I Pledge Allegiance...Umm, no I don't!

[RJDiogenes]

First of all, everybody please remember to stick to presenting ideas and backing them up; no drive-by rhetoric and no personal attacks. Thanks.

As for the Topic: The Pledge, as was pointed out, is voluntary. Nobody can be forced to do it, unless they allow themselves to be forced to do it.

The Pledge itself (the real one) could certainly have been written better. The idea should be to express belief in and loyalty to the country, the Constitution and the ideals that we stand for. However, since the flag represents all that, we can give that a pass.

Actually, I do think the inclusion of "under God" should be dropped, as well as the proclamation "In God we trust" on currency.

This is another important point. The rewriting of the Pledge and the substitution of our traditional Motto was done by the McCarthyists in the 1950s. Neither of these things represent real American Values. When I say the Pledge of Allegiance, I use the real one.

 

[JuanBolio]

And again, I have no problem if anyone wants to protest. I do have a problem with two of these people actively preventing another person of their own party from participating. Protesting through coercion just isn't really a protest now is it? Because you see, the only person being coerced was the guy being held down, not the people standing up.

Somehow I doubt you'd have posted a thread in outrage if almost everyone had been standing to recite the pledge, and one man abstained, who was then coerced by the people around him to rise and join in against his wishes.

You seem to only get outraged at people you percieve as liberals, or as unpatriotic, non-christian, and so forth.

Actually, I do think the inclusion of "under God" should be dropped, as well as the proclamation "In God we trust" on currency.

This is another important point. The rewriting of the Pledge and the substitution of our traditional Motto was done by the McCarthyists in the 1950s. Neither of these things represent real American Values. When I say the Pledge of Allegiance, I use the real one.

For this I salute you, sir. I am well aware of the origins of this line and is sickens me that it is still in use.

 

[Aurian]

I am too lazy to google.. what is the correct version, and what was changed?

 

[JuanBolio]

I am too lazy to google.. what is the correct version, and what was changed?

The correct version was the same as the one in current use, but without the "under God" line. It should go: "One nation indivisible". It was changed in the 1950's to show the Soviet Union we were a God fearin' nation as opposed to the Soviet Union's atheist secularism. The McCarthyists never let a little thing like the First Amendment get in their way.

Anyway, it stuck, and whenever anyone talks about changing it back these days the "family values" people throw hissy fits.

 

[Aurian]

Does seem wierd that a country that welcomes all religions are keeping the "under god" line..

 

[Misfit Toy]

Does seem wierd that a country that welcomes all religions are keeping the "under god" line..

Well that's just it. Some people don't welcome all religions. That kind of attitude seems unAmerican to me...

 

[RJDiogenes]

^^ And it's pretty much the same ones that perpetuate McCarthyism.

I am too lazy to google.. what is the correct version, and what was changed?

The correct version was the same as the one in current use, but without the "under God" line. It should go: "One nation indivisible". It was changed in the 1950's to show the Soviet Union we were a God fearin' nation as opposed to the Soviet Union's atheist secularism. The McCarthyists never let a little thing like the First Amendment get in their way.

Anyway, it stuck, and whenever anyone talks about changing it back these days the "family values" people throw hissy fits.

And our traditional Motto, given to us by the Founding Fathers, is "E Pluribus Unum." It means, "From many we become one." Not a philosophy the McCarthyists were very fond of.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

I've said it here before, I never say the pledge, never stand for the anthem. I see it as a needless, both of them. As seeing as my long term goal is it ex patriot myself from the USA, then I feel it would be hypocritical for me to do so.

The fact that you're actually willing to put this into action is a LOT more than most people are willing to do, even if they say their convictions are strong. My personal thought is that if one does believe that the country is so far beyond fixable that it's that repugnant to live in it, that to continue to be a citizen, a taxpayer (especially since you can't "earmark" your taxes), and a recipient of services from that country should be morally objectionable. So even though I disagree with your views--as I've said before, I believe that this is the correct response if you feel that way, and respect you because you are actively following through on it.

But to me, I am definitely irritated that someone would actively try to prevent another from reciting the Pledge if they so desire. The Constitution and Bill of Rights are a guarantee not just for dissenters--but also for those who DO wish to follow traditional practices. The voluntary practice of reciting the Pledge of Allegience is not one that hurts anybody or impinges on anybody else's rights. So why should those who don't like it get the right to impinge on those of others?

 

[JuanBolio]

Does seem wierd that a country that welcomes all religions are keeping the "under god" line..

Well that's just it. Some people don't welcome all religions. That kind of attitude seems unAmerican to me...

It does to many of us. Unfortunately we have a large fundamentalist Christian base here who don't take kindly to secularism of any kind.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

I am too lazy to google.. what is the correct version, and what was changed?

The correct version was the same as the one in current use, but without the "under God" line. It should go: "One nation indivisible". It was changed in the 1950's to show the Soviet Union we were a God fearin' nation as opposed to the Soviet Union's atheist secularism. The McCarthyists never let a little thing like the First Amendment get in their way.

Actually, the original version was "I pledge allegiance to my flag and to the republic for which it stands. One nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all"

"My flag" was changed to "the flag of the United States of American" because they were worried immigrants were pledging allegiance to a different flag. And "under God" was added because the Soviet Union also had parades and saluting of flags, so they had to show why they were different.

 

[miraclefan]

Does seem wierd that a country that welcomes all religions are keeping the "under god" line..

Well that's just it. Some people don't welcome all religions. That kind of attitude seems unAmerican to me...

It does to many of us. Unfortunately we have a large fundamentalist Christian base here who don't take kindly to secularism of any kind.

I'd STILL like to know where in the BIBLE it says america IS god's country! I mean dosen't GOD own the universe? so how can one country be better then all the rest?!?

 

[CaptainStoner]

Does seem wierd that a country that welcomes all religions are keeping the "under god" line..

Well that's just it. Some people don't welcome all religions. That kind of attitude seems unAmerican to me...

"Under God" is not indicative of any particular religion, though it does imply monotheism.

What's better, to not say the pledge, or to say it how you want to, and throw off the people around you?

If I ever get a chance to lead a pledge of allegiance over a PA, I think I will either skip "under God", or say, "under the Goddess". Because that's where I'd rather be.

 

[miraclefan]

Does seem wierd that a country that welcomes all religions are keeping the "under god" line..

Well that's just it. Some people don't welcome all religions. That kind of attitude seems unAmerican to me...

"Under God" is not indicative of any particular religion, though it does imply monotheism.

What's better, to not say the pledge, or to say it how you want to, and throw off the people around you?

If I ever get a chance to lead a pledge of allegiance over a PA, I think I will either skip "under God", or say, "under the Goddess". Because that's where I'd rather be.

You ever see BORAT?

 

[TheLonelySquire]

Well that's just it. Some people don't welcome all religions. That kind of attitude seems unAmerican to me...

It does to many of us. Unfortunately we have a large fundamentalist Christian base here who don't take kindly to secularism of any kind.

I'd STILL like to know where in the BIBLE it says america IS god's country! I mean dosen't GOD own the universe? so how can one country be better then all the rest?!?

"One nation" doesn't mean "Only nation". God has domain. And yes, over the universe.

 

[Amaris]

It does to many of us. Unfortunately we have a large fundamentalist Christian base here who don't take kindly to secularism of any kind.

I'd STILL like to know where in the BIBLE it says america IS god's country! I mean dosen't GOD own the universe? so how can one country be better then all the rest?!?

"One nation" doesn't mean "Only nation". God has domain. And yes, over the universe.

For you. In your faith.


J.

 

[sidious618]

But to me, I am definitely irritated that someone would actively try to prevent another from reciting the Pledge if they so desire. The Constitution and Bill of Rights are a guarantee not just for dissenters--but also for those who DO wish to follow traditional practices. The voluntary practice of reciting the Pledge of Allegience is not one that hurts anybody or impinges on anybody else's rights. So why should those who don't like it get the right to impinge on those of others?

But no one is doing that so don't worry about it.

 

[TheLonelySquire]

I'd STILL like to know where in the BIBLE it says america IS god's country! I mean dosen't GOD own the universe? so how can one country be better then all the rest?!?

"One nation" doesn't mean "Only nation". God has domain. And yes, over the universe.

For you. In your faith.


J.

No, for everyone. Whether it's your faith or not. Although I respect your right not to believe, J.

 

[Amaris]

No, for everyone.

No, for you. You do not and will not have a right to enforce your faith onto anyone else.

Whether it's your faith or not.

It doesn't matter whether it's my faith or not. It is your faith.
For you, that is how it works. Your faith is not authoritative.


J.

 

[Michael Chris]

J, God has control, and it doesn't matter what faith a person has. It is not in anyway relative.

 

[JuanBolio]

Michael, regardless of what you or TLS may think about your God, his existence, his powers, and his rightful dominion, your views are far from being provable fact, and not all of us share them. The government is supposed to stand for all the people and not take any preference when it comes to theistic matters.

If you're right, your God will still be God whether or not the pledge of allegiance or our currency makes any reference to him, don't you think?

No, for everyone. Whether it's your faith or not.

J, God has control, and it doesn't matter what faith a person has. It is not in anyway relative.

Really? You worship him, his words have bearing on your thoughts and actions. The same is not true for me. I'd say that makes it very relative.