If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NewsMax)   Student leaders at a California college have banned the Pledge of Allegiance at their meetings, saying they see no reason to publicly swear loyalty to God and the U.S. government   (newsmax.com) divider line 642
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

7161 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Nov 2006 at 8:00 AM (7 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



642 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all
 
2006-11-10 11:57:44 AM
Homer
"I hope you realize that if someone had proposed the Recitation of a Loyalty oath to the Framers of the Constitution, they would have been laughed right out of the Continental Congress."

I bet they would do the same if you said you cant pray in school as the constitution says nothing against it. If you read it it it says "Congress shall make no law..." how do people read this and say it means no 10 commandments in courthouses? Now nativity scenes on public property? etc? Local and state govenments are not congress. They wrote the damn thing and had no problem with it so whats that say?
 
2006-11-10 11:57:45 AM
Oh, I also don't care if you burn your own Bible, house (as long as you don't hurt other people and don't expect the fire department to put it out or get insurance money for it), body, clothes, flag, underwear, or anything else.
 
2006-11-10 11:59:21 AM
The Homer Tax:

Daily Compulsory Recitation of a loyalty oath...

It's not compulsory.

I hope you realize that if someone had proposed the Recitation of a Loyalty oath to the Framers of the Constitution, they would have been laughed right out of the Continental Congress.

The presidential loyalty oath (to the constitution), mandated by the constitution:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
 
2006-11-10 11:59:36 AM
tonesskin

But please dont burn a koran or you will get your embasy burned. Bibles are ok as the xtains will not go apeshiat and kill people.
 
2006-11-10 12:01:07 PM
flux

So good to see you.
 
2006-11-10 12:01:11 PM
3boys: I bet they would do the same if you said you cant pray in school as the constitution says nothing against it. If you read it it it says "Congress shall make no law..." how do people read this and say it means no 10 commandments in courthouses? Now nativity scenes on public property? etc? Local and state govenments are not congress. They wrote the damn thing and had no problem with it so whats that say?


You can't pray in school? Where? This is news to me.
 
2006-11-10 12:05:14 PM
Cheeseburger: The presidential loyalty oath (to the constitution), mandated by the constitution:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."


Do you really not see the difference between expecting the citizenry to pledge allegiance to their country, and an Elected Representative pledging to defend the document he was elected (in theory) to preserve?

It's funny that you bring that up though, because it only serves to bolster my position on the worhtlessness of "loyalty oaths," considering the fact that Every president since John Adams has done a bang-up job of *not* preserving, protecting, or defending the Constitution, and has, in fact, done the exact opposite.
 
2006-11-10 12:06:28 PM
For Leviathan's sake. If I do not have to say the pledge of allegience, I should not have to hear it either. ;) And that's the bottom line because I said so. Get a life and recite it in private, in your basements. But be quiet about it. I don't want to hear any idolatry.
 
2006-11-10 12:06:31 PM
I like how we deal with loyalty, nationalism and love for the country over here in the UK.

Our head of state is the queen, who does very little that's relevant to anyone's life and has made a damn good go of having done so little that almost nobody could find her either offensive or in any way relevant.
We have a national anthem that is so dull, grey and dreary that nobody even really remembers the first verse.
There are no pledges. Nobody is required to sing anything.
Our national religion is so watered down and ineffectual that even the athiests here tend to think it's quite sweet. It's more about tea and jam than it is about god.

Any "loyalty" in the UK has to be the genuine article after the authorities have tried so damn hard to keep people disinterested.

Many of us love our country, or appreciate it at any rate. May even fight for it if pushed. But without the jingoism and the incredible mass of EGO masturbation that seems to be involved in USian society.
 
2006-11-10 12:06:59 PM
zenferret

Slavery, the treatment of Native Americans, civil rights..

Yeah, way to completely put those items out of context of the rest of the world at those time periods.
 
2006-11-10 12:07:43 PM
The Homer Tax

Where have you been? Do you not recall all the shiat about praying valedictorians . or the people all upset because a group is using schools to have prayer groups in, after school is over and they still get attacked.
 
2006-11-10 12:07:52 PM
Cheeseburger
The presidential loyalty oath (to the constitution), mandated by the constitution:


Which isn't the same as the Pledge of Allegiance.
 
2006-11-10 12:07:54 PM
But please dont burn a koran or you will get your embasy burned. Bibles are ok as the xtains will not go apeshiat and kill people.

I doubt I'll get my embassy burned for buring a Koran.
 
2006-11-10 12:08:35 PM
You can pray in school. But schools can't enforce a school prayer. I believe saying "under God" is a prayer, and certainly forced religion, and should not exist in this country. If you want to say "under God", say it during recess.
 
2006-11-10 12:08:48 PM
Lispin'Liberal: "I liked your revised pledge, up until this assinine little quip. The mindset that organized terrorism is a crime and not an act of war will do us in. Thanks for pointing out that all Muslims are persecuted, I'll be sure to remind that to the Muslim guy in my class who is a Corporal in the Marines."

Sorry it was assinine, at least it wasn't luddicrous.

Your 2nd sentence is hard to parse. You seem to be saying that a mindset alone can be a crime. I would disagree.

I didn't say all Muslims are persecuted, I said some Muslims have recently been denied libery and justice. This is not a controversial statement. Shortly after 9/11 many Muslim citizens were put in prison for months without ever being charged (they were "held for questioning"). The lack of due process at Guantanamo Bay is well documented. As for your friend who is Muslim and in the military, good for him. I hope there will be more like him to serve as examples and discourage people's bigotry.

Anyway, I am glad you enjoyed the rest of my joke. I agree the last line wasn't a gut buster. Please write your own revised Pledge and show me how it is really done (I mean that seriously, not snidely).
 
2006-11-10 12:09:05 PM
elmo2525

How does the pledge establish a religion again? "Under god" does not define God in anyway. It does not even encourage people to act in a certian way. The only thing it does is describe the United States. You english language gurus please explain the usage of "under God" as used in the pledge. Does it require you to pledge to and God? It would establish a religion if it said pledged to the "Lutheran God" or to "Allah"...


I dunno, mabye because the legislation that introduced it into the pledge was to identify us as a Christian nation and not those damned godless red commie bastards.
 
2006-11-10 12:09:17 PM
It's not about insecurity at all. Reciting the pledge is just like singing the national anthem. It is jsut like singing the fight song before a sporting event. It is just like reciting a oath of office. You are building up others and saying that loyalty to the country is ok. It is a huge moral booster to stand with fellow Americans and (re)state you love for country and what is stands for.

I also hear a lot of selfishness here. People who are too selfish to defend their fellow citizens. This is disturbing. If you will only defend your little group of family and friends, you are selfish. It is our duty to help people that "need" defending.
 
2006-11-10 12:10:22 PM
It's threads like this that support my belief that Tatsuma is one of the smartest people I have ever seen.

You should be free to do as you please with the exception of intentionally wounding/killing someone or denying them, by deceptive means, of something that is rightfully theirs. If your actions should cause the death/injury of another or loss of property, you shall be tried and sentenced. Everything else is fair game. Have fun!
 
2006-11-10 12:10:51 PM
3boys
Where have you been? Do you not recall all the shiat about praying valedictorians . or the people all upset because a group is using schools to have prayer groups in, after school is over and they still get attacked.


You can pray all you want, just don't expect the state or it's entities to provide a mandate for your religious beliefs.
 
2006-11-10 12:11:46 PM
HappyDaddy: I say it every day, right after I lace up my brown wingtips.


Why am I not surprised by this?

i24.photobucket.com
 
2006-11-10 12:12:31 PM
Mordis

Step into some of the other threads he gets into, it's painfully obvious that he gets in over his head sometimes ut continues to argue (inefectively) anyway.

Having said that he is often level headed and a joy to converse with. I hope people could say the same about me but I suspect perhaps not.
 
2006-11-10 12:12:42 PM
cankersnore

The last line should go:

With liberty and justice for those who can afford a good lawyer

Accurate, but not extremely funny. It's all I've got.
 
2006-11-10 12:13:37 PM
We actually need stuff like this. For every ban on the Pledge of Allegience there is a Bible-toting politician who thinks Jesus dictates what the US foreign policy should be...

Gotta have checks and balances.
 
2006-11-10 12:14:17 PM
The Homer Tax: No, because I honestly don't care. I don't think the Federal government should be funding really *any* research, and they most certainly should not be using my tax dollars to do it.

That said, my only real feelings on the whole Stem Cell fiasco is that if they are going to waste all of our money on research for shiat, they shouldn't arbitrarily restrict funding to one area of study just to pander to a group of people who feel that a clump of cells has a soul. I am ethically against the notion of "embryo farming" i.e. creating embryos for the sole purpose of destroying them for their sweet, sweet, stem cells. I also revel in the hypocrisy of people who are so virulently anti-embryonic stem cell research because it "destroys a life," Yet, are in full support of In-vitro Fertilization, which also destroys lives, or freezes them in perpetuity (which is essentially the same as destroying them).

That's where I stand on the whole Stem-Cell issue, not that you care :-P


Actually, you stand about where I do. FWIW.
 
2006-11-10 12:14:36 PM
The Homer Tax:

Do you really not see the difference between expecting the citizenry to pledge allegiance to their country, and an Elected Representative pledging to defend the document he was elected (in theory) to preserve?

How about you point out the difference to me, or was that it? Allegiance is expected of the citizenry, and a verbal expression of that intent does not seem all that outrageous an act. As I've already pointed out, though, it is not mandatory. No one is going to compel you to say it.
 
2006-11-10 12:15:42 PM
...With liberty and justice for some, tiny American flags for others.
 
2006-11-10 12:16:00 PM
Cheeseburger: No one is going to compel you to say it.

But they (yourself included) sure seem to get bent out of shape if you don't.
 
2006-11-10 12:16:48 PM
You should be free to do as you please with the exception of intentionally wounding/killing someone or denying them, by deceptive means, of something that is rightfully theirs. If your actions should cause the death/injury of another or loss of property, you shall be tried and sentenced. Everything else is fair game. Have fun!

You are. You CAN PRAY IN SCHOOL. The ACLU has fought for that right. The school just can't mandate it. Authority figures can't make OTHERS pray. You can pray privately, but the school can't pray over a loud speaker. A teacher can't have his or her class pray. And prayer shouldn't take away from class time (though from a recent thread it apparently does in some states with Bible school being taught during "free school time" that was set aside for Bible school to be taught).
 
2006-11-10 12:17:49 PM
College, check.
Californa, check.
Socialist, check.
Atheist, check.

And there is something new here?
 
2006-11-10 12:19:04 PM
I see no problem. It is a subtle method of brainwashing, but it is brainwashing, nonetheless.

How many of you advocating the pledge of alegiance found it wrong for Soviets to mandatorily swear allegiance to the USSR?

Oh, I see, do as we say, not as we do.
 
2006-11-10 12:20:05 PM
But they (yourself included) sure seem to get bent out of shape if you don't.

Perhaps it's all in your perception of me, DisneyOnIce? What have I said that makes you think I'm 'bent out of shape'?
 
2006-11-10 12:20:34 PM
elmo2525: "How does the pledge establish a religion again?"

It isn't that the pledge "establishes a religion," it is that the repeated ritualistic reference to God in a government-sponsored context (public schools, etc.) violates the principle of separation of church and state.

""Under god" does not define God in anyway."

It defines God in that it proclaims the existence of a singular god, and it is no stretch to assume that the usage is intended to refer to the Judeo-Christian God. It is also irrelevant whether it defines God since the principle is not limited by specificity.

"The only thing it does is describe the United States."

In what sense does "under God" define anything relevant to your argument? If you were to say "under the sky," that would be true, but it would be trivially true and thus pointless.
 
2006-11-10 12:20:40 PM
wingnut396

Where does it state in the legislation intent? Picking and choosing where intent can be used in law is dangerous. You either use the legislation or not. The is nothing about seperation of Church and state in legislation. There is the establishment clause, but that was interpreted by a statement for Thomas Jefferson and later, the SCOTUS gave an opinion that there was a seperation. There has been no legislation however, just intent. The scary part is that intent is subjective. I can only guess what the people were thinking by reading their thoughts in public statements, letters and other documents that we have.

Use the intent arguement on the 2nd amendment, 14th amendment, and the Declaration of Independence (DoI) would scare the crap out of most people who want to take the word God out of the pledge. It was clear that the word creator was placed in the DoI on purpose and can only be interpreted that it was a common beleif and desire to have it there.
 
2006-11-10 12:20:59 PM
DisneyOnIce: But they (yourself included) sure seem to get bent out of shape if you don't.

Yeah, that was my point. I was arguing against the notion that it should be compulsory, something that was advocated by several in theis thread. One eloquent poster even said that people who opted *not* to say the pledge should be murdered for treason.
 
2006-11-10 12:21:36 PM
Oh, and Gothnet
I know Tats can get himself in a bit of trouble from time to time. More often than not he seems the only cool head in the threads he chooses to speak in.

/all this praise for a Jew coming from a German?
//They're gonna take away my snappy looking uniform, aren't they?
 
2006-11-10 12:22:03 PM
elmo2525

It's not about insecurity at all. Reciting the pledge is just like singing the national anthem. It is jsut like singing the fight song before a sporting event. It is just like reciting a oath of office. You are building up others and saying that loyalty to the country is ok. It is a huge moral booster to stand with fellow Americans and (re)state you love for country and what is stands for.

I also hear a lot of selfishness here. People who are too selfish to defend their fellow citizens. This is disturbing. If you will only defend your little group of family and friends, you are selfish. It is our duty to help people that "need" defending.


Stating a silly pledge does not mean you will not help out the people that need defending. In facists and totalarian regimes, there are often huge displays of public support for your country. The symbolism is crap, pure and simple. I means nothing as most people recite it by rote not even caring what it really means.

As for it being a morale (i guess you meant that and not moral) boost, sounds more like a mob boost to me. If it require that 30,000 people get up and say the pledge for you to do what is right by your family and country, there is something wrong. We should not all think the same. We should all be different. We should peacefully work together to make the world a better place, but promoting mob morale is not the way in my book.

And why is it necessary to play the anthem before every sporting event? If it builds unity, why not just blast it out ever hour? How about staring each day at work with the pledge and a minute of support for the nation? Maybe before checking out at WalMart we could say the pledge so we can properly thank this country for it prosperty and be united in our consumer pursuits.
 
2006-11-10 12:22:21 PM
The question now is whether or not Fark.com commenters will take a swing to the right once the new Dems are sworn in. Are they true to their ideas, or do they just like to biatch about whoever is in power?
 
2006-11-10 12:22:57 PM
Doesn't the KKK say the pledge and pray before each one of their "ceremonies"?

not sayin' it is a good or bad thing to say the pledge, but saying it (the pledge), doesn't mean you are a good person, then, in turn, not saying the pledge doesn't make you a bad person either, they are just words.
 
2006-11-10 12:27:00 PM
elmo2525: It was clear that the word creator was placed in the DoI on purpose and can only be interpreted that it was a common beleif and desire to have it there.

It is clear that the phrase "Their Creator" was placed in the DoI for a reason. It's convient how you leave out the most important part to suit your own purposes. "Their Creator" is entirely subjective to the person created: Your creator can be anything you desire, or nothing. The noticable lack of a phrase like "The Creator," or "Our Creator" is very telling. Despite your wishes, most of the Framers (Save for Adams) were not Christians...If anything they were Deists.
 
2006-11-10 12:32:54 PM
elmo2525
Where does it state in the legislation intent? Picking and choosing where intent can be used in law is dangerous. You either use the legislation or not. The is nothing about seperation of Church and state in legislation. There is the establishment clause, but that was interpreted by a statement for Thomas Jefferson and later, the SCOTUS gave an opinion that there was a seperation. There has been no legislation however, just intent. The scary part is that intent is subjective. I can only guess what the people were thinking by reading their thoughts in public statements, letters and other documents that we have.



It was championed by the Knights of Columbus, a Christian organization. The legislation was drafted with their aid. I'll have to find the quote, but Ike said something to the effect that this was to show the world we were a Christian nation, unlike the USSR. But without knowing the intent of law, you don't have justice, you simply have law, which can be bad in its own right. The intent of Emminent Domain was only to take property for clear public use, not so some the locals could earn more property taxes with a mall over someone's old farm. Sorry but in my mind, intent should matter. Ignoring intent leads to overzealous governments that try to leverage it for their own advantage.



Use the intent arguement on the 2nd amendment, 14th amendment, and the Declaration of Independence (DoI) would scare the crap out of most people who want to take the word God out of the pledge. It was clear that the word creator was placed in the DoI on purpose and can only be interpreted that it was a common beleif and desire to have it there.


I agree, working with the intent and we should be able to use aramaments comparable to our armed forces. Light infantry weapons would be pretty easy for most people and townships to afford, and would suffice for purposes of the 2nd Amendment. People always go on about atomic bombs, but that is a foolish stawman as it is difficult for well funded nations to build or purchase them.
 
2006-11-10 12:33:10 PM
The Bible forbids swearing allegiance and Constitution protects us from making any pledge mandatory

Orange Coast College "The School of Sailing and Seamanship"

Arrrrrrrrrrrrr they should make smitty walk the plank
 
2006-11-10 12:34:10 PM
macdaddy357
The pledge makes you swear to a symbol. That is idolatry. The symbol doesn't have to be a golden calf. It is no different than bowing down before a statue. It is hard for me to believe that only a few "fringe groups" among Christians like the Jehovah's Witnesses get that.

That's why they added the "under God" part in the 1950s. So that, unlike the athiest Commies who demanded their people worship the State as their god, Christian Americans could in good conscience pledge allegance to a Republic that recognized it was under a higher power.
 
2006-11-10 12:38:24 PM
Oh how cute. The little college students think they are relevant. They probably think they are our future too. That is just adorable. I think I will send them some cupcakes with butter frosting.
 
2006-11-10 12:42:22 PM
I actually agree with this.

Hardly anyone seems to know what the words mean, and
all it is is a blind statement of patriotism and endorsement of religion. We don't really have crap with the commies anymore, at the very least they should take the god bit out. People shouldn't have to repeat a sort of mantra daily about their country.
 
2006-11-10 12:43:59 PM
It has been said, but it is worth repeating...

They did not ban the pledge, the decided not to recite it at the beginning of their meetings.

Gosh, some Farkers are such drama queens.

I recited the pledge enough times in grade school to last a lifetime. I also swore to uphold and defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies, forgeign and domestic once...

That was enough. =)
 
2006-11-10 12:45:24 PM
Cheeseburger: What have I said that makes you think I'm 'bent out of shape'?

Every frikken' post you've made in this thread.
 
2006-11-10 12:47:12 PM
DisneyOnIce: HappyDaddy: I say it every day, right after I lace up my brown wingtips.

Why am I not surprised by this?



Not a bad likeness, except my hair is lighter. Actually, I wear these:

www.allenedmonds.com

Allen Edmonds, the best American shoes.

I like the Pledge. "Indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." Good stuff.
 
2006-11-10 12:48:30 PM
can we bring these un american commie bastards up on treason. this country hasn't had a good treason hanging in years
 
2006-11-10 12:50:33 PM
Tatsuma writes: completely banning it shows you're exactly like the assholes that want to force people to say it

Did you bother to RTFA? The "ban" applies only to a particular student meeting. The pledge hasn't been "banned" anywhere -- or anytime -- else on campus.

This would be equivalent to the US Congress "banning" the prayers that begin their daily sessions -- while leaving the rest of the government and ordinary Americans free to pray or not to pray as they see fit.

And, more to the point, this doesn't sound like a ban at all. Just a change from the previous protocol. The meetings used to start with the pledge...they don't anymore. In NewsMax land, that translates to a ban.

You're just being ridiculous.
 
2006-11-10 12:51:08 PM
HappyDaddy: I like the Pledge. "Indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." Good stuff.

I like the Pledge just fine, myself. Even the unnecessary "Under God" part. It's the crazies that consider the recitial of it as the ultimate test of Patriotism that I can't stand.
 
Displayed 50 of 642 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report