Appeals court: Pledge of Allegiance still unconstitutional

[Berzerker]

Imran -

EXACTLY! If a teacher discriminates fire the teacher, don't get rid of a voluntary pledge.

The pledge isn't voluntary, you going to fire the children too if they discriminate against the kid who refuses to take the pledge? That's why the pledge is coercive... It's hard enough figuring out if a teacher is discriminating based on race, but you want to add more potential discrimination?

[Berzerker]

Vel -

And as has been pointed out...I WENT to public schools, and nobody forced or coerced me to do it. You guys are making a mountain out of a mole hill. I wasn't treated ANY differently for not sayin' the pledge. No biggie.

Your experience is limited to you, not everyone else. There are children in this country who've been mis-treated for not taking the pledge.

Let's see....in order to protect our children, we should probably just simply avoid language of any kind in public schools, or wrap everything in a thick coating of PC speak, so no one's tender sensibilities are offended

You aren't getting it yet, it's not about hearing offensive words or ideas, it's about being coerced into affirming religious beliefs some children don't have. How would a Christian react if the teacher told their kid to stand up with his classmates and affirm a belief in Satan?

[Stuie]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
I don't see what the big deal is. Just restore the Pledge to its original form, the one that was around before the McCarthyites decided to change it. That would be "One Nation, Indivisible..." That way, there will be one less bit of divisiveness. And it reverts to the Pledge as it was designed.

[Giant_Squid]

It seems to me people are getting too caught up on the actual words of the pledge. The issue seems to me to be whether or not ANY pledge said in school in a noncoercive matter that nevertheless expresses support for a belief not universally held is acceptable. What if every day schoolchildren were strongly requested to begin their studies with

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States, and to its ideals of helping the needy, preserving equality and tolerance of minorities, preventing plutocratic oppression and pushing for freedom and social justice worldwide"

or even

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States, and to the republic for which it stands, under only the divine limitless potential of humanity"

If either of these were used, conservatives would rise up in open revolt, and they'd probably be right to do it, and Imran, you'd be at the head of their army, wouldn't you? Even if any child could choose not to say the pledges without any open coercion. Face it - the only reason this is being so strenuously opposed by certain groups is because it's THEIR message that's being implicitly injected into young tractable minds. The issue isn't even I think the first amendment - it's just in general whether schools should be supporting the agenda of one side of a social controversy.
And, of course, it's only a matter of time before we change to "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, and to the beloved President of that Republic, George W. Bush" - I think Cuba does something like that already - got to instill those values at the right age!

[BustaMike]

Seems pretty clear cut to me. The pledge should revert to how it was. It clearly says in the constitution that there is a separation of church and state... but then again our dollar bills also say "In God We Trust" on them.

The real problem is not whether or not "under God" should be recited. It shouldn't. The problem is whether or not it's worth the effort to change the pledge back to how it was originally. Personally, I think it is.

I've gotta tell you (at the risk of going off topic), I'm really tired of some of the religious nonsense I see in this country today. My Aunt actually sent an email to a bunch of her friends and family that was a flash presentation with pretty little children and flowers and stuff praying for the outright destruction and slaughter of the middle east and all the sinners over there. WTF?

It may not seem like a big deal, but having those two little words in the pledge go a long way towards reinforcing that ridiculous idea that if you don't believe in God (or one person's view of God) that somehow you're less of a person. An adult can easily make an informed decision on whether or not to say a pledge, but can a 2nd grader? There aren't many 2nd graders I know that can.

By removing the "under God" no one is saying anything one way or another about religion, but by leaving the phrase in they are. I'm tired of seeing any kind of religious intolerance anywhere, and even though "under God" is just two words, I believe that it does promote religious intolerance, and I think that this is a good enough reason to put forth the effort to change the pledge back.

I dunno what we're gonna do about the dollar bills though...

[BustaMike]

It seems to me people are getting too caught up on the actual words of the pledge. The issue seems to me to be whether or not ANY pledge said in school in a noncoercive matter that nevertheless expresses support for a belief not universally held is acceptable.

I think the plege in it's original form is perfectly acceptable. All it really does is reinforce the social contract - as a citizen you agree to give up certain things (i.e. you ability to go loot and pillage and harm others) in order to gain the protection of your rights by the state. All the pledge says is that you choose to respect the social contract (allegiance to the flag and the republic). That belief should be universally acceptable to all citizens. If it's not, the person shouldn't be a citizen in the first place.

OT - This gets back to the whole argument of whether one is bound to the social contract w/o ever agreeing to it in the first place, i.e. being born a citizen. That whole idea never really made sense to me, but it's really the only way to have anything work I guess.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Berzerker
Sports are an extra-curricular activity, you don't have to play.

The requirement of saying the pledge went out the window sometime ago as well. Imran can even cite you the case if you wish.

I'm still waiting on a real verdict for the Star Spangled Banner. God, I'd love to start reading the dissents in the wierder cases the 9th takes up if they are all like this one.

[Zkribbler]

Why does the government feel it is proper for it to indoctrinate children with theism?? Religious education is the proper province of parents, guardians and religious institutions. If this country's political leaders believe this is a nation under God, fine. They can go to their church & I'll go to mine.

Any why are children pledging allegience to the flag? Isn't our allegience supposts to be to the Constitution?

[GePap]

" I pledge alliegence to the flag, and to the nation for which it stands, one republic, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all" That, ladies and gents, was the original version of the pledge of Alliegence writen, May I add, by a socialist, in the 1890's. "Under God" was added in 1954 (which means that the pledge existed longer without this religious symbol than with it) in 1954 as part of the campaing against communism, since no good Commie aetheist would swear alliegence to God. "Under God" was put in for political reasons, it was not part of the original pledge, and the courts are correct to state that it shouldn't either.
Also, in 1943, during he middle of WW2, the courts of this land stated that it was unconstitutional to force someone to recite the pledge in school. It seems courts had more backbone back then when it comes to confronting cheap fake patriots.


EDIT: did not see Boris's previous comment to this, but Boris is correct.

[Jaguar]

Originally posted by Sava
I just heard a bunch of dumbass conservatives ranting about how children are getting teased because their parents are going to Iraq. Well what about the children who will get teased because they don't believe in God, or because their parents don't believe in God? Huh? It's just more proof that the supporters of "Under God" are a bunch of f*cking hypocrits.

Muslims, Buddhists, and other minorities get teased way more than atheists. **** it, even Jews and Christians get teased for their beliefs more than atheists. (Admittedly its the fundamentalist Jews and Christians, who probably deserve it, but that's not central to my point.) You can make fun of a religious person by being disrespectful to their God. There is no equivalent for atheists.

[devilmunchkin]

i just think we need to get rid of religion period. but since we can't....this is a right step to making society at least a little more fair for those who don't buy the god bit.

[Imran Siddiqui]

The pledge isn't voluntary

Where have you been? If you consider coercion by other kids to make some action involuntary, you have some screwed up ideas.

If either of these were used, conservatives would rise up in open revolt, and they'd probably be right to do it, and Imran, you'd be at the head of their army, wouldn't you?

Thank you for putting words in my mouth Squiddy (as you always do), but no. I actually liked both pledges you put up and would have no problem if they were recited.

And I have NO idea why you think Conservatives would be fighting mad over your first pledge. Many Christians would be very happy with that exact wording.

Way to keep up with the world .

It clearly says in the constitution that there is a separation of church and state

Really, can you point to the exact words 'seperation of church and state'. I guarentee you won't find it there.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Azazel
oh, who gives a ****. I guess you believe in god, since you celebrate Christmas.

just another tradition. give it a ****ing rest.



"farting still unconstitutional"

I don't know about God, but I do believe in Jesus Christ and for that matter, Moses.

[Berzerker]

Imran -

Where have you been? If you consider coercion by other kids to make some action involuntary, you have some screwed up ideas.

Little kids do not take the pledge voluntarily, Imran, they are coerced by the knowledge of what can happen if they don't take the pledge. That's so obvious I don't know how you can deny it.

[devilmunchkin]

teased me ass! that's a load of bollocks considering 85% of america is xian. i get teased, ignored, discriminated against by xians all the time.