Why Conservatives insist on reciting loyalty oaths:Pledge of Allegienc
Background
https://www.yahoo.com/news/freedom-not- … 10260.html
I found this article to be disturbing, kid or no, who has the right to make me recite anything?
I grew up with having to recite the Pledge of Allegience during my grade school years. I understand the need to be respectful while others are engaged. But this idea of punishing students for not reciting loyalty oaths is reminiscent of mind control having a fascist foundation.
So, we all stand together and chant in unison, what is that supposed to mean? Let's work harder in living up to what those vaunted words mean rather than be content in just regurgitating them.
Wow, while the Righty says "don't say gay" and burn books, he wants to force me to recite/parrot words that are in direct opposition to this reality?
Conservatives, as usual, seem to be pushing this stuff.
Those are my thoughts, what are yours?I see it unfair to punish anyone that does not want to say something they don't believe in --- period.
The "Pledge of Allegiance" should not be forced on any student. If they don't believe in its words, they actually should not be made to recite it.
You can't really force what the Pledge means and offers to those that cherish it. Myself, it always reminds me of how lucky I am to live in such a Nation --- I have treated it well, and it has treated me well. Thus far.
"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".I still know that plegde by heart as having to recite is so many times, so long ago. It is only when you are older and not an impressionable child, do you look at the words verses the reality more closely.
I am glad that you are not for coerced confession and rote recitations that do not reflect your actually beliefs.
There may be hope for you, yet......"I still know that plegde by heart as having to recite is so many times, so long ago. It is only when you are older and not an impressionable child, do you look at the words verses the reality more closely."
I agree, life can beat one up, and the Pledge can seem like a promise that just never came true.
In my view --- The Pledge of Allegiance is a symbol of patriotism and I am glad to repeat it simply due to my love for my country. To me, it purely represents a commitment and loyalty to the ideals and values that the American flag represents. Yes, we have problems in America, we are a work in progress. Yet, we can all take pride in how far we have come, and take heed that we have a long way to go.
The Pledge perhaps is something that fosters a sense of unity among all American citizens, bringing people together under a common banner and reinforcing a shared national identity.
Plus the Pledge has a long-standing tradition in many countries, including the United States. It may hold personal or cultural significance to individuals who value the history and heritage associated with it. To me, the American flag is seen as a powerful symbol, that represents freedom, democracy, and the sacrifices of previous generations that have provided wonderful freedoms. The Pledge evokes a sense of reverence in me, due to being a Christain woman. It's important to note that people's reasons for loving the Pledge can vary greatly, and anyone has the right to their own beliefs in regard to reciting the Pledge. It has no meaning to a given individual, they really have no reason to recite it.Great, Sharlee, I understand. I just want everyone who should have a choice to participate to have that choice without school authorities hassling them.
I was compelled while young as I did not know better and my parents probably did not know any better either to inquire much beyond the surface.
For many, it may well have little or no meaning, but they are being told to recite anyway or suffer reprisals...,A superpatriot might take issue with criticisms of the pledge. A sincere patriot might also. Being a "patriot" isn't a bad thing. Some people do bad things in its name, but that's the person, not the trait.
Of course, asking kids to recite the pledge is indoctrination, but that doesn't make it a bad thing. For adults, it's an affirmation.
For kids, the indoctrination is inserting a thought of loyalty to the nation. Surely instilling a sense of good citizenship in young minds isn't a bad thing. In the public world, reciting the pledge is voluntary. That an adult has enough faith in their nation to voluntarily reaffirm their allegiance seems like a good thing.
Putting aside the words of the pledge and addressing the message of the act, the 'I wants' and the 'indoctrination' condemnations seem to be missing the point.
GA"Great, Sharlee, I understand. I just want everyone who should have a choice to participate to have that choice without school authorities hassling them."
Very few state public schools have a requirement that a child be made to recite the Pledge. In Michigan, it is offered each morning and any child that does not want to take part doesn't need to.
Yes, it is possible that some children find little or no meaning in reciting the pledge. I think it most likely has lost its meaning for some. America certainly has over decades become less patriotic, and you pointed out something that is important --- you were just compelled to say the pledge, and you say your parents did not know any better --- did you ever tell them you did not care to recite the pledge?
I don't think anyone should be forced to recite the pledge. But it should be offered to those children that hope to recite it. These children have rights too... For me, I just love the tradition of coming together, and finding this one little pledge is something that we can agree on, and show no matter what, we love our country.Sharlee, the Pledge of Allegience was a grade school phenomenon, I was too young to ask a lot of pointed questions and just did as I was told by parents not to make trouble for administrators. I did not know that I should have questioned its significance at 11 years old and neither did my parents, who had a handful with real world issues to deal with, having no time for theoretical debates.
But, I wish that I had have known....
"Righty says "don't say gay" and burn books"
Really? I think you are a few facts short of a valid point."Really? I think you are a few facts short of a valid point."
----
Really, just how so? Have you been to Florida lately?Live there, your statements are hyperbolic... parroting the nonsense of the Leftwing MSM.
There is no "don't say gay" and there are no books being burned.
Books that show children how to perform oral sex on adults have been banned, there is a bill/law created to keep grooming children for sexual exploitation out of the school systems.
The Pedophiles are outraged by these stands that Florida has made to protect children and keep them from being prayed upon by perverted and twisted individuals... the LGBTQ+ wants grooming started at the earliest age... I understand why these groups want to decriminalize and support the targeting of children for their perversions.
I don't understand why you are in such support of them. Why you love to embellish and propagate these mistruths that further the advancement of the exploitation of children?
The "Don't Say Gay Bill":
The bill, filed by GOP Rep. Joe Harding and titled the Parental Rights in Education Act, says that school districts “may not encourage classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in primary grade levels or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students.”
Books showing graphic sexual content Banned from Schools:
DeSantis held a press conference titled “Exposing the Book Ban Hoax” where he presented a five-minute-long video reading from books the administration has banned from classrooms in the state. The books include “Gender Queer,” which depicts masturbation and oral sex between girls, and “Flamer,” which describes explicit sex acts between boys. “Let’s Talk About It” is another book that explains to how men and women can masturbate, and shows how to perform anal sex.
“Some of the media had to cut their feed when books with graphic content were displayed that were found in K-12 school libraries,” DeSantis Press Secretary Bryan Griffin said on Twitter.Ok, i stepped out on a limb a little bit, but not in regards to censorship attempts in regards to books that deal with themes of race and gender variance, shrouding actual history with lies draped over with the American flag. I live here and I know that a bonehead parent from Klanned Karenhood or two are given far to much credibility in deciding which books are objectionable verses otherwise.
Yes, I have my issues with DeSantis and his policies and it cannot be explained away from my perspective.
Conservatives like to wrap themselves in the flag and God bless America. It gives them the feeling of patriotism, that they think liberals don't have. Because liberals are not true Americans in their eyes. They are commie socialists who are on the dole to rob the government of their money.
For children, I think the pledge is just words as it was for me. But then there is a time when those words have real meaning when they are applied to where this country is today.
Are we really one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all? We are one nation at the federal level, but it is questionable about being indivisible given where this country is today.
At the state level, we have states who are ready to secede from the nation. Is it really justice for all when if you steal a loaf of bread, you can goal to jail. While a man who has committed crimes that put this country at risk in both Jan.6 and with the mishandling of top secret documents, is free to run for the highest office in the land again?
This country was formed on manifest destiny where it was justified to make refugees out of the indigenous people of the land. But then that is the plight when you are conquered people as many countries have been. As they say, might is right.The idea of super patriotism is just a ruse used by the Right to support the Rightwingers authoritarianism nature. You can use it for a cover to conceal an endless number of lies and misrepresentation.
What do we do by making children recite things without understanding, it is the MO of the right, play on ignorance and a dearth of information to indoctrinate people.
The contradiction from what is contained in the Pledge and what the real America is is something that Righty would just assume that you do not notice, evaluate, or even consider.
Conservatives basically believe that "might makes right" but that is neither politically correct nor palatable in our discourse over these matters. So, A basic ruse is always more helpful.
Thanks for your reply, Mike.
First, with poking about I discovered that it is constitutional to not recite the pledge or salute the flag. That makes it sealed deal. I guess that may be why those school districts and in some cases teachers settled out of court with their tails between their legs.
"However, in 1943, the Court changed its course in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, where the majority reversed the Gobitis decision and held that “the Free Speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits public schools from forcing students to salute the American flag and say the Pledge of Allegiance.”
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the … allegiance
But, with another case, it is the parent that makes the determination if a child can not recite the pledge. Parental permission is required.
"An event in 2019 drew attention to the ability of states to require students at public schools to get parental permission before opting out of the pledge, when a sixth-grade student was arrested in a pledge dispute. That case was dropped in March 2019, but the incident harkened back to Frazier v. Winn, a 2008 lower court decision that the U.S. Supreme Court did not take on appeal.
In that case, the 11th Circuit Appeals Court upheld Florida’s statute requiring parental permission as constitutional. “Although we accept that the government ordinarily may not compel students to participate in the Pledge, e.g., Barnette, we also recognize that a parent's right to interfere with the wishes of his child is stronger than a public school official's right to interfere on behalf of the school's own interest,” the federal court said. “Most important, the statute ultimately leaves it to the parent whether a schoolchild will pledge or not.”
So, we wind up with 47 states requiring the pledge to be recited in school. It comes down to:
** States with no policy for the pledge
** States that require the pledge be recited, with no clear exemptions
** States requiring the Pledge be recited with stricter exemptions
** States with new laws establishing the Pledge be recited in schools
** States with exemptions, but varying interpretations
** States with clear exemptions
Here is a breakdown of laws in 47 states that require reciting the Pledge of Allegiance by The Hill (4/2/22)
https://thehill.com/homenews/3256719-47 … ates-laws/I had overlooked an important point you bring up, parents are the ultimate decision makers, here. If the parents wants either Their 4th grade Jane or Jim to recite, they have to recite. It becomes obligatory on the children and they do not have the right to not participate. However for me, Indoctrination and education are two different things. The kid has to go to school for reading, writing and arithmetic, but only with parental approval can he or she be compelled to participate in reciting a loyalty oath.
If the kid has a conscience about the requirements, he or she must take it up with the parents with his or her choice constrained to whatever their wishes are.
At some point, the parents just might ask the kid if he understands the meaning of the words that he is to parrot every morning and critically think about them.
As a European, from across the pond, that sounds to me very much like indoctrination.
Coincidentally, earlier this year I stumbled across an article written by an American on this very subject, comparing the USA with Europe; and he described it as indoctrination from a very young age in America!
As you can gather from my opening statement, we don’t have anything like this in the UK. In the UK the only people who have to ‘swear (or affirm if you are not religious) an oath of allegiance, to the King, his heirs and successors, are just people in Office, such as MPs, Judges, Armed Forces and the Police etc., and Privy Councillors, Scouts & Guides and the ‘citizen ceremony’ etc.
The full details can be seen hear: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_A … d_Kingdom)
One person who had serious problems with this was Jeremy Corbyn (an MP since 1983 and leader of the Labour Party from 2015 to 2020) as he is a staunch anti-royalist. As an MP he must have taken the oath after every General Election, because not to do so means that you can’t sit in Parliament, and you don’t get paid; but when he became a Privy Councillor (a job that he didn’t want) he refused at first to give his Oath of Allegiance to the Queen, but was eventually forced to.
For clarity, in British Politics, as well as the Prime Minister automatically becoming a ‘privy councillor’ for life, so does the leader of the official opposition party e.g. the political party in opposition to the government with the most seats.
The Privy Council in England, which dates back to Anglo-Saxon England from around the 6th century, is a formal body of advisors to the King (or Queen).
When Jeremy Corbyn became the leader of the Labour Party, under the British Constitution, as the leader of the Official Opposition Party, he automatically became a Privy Councillor (Advisor to the Queen), and was duly invited to kneel and swear his oath of allegiance to the Queen. At first he refused on principle, but a second appointment was made for him, and he had his arm twisted to attend – which he did.
At the ceremony he did begrudgingly swear allegiance to the Queen, but he refused to kneel to her: The Queen didn’t mind, in all her grace she took it gracefully, but the press had a field day with his apparent disrespect to the Queen.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 … -the-queen
Jeremy Corbyn Defends Decision Not To Sing National Anthem: https://youtu.be/SUx0TYpAnpoThanks for your comment, I never had problems with folks taking oaths voluntary prior to assuming an office of public trust.
But, coercing such confession from those that choose not to is another matter.Yep, a bit of a tricky situation when in order to ‘hold Office’ you’re expected to give your allegiance on oath. I don’t know whether there is an easy answer to that?
That being said, Jeremy Corbyn hasn’t been the only MP to face a situation that challenged his ‘Principles’; Tony Benn was another infamous Labour MP who fought for his rights to choose on ‘principle’.
Tony Benn’s father was an elected Labour politician in the House of Commons in the 1930’s until he was made Viscount Stansgate in 1942, and became a Lord in the House of Lords.
Following in his father’s footsteps Tony Benn became an elected Labour MP in the House of Commons from 1950; but inherited his father’s title and became Viscount Stansgate in 1960; which meant that as a Lord he could no longer sit in the House of Commons, and had to sit in the House of Lords instead; but ‘on principle’ he vehemently objected and fought to give up his hereditary title so that he could sit in the House of Commons as a democratically elected politician (MP).
He fought to remain in the House of Commons and campaigned for the ability to renounce the title, a campaign which succeeded with the Peerage Act 1963. The Peerage Act 1963 not only allows new hereditary peers to denounce their title, and remain a commoner; but for the first time it also allowed women and Scottish hereditary peers to sit in the House of Lords.
Having won his right to denounce his hereditary peerage (and remain a commoner) Tony Benn went on to have a long and fruitful career as MP, holding senior posts in Government when Labour was in power, until his retirement from Parliament in 2001.
Tony Benn had four children, the eldest of which inherited the title his father denounced, and is now a Labour Peer in the House of Lords, and his 2nd son is a prominent Labour MP in the House of Commons, who had senior posts in the government when Labour was in power.
Tony Benn: the aristocrat who fought for workers https://youtu.be/bdtri6ZMbmQMr. Benn was a man dear to my heart, recognizing capitalism as inherently exploitive. But, I tolerate its preeminance here in America as a fait accompli
A man of the people, willingly setting aside an advantageous position as a man determined to walk the talk.
It is strange, completely foreign story for my perspective as being from across the pond. But courage and the audacity to stand for something always has universal appeal.
Taking oaths are common here. Anyone who has joined the military can attest to that.
At issue is students being punished for not reciting the pledge of allegiance and giving respect to our symbol of our nation, its history, and virtues the American Flag. To me that is a good thing in a sense in a roundabout way.
Those students who refused reciting the pledge understood what the pledge's history was, the meaning of the words, the significance of those words to our nation with its history, and its relationship to citizenry and patriotism. After all, beginning with the first grade there are lesson plans for those through lecture, reading, and class discussion. For proof one only needs visit Google University to discover school systems lesson plans surrounding the pledge and the flag as an entry level understanding for history and civics for first graders and onward.
The students who did not want to recite the pledge were not first graders. They were older and they had learned those lessons taught. Why it is a good thing, in a sense, is I give credit to the teachers for instilling critical thinking into the students. That is a good thing is it not, though some may disagree with that student's conclusion leading to their act.
And, by not reciting the pledge they exercised liberty held very dear to the concept of America's foundation and ideals, right? Apparently they did learn. From what I read they did it in good conscious and not a whim. Yes, some did so for religious reasons such as being a Jehovah Witnesses.
In an odd sense, maybe, the significant point hidden in the clutter of this and that is; Liberty vs. following rules of a society. That is an age old question is it not?I studied with Jehovah's Witnessws for some time and was attracted to the fact that they did not link strident nationalism with Christianity. As part of my studies, I am familiar with 1943 Supreme Court Ruling involving them.
1. Most first graders do as they are told, too young to understand and question the significance of what they are reciting.
2. I have no issue with the "Pledge" as it is arranged in the schools, only that participation in the recitation of the pledge be voluntary.
3. Those students that do not want participate are free to sit quietly, or leave the room.
4. As a parent (I don't have any kids in actuality), I, not the school, county or state will decide if it is appropriate for my child to participate in this Pledge.
5. Jehovah's witnesses took issue about the state competing with God for their allegiance. The ability to opt out should be available whether it is based on good conscience or just a whim.
6. There are many agnostics and atheists that do not acknowledge "God" as part of the Pledge. Who has the right to compel them to participate?
Wilson had 14 points, but I only have 6....
There should be no conflict between liberty and rules of society, in the ideal sense.
Related Discussions
- 56
Freedom of religion? Conservatives, where do you really stand
by Credence2 10 years ago
Oh yes, boys and girls, I am back, like a bad penny. I wonder what are conservative poster's positions on this topic is; are they really for freedom of religion or should children be hogtied and forced to participate in loyalty tests? I have studied with Jehovah's Witnesses and I say that their...
- 12
The Pledge of Allegiance Divisive? Some Politicians in Oregon say yes.
by TMMason 12 years ago
How could something that includes the words ‘pledge of allegiance to the flag of the UNITED States’ be considered divisive? Believe it or not, the mayor and city council of Eugene, Oregon just voted on this very issue. (It should also be noted that the city of Eugene, Oregon is a member of...
- 79
Mass Public School Now Require permission to say Pledge
by Stacie L 13 years ago
Guy Benson Groan: The principal of a public school in Brookline, Mass., is asking parents to fill out permission slips before their children can participate in a weekly recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance. Gerardo Martinez, the principal of The Devotion...
- 5
Reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in school?
by WindMaestro 10 years ago
Reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in school?Do you think that a child should be disciplined for not standing to recite the pledge of allegiance? Or do you think that any disciplinary action be considered unconstitutional?
- 23
Do kids still say the pledge of allegiance at the beginning of the school day?
by Victoria Lynn 11 years ago
Do kids still say the pledge of allegiance at the beginning of the school day?So many people still question this? Don't many elementary school students still recite the pledge of allegiance at the beginning of the school day?
- 140
Show me where does the Constitution mention Christ?
by Susan Reid 10 years ago
Since when is America a "Christian" country? I challenge anyone to find a single mention of Jesus Christ in any of our founding documents."God" does not equal "Christ." I swear to God, yes. I swear to Jesus His son? No.One nation under God, ok. One nation under the...