Don't say the pledge...its offensive

[cvramen]

"I think that's what they should be doing - telling kids you should be pledging your allegiance to this country," Reese said. "This is a great country. You're here for a reason."

If you dont have allegiance to this country go to one where you will be happier

What is a country? How can one be loyal to a country?

Personaly I believe any citizen who doesn't want to Pledge Allegiance to America, should be given a ride out of the country.

Some questions directed toward everyone (none of this is intended to be confrontational or to anger anyone; just trying to get people to think):
Can you tell me the Pledge of Allegiance for Sweden? Somalia? Croatia? Italy?

One of the objections to the Pledge of Allegiance, is that no other country has one. Philippines created something like it in 1996, but their pledge is quite obviously modeled after ours.

Did you know that the creator of the Pledge of Allegiance was a self-avowed socialist?

Did you know the creator's motivation for promoting the Pledge of Allegiance (he was trying to sell flags)?

Did you know that the Pledge of Allegiance did not have the words "Under God" in it? 62 years after it was created, the government "arbitrarily" threw in those words.

People seem to think the big issue is "should the words 'Under God' be in the pledge?" I say, should there even be a pledge?- seeing that all it was, was a strategy created by a socialist to sell more flags.

The following is the full e-mail response that parent Briana Reese received from Principal Pam Wilson:

"The Pledge contains the words, 'under God' and we have many Muslim families here.

Well, the principal is stupid. Muslims believe in a monotheistic God just like Christians. They don't believe in a moon god. "Allah" is just the Arabic word for "God". Christians who speak Arabic use the word "Allah" when they talk about God.

I don't understand how folks want to pander to EVERY SINGLE interest group out there that make up the citizenry of the United States...
Gosh I hate this politically correct b.s. Trying to please everyone, you please nobody.

This is one of the problems with public schools and other government programs. You get a one-size-fits-all solution. With the "monopoly" of government, it's impossible to please everyone.

we are flushing our patriotic traditions

How is the Pledge of Allegiance a "patriotic tradition" if one person invented it?

 

[RadioPatrol]

Can you tell me the Pledge of Allegiance for Sweden? Somalia? Croatia? Italy?

One of the objections to the Pledge of Allegiance, is that no other country has one.

Because they are all barely Democratic .......

 

[BOP]

Isn't that what Britan said after colonists told them to shove it?

at any rate, I don't care what some stupid principal does. Sorry if the constitution isn't as cool as the pledge.

you do know the under god part wasn't added until 59 years later right?

just curious.

everyone is up in arms over a stupid addition the KoC put in because they have the same hard on a lot of folks seem to have about having to insert god into everything.

anyways, I just moved my old fridge and I'm tired and still have to move a million boxes, so I'll once over some other threads and get to work.

later, my fellow Americans!

I'm not up in arms over the "Under God" part; personally, I'd be okay if they removed that part. I don't care if you believe in God, Goddess, Gods, or none of the above. I'm not even all that concerned about whether or not the Pledge of Allegiance is required of school children. It shouldn't even be required of anyone who hasn't reached the age of majority.

What I am concerned about is this constant pandering, catering to people who don't even feel any loyalty to this country, nor any respect for our traditions and culture.

 

[Xaquin44]

I'm not up in arms over the "Under God" part; personally, I'd be okay if they removed that part. I don't care if you believe in God, Goddess, Gods, or none of the above. I'm not even all that concerned about whether or not the Pledge of Allegiance is required of school children. It shouldn't even be required of anyone who hasn't reached the age of majority.

What I am concerned about is this constant pandering, catering to people who don't even feel any loyalty to this country, nor any respect for our traditions and culture.

I agree with that.

I guess the only problem with being a 'great melting pot' is that eventually, it turns into a soup no one likes =/

 

[cvramen]

Can you tell me the Pledge of Allegiance for Sweden? Somalia? Croatia? Italy?

One of the objections to the Pledge of Allegiance, is that no other country has one.

Because they are all barely Democratic .......

Well, those are just four arbitary examples I pulled out at the time. You may substitute, Germany, India, Canada or whatever country you like.

 

[This_person]

What is a country? How can one be loyal to a country?

Is this really what we've reduced ourselves to, wondering what exactly a country is, and how you can be loyal?

What is a "spouse", and how can you be "loyal" to a spouse? Do you see what I'm saying?

A country is a place, an ideal, a way of life, a government and a people, and a host of other things. One can be loyal to it by upholding it's best ideals, being proud of it's accomplishments and work towards bettering its faults. By standing up and fighting when someone from inside or out attacks. By helping the people within who you can help, and controlling the borders so that there aren't more than you can handle. By working towards a common goal of the good of those people, and that place.

This is a very, very, very short list of what a country is, and how one can be loyal to it.

Some questions directed toward everyone (none of this is intended to be confrontational or to anger anyone; just trying to get people to think):
Can you tell me the Pledge of Allegiance for Sweden? Somalia? Croatia? Italy?

No, nor do I feel the need to. I'm sure the people of those countries have their own ways of demonstrating their allegiance to their countries, and I'm happy for them to have theirs. We have ours, and I see no conflict if they do or do not have one of their own.

One of the objections to the Pledge of Allegiance, is that no other country has one. Philippines created something like it in 1996, but their pledge is quite obviously modeled after ours.

Who objects to a pledge of allegiance? Why does it matter whether anyone else has one for us to have one? Does anyone else have a Lake Michigan? Does anyone else have the Black Hills, or Nantucket, or a Constitution like ours? A "Bill of Rights"? I don't need to have what everyone else has, nor do they need to have what we do. Part of a national identity is to have those things that other places/people DON'T have.

Did you know that the creator of the Pledge of Allegiance was a self-avowed socialist?
Did you know the creator's motivation for promoting the Pledge of Allegiance (he was trying to sell flags)?
Did you know that the Pledge of Allegiance did not have the words "Under God" in it? 62 years after it was created, the government "arbitrarily" threw in those words.

(A) Source?
(B) So what? Does that make it any less than what it is?

People seem to think the big issue is "should the words 'Under God' be in the pledge?" I say, should there even be a pledge?- seeing that all it was, was a strategy created by a socialist to sell more flags.

If that were how most people viewed it, I would agree that a sales strategy shouldn't be given much credance. However, I think 99.9999999999999% of people don't view it that way. I think a pledge stating one's allegiance to this country is a good idea, with a strong, long history. So, yes, there should be one.

How is the Pledge of Allegiance a "patriotic tradition" if one person invented it?

Easy. More than one person uses it.

 

[This_person]

So your upset the kids are learning the Constitution, instead of the Pledge of Allegience? :shrug:

Which version of the Pledge would you want them to say? The original or the one that was modified :

• In the 50's, to distinguish ourselves from the Soviets?
• In the 40's to disguinish our salute (to the flag) from the Nazi salute?

Personally, I wouldn't want them to learn the Constitution just up to the 12th Amendment, I want the current version. Same with the pledge. :shrug: Seems like an odd question to ask.

How would you feel if they changed the Pledge to :

would you be fine with that?

If our money said "In Satan we trust" on it, and our Declaration stated that we believe it's self evident that we were endowed by Satan (vs our creator) to have certain rights, I probably wouldn't have a problem with that, because that's probably the country I'd be pledging my allegiance to. It's not, so it's kind of a pointless question again. Is it so hard to use the language of the country you're in when referring to God (vs. Allah), since the religions at the macro level say they're praying to the same God? Or, since the God in the pledge is denominationless, is there really a conflict at all? For the atheist to recognize that they live in a country that the vast majority (you know, the important ones in a democracy) believe this country to be "one nation under God" doesn't mean they personally must believe in a specific God, just that the majority believe it is a nation under some unspecified God? It's like not liking the color red, so you get your own special flag with no red in it. I don't get that entitlement philosophy.

 

[foodcritic]

Knucklehead finally got it

Strawman, the argument isnt against the Pledge to the Country.

The argument is the recognition of a God.

Your right the argument is really about God in the pledge and then it's about offending someone.

How and when the pledge came to be is irrelevant.

 

[foodcritic]

Spreading some propaganda.

Why that particular one? Why not the original pledge ?

Your pushing your own entitlement with a belief in God. A majority of people do not believe in Christ, does that make Christians wrong? A majority of Christians are Catholics does that make Baptists wrong?

We've had this debate before, we are not a Democracy, for the sole reason that Democracy's inherently avoid the rights and standards of the Minority. Thats one of the reasons the Founding Fathers created this country as a Republic.

Your right on the republic, of course the founders were mostly Christian with a few deists.

Actually the number is about 76%-80% of US population. (prot+catholic)

217,872,000 76.5 % (2)

2. ARIS: The largest, most comprehensive surveys on religious identification were done in sociologists Barry A. Kosmin, Seymour P. Lachman and associates at the Graduate School of the City University of New York. Their first major study was done in 1990: the National Survey of Religious Identification (NSRI). This scientific nationwide survey of 113,000 Americans asked about religious preference, along with other questions. They followed this up, with even more sophisticated methodology and more questions, with the American Religious Identity Survey (ARIS) conducted in 2001, with a sample size of 50,000 Americans.

 

[foodcritic]

Sorry i should have clarified.

A majority of people in the world do not believe in Christ, does that make Christians wrong?

A majority of Christians (doesnt matter) are Catholic does that make Baptists/Protestants/Mormon/etc. wrong?

This is America that is the point. If your unhappy you can try communist russia or china...you may find a better fit for the atheist view.

 

[Xaquin44]

This is America that is the point. If your unhappy you can try communist russia or china...you may find a better fit for the atheist view.

what on earth does that have to do anything.

 

[chernmax]

Just change "Under God" with "United" and move forword.

I'll talk to my god on my own time...

 

[tommyjones]

This is America that is the point. If your unhappy you can try communist russia or china...you may find a better fit for the atheist view.

lets jsut go back to the original pledge
'I pledge allegiance to my Flag and (to*) the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all'


the under god part wan't inserted until the KOC lobbied congress for it in the 50's.


to me i always thought it was funny that a 'free' country indoctrinates ALL of its children with this silly pledge.

 

[foodcritic]

And because this is America we recognize the Freedom of Religion (which also includes from Religion).

And because this is America, a Republic (for which it stands) the rights of the Minority are not trampled by the Rights of the Majority (which would be a Democracy).

You and your ilk are the ones that would be a better fit in China/Russia since your intent is to push your View upon others. You have an exclusive belief, which fits exactly with those regimes.

The argument against the "Under God" is one of inclusion, not exclusion. By removing "Under God" your including all other beliefs, since your not making an argument for any belief.

You attempt to muddy the argument by attempting to claim its Un-Patriotic, without taking into account that not every belief is the same as yours (Exclusion).

No One is arguing (well maybe Obama, i dunno) that we shouldnt say the Pledge, or that we shouldnt make a Pledge to our country, i'm all for it. But in order to make that Pledge be worthwhile, you shouldnt offer a religious belief into that Pledge, especially since all beliefs dont follow an entity such as yours (that is inclusion).

If you want the Pledge to mean something, i'm assuming you do, do you really want Atheists making a Pledge and a promise to a God they dont feel exists? Doesnt that bring the sincerity of the Pledge into question?

Wouldnt you rather they Made a Pledge whole heartedly?

If your ignorant enought to think that removing God will solve the problem, I think your wrong. We will then hear from those who wish the world was united and want a one-world, no borders place to live. They will not want to pledge to the US or the flag.


And like I said in the previous post the founders were Christians not muslims. The context of "God" to our founders is Judeo-Christian. Certainly not muslim, hindu etc. etc.

 

[tommyjones]

If your ignorant enought to think that removing God will solve the problem, I think your wrong. We will then hear from those who wish the world was united and want a one-world, no borders place to live. They will not want to pledge to the US or the flag.


And like I said in the previous post the founders were Christians not muslims. The context of "God" to our founders is Judeo-Christian. Certainly not muslim, hindu etc. etc.

obviously you are too ignorant to know that God is God, it doesn't matter what name you call him, god is god.

 

[Xaquin44]

And like I said in the previous post the founders were Christians not muslims. The context of "God" to our founders is Judeo-Christian. Certainly not muslim, hindu etc. etc.

actually, the founders were Native Americans .... it took a while for the Christians to kill them off.

but anyway.

 

[Ken King]

If your ignorant enought to think that removing God will solve the problem, I think your wrong. We will then hear from those who wish the world was united and want a one-world, no borders place to live. They will not want to pledge to the US or the flag.


And like I said in the previous post the founders were Christians not muslims. The context of "God" to our founders is Judeo-Christian. Certainly not muslim, hindu etc. etc.

And the founders never thought of making anyone recite such a pledge. You do know that it wasn't created until the late 1800s and still was an "unofficial" pledge until June 22, 1942?

 

[This_person]

Why that particular one? Why not the original pledge?

Same reason I wouldn't want them to JUST learn the original Constitution - much of it is different today. It's been changed, some for the better, some for the worse, but what it is today is what we have to work with. Why would I want them to NOT learn the current one?

History and how we got where we did is worthwhile learning; the reality of today is MORE worthwhile learning.

Your pushing your own entitlement with a belief in God. A majority of people do not believe in Christ, does that make Christians wrong? A majority of Christians are Catholics does that make Baptists wrong?

When speaking of Americans (the ones that matter when discussing a Pledge of Allegiance to America), most DO believe in Christ. That being said, it really does not matter, as the Pledge does not say "one nation, under Christ".

A much larger majority believe in a God of one form or another. The Pledge does not say "...under the Missouri Synod's version of Lutheran Christianity's God", it just say "under God". The vast, vast majority of Americans claim or admit to believing in a God.

Whether they're right or wrong is also not the point. It's what they believe, it's what helps to partially define us as a nation - the belief in some form of a God, and the ability to tolerantly accept that others believe in their form of a God.

Thus, the vast, vast, majority of us feel we are "one nation, under God" in our own ways, inclusive of others, not exclusive of others.

We've had this debate before, we are not a Democracy, for the sole reason that Democracy's inherently avoid the rights and standards of the Minority. Thats one of the reasons the Founding Fathers created this country as a Republic.

It is a republic, I fully agree. And, we have our representatives resolve our issues in a democratic fashion, you must agree with that.

Our constitution demands we protect the minority from the majority should the minority need protection. No one needs protection from this. In having the words in the pledge, no one's ability to practice their own religion is challenged. No religion is being established. A statement of fact that one way to define our nation is that the vast majority feel it's "under God" is a mere statement of fact, like "shining sea", or "land of the brave". Is everyone brave? No. Would that establish a requirement to be brave? Clearly, no. But, it's part of how we Americans, the vast majority of us, see and define ourselves, like our nation is "under God".

 

[This_person]

actually, the founders were Native Americans .... it took a while for the Christians to kill them off.

but anyway.

The people who founded the nation of "The United States of America" were mostly native to America themselves, though a few were born elsewhere.

However, if you're speaking bigger picture, there are no people "native" to America. They travelled mostly from Asia over hundreds of years at first, and then hundreds of years later more came mostly from European nations. No one, as far as anyone can tell, was either created here, nor evolved here. Everyone travelled here from somewhere else.

Again, I ask you to show me that (A) Christians tried to kill off all American Indians, or (B) where all the American Indians came from that are still here if they were all killed off.

You failed miserably to make your point on this earlier, and I doubt you have any new information on that.

But, anyway.....