft of the Columbus Day Proclamation for President Benjamin Harrison in July, 1892. He used the words, "Divine Providence" and "Divine care" in this statement: "Let the National Flag float over every school house in the country, and the exercises be such as shall impress upon our youth the patriotic duties of American citizenship. In the churches and in the other places of assembly of the people, let there be expressions of gratitude to Divine Providence for the devout faith of the Discoverer, and the Divine care and guidance which has directed our history and so abundantly blessed our people."

When Bellamy wrote his Pledge in August, 1892, he was well aware of the Balch Pledge. In 1892 George T. Balch was the most influential person in the development of a patriotic flag ritual for the classroom. He was a New York City auditor and had developed a patriotic verbal flag salute and ritual, the first verbal flag salute used in American public schools. The students in his New York Public Schools gave his "American Patriotic Salute" as follows: students touched first their foreheads, then their hearts, reciting, "We give our Heads - and our Hearts -to God and our Country." Then with a right arm outstretched and palms down in the direction of the flag, they competed the salute"One Country! One Language! One Flag!"

 

[Weird Harold]

Me, I'd like to pledge my allegence to that goofy pyramind with the eye in it that's on our dollar bill.

Shush.

We don't want to confuse the godless atheists by pointing out that our paper money is infested with not one religion but two religions.

IIRC, the eye atop the pyramid is "The Eye of Horus" -- originally an Egyption religious symbol, but on our money because it was preempted by the Masons as "the all-seeing eye of God."

Frankly, the many influences the Masonic Fraternity has on many of our national symbols and government disturbs me more than token religious symbolism does.

 

[Boxlicker101]

I remember saying this pledge during the younger elementary grades, and it honestly meant nothing to me. At all. Made no impression whatsoever. No one ever explained anything about it; we just did it every morning. I always thought it was just the teachers' way of getting us settled and quiet before we started class.

Personally, I don't understand why American children are pledging anything in school. What are they being taught? To mumble a bunch of words that are mostly meaningless? To mindlessly stand at attention and talk to a flag because the teacher said so? To indoctinate loyalty to God and country?

In first and second grade, the words were meaningless to me too but later, I learned what they meant. I said the Pledge proudly and I meant it and I still do. Of course, at that time "Under God" had not been added. From the start, I didn't like the change.

 

[amicus]

God save the Queen! Where are the Brits when we really need them?

"Article {1}

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."

I see Colly's point even though I wish I did not as it is a 'practicle' approach, subjective in terms of cause and effect.

The first amendment was to prevent there ever being a Church of England or the verisimilitude, in the United States. The horrors of the Inquisition and powerful Popes, the Protestant Reformation and a dozen other examples of religious excesses gave rise to that article and with good cause.

As others have suggested, however, one must be reminded of the religious heritage this nation does have and how much a part of everday life, churchgoing has been and is to some lesser exent.

I currently reside in a small town and within walking distance to the marketplace there are five different places of worship.

Each Sunday perhaps a dozen, give or take, cars are in the parking lot of each building.

If you give it some thought, the social life of many communities revolves around church attendance and functions; birth, death, marriage, political associations, et cetera.

It has been that way throughout the entire history of America, for better or worse.

Now fast forward to the 1950's, when with the advent of television and Playboy magazine, all following World War two and the emancipation of women to work in factories while the men were off to war.

A fairly healthy percentage of our society were raised in the 50's and are now about to retire. It is a far different world in 2005 than it was in 1955, a half century ago.

Abortion was a crime and not spoken of.

Divorce was rare and shameful.

Homosexuals were called 'queers' and laughed at.

Drugs were a small problem.

Casual sexual relationships were frowned upon.

Children without fathers were 'bastards'.

These were and are, 'moral' issues. Moral issues are addressed by religion, the church.

There is a great upwelling of anger at the Liberal Left and organizatons such as the ACLU, in that people feel they have corrupted the nation and are now attempting to remove all signs of religion from public view.

The churches have been and are fighting back. Gay marriage was rejected at the ballot box in eleven states in the election of 2004.

So then the Liberals go around the people to the court systems and manage to sidestep the will of the people.

Colly is right. There is a great backlash not just brewing, but already boiling over and could affect elections at all levels in 2006 and 08.

The Liberals know it, when Hilary Clinton voices, 'and God bless America..' at the end of a speech, for the first time I ever heard her say it.

Even the Colly is right and the practicality may be the wise path, objectively, a rational person must insist that the first amendment be followed. That no establishment of religion in public places can be tolerated.

It is long overdue, even though it will infuriate even further the religious right.

amicus...

 

[JamesSD]

I've never found "under god" terribly offensive, but then again I'm pretty agnostic. There might be a god, in some shape or form. "God" doesn't have to mean "Christian God", "Muslim God", "Jehovah", or even a male god.

Of course, I wouldn't miss it if they took it back out again either. Wow, I wrote a lot of words to say "I don't care."

 

[JamesSD]

A fairly healthy percentage of our society were raised in the 50's and are now about to retire. It is a far different world in 2005 than it was in 1955, a half century ago.
Abortion was a crime and not spoken of.
Divorce was rare and shameful.
Homosexuals were called 'queers' and laughed at.
Drugs were a small problem.
Casual sexual relationships were frowned upon.
Children without fathers were 'bastards'.

*Shudder* Really shows you how far we've come. I only hope the world keeps improving. (And while drugs are far more available and abused now, it's not like they weren't a problem in the 50s. Mommy's little helper anyone?)

 

[elsol]

Whatever happened to

a) Don't say the pledge if you find it offensive.
b) Don't say the 'Under God' part

There were quite a few Jehovah's Witnesses who didn't when I was growing up... no one said anything.

Oh wait... I'm sorry, I forgot. The words 'reasonable compromise' and 'tolerance' left our political vocabulary.

I'll go back to the moderate hole now.

Sincerely
ElSol

 

[JamesSD]

There were quite a few Jehovah's Witnesses who didn't when I was growing up... no one said anything.

Were those the kids that didn't get to come to the class Halloween party? I always felt kinda bad for those kids.

 

[elsol]

Were those the kids that didn't get to come to the class Halloween party? I always felt kinda bad for those kids.

No birthdays... no christmas... no NOTHING.

I was always like... "I don't think I like their God!"

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[Weird Harold]

*Shudder* Really shows you how far we've come. I only hope the world keeps improving. (And while drugs are far more available and abused now, it's not like they weren't a problem in the 50s. Mommy's little helper anyone?)

As someone who lived through the changes in the world, I question whether it is "improving" -- many things have improved, but just as many have gone to shit.

The tagline, "Where are we going and why are we in this handbasket?" comes to mind fairly often when I read the news.

 

[elsol]

As someone who lived through the changes in the world, I question whether it is "improving" -- many things have improved, but just as many have gone to shit.

The tagline, "Where are we going and why are we in this handbasket?" comes to mind fairly often when I read the news.

The only difference between now and the past is there was a new world for those who thought we were in the handbasket could escape to.

Plus wasn't the 50's the decade after we killing something like 300+ million in a WWII.

Sincerely,
ELSol

 

[Weird Harold]

Plus wasn't the 50's the decade after we killing something like 300+ million in a WWII.

Actually it was the decade after we killed a couple of million in Korea -- not tha either war really has anything to do with the changes that have taken place except as historical background. Vietnam and the Cold War are much more relevant if you want to talk about the influence wars have had on the changes.

 

[JamesSD]

Things are far better for homosexuals and women than they were in the 50s. People are able to address their issues instead of shushing them.