- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
A few years ago there was a big debate as to whether or not students should be forced to recite the pledge of allegiance each day in school. The debate came about because it families of a particular faith claimed it violated their religious freedom. Now, there are several states that do not require students to say the pledge of allegiance in school. At the schools in my area, students are required to stand during the pledge and are invited to recite it, however nearly all remain silent. I imagine this has naturally occurred because of laziness and influence of peers, nobody wants to be the only one saying it. Even my fellow teachers tend to remain silent. I, however, cannot, and it IS a little awkward being the only person in the room reciting the pledge while all stand there in seeming protest. Every time we are called to say the pledge I think of my grandmother and her patriotism and enthusiasm for the cause of freedom. She also used to say, you need to stand for what you believe is right, even/especially if it’s not popular. These are my thoughts on the current situation:
Quote:Students should not be forced to do anything, they should be given opportunities and be INSPIRED to capitalize on those opportunities. Students should not be forced to say the pledge, but they should be taught what it really means. It is not, as some have suggested, the same as pledging allegiance to a dictator or elite group of rulers as was the case in Nazi Germany.
“I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America,” The flag is a symbol, a stand in for the country as a whole, including its citizens, soldiers and elected officials. Pledging allegiance to the flag is not selling your soul to the government and blindly following their rule. It is acknowledging your responsibility as a citizen to fight for the well being of your fellow citizens. Pledging allegiance to the countries soldiers does not mean you agree with the wars that the country is fighting, it means you will do all you can, as a citizen, to ensure that our soldiers do not die in vain. This includes voting and peacefully protesting.
“And to the republic, for which it stands,” Pledging allegiance to the republic, or elected officials, is not saying that you subordinate yourself to their oppressive rule, it means acknowledging that one of your duties as a citizen is to vote for representatives who you believe also hold the same allegiance to the country’s citizens by defending their rights, freedom and well being.
“One nation, under God, indivisible,” This entire line is meant to communicate unity. It does not claim that the country IS united or that we all worship God, or that we have no difference of opinions. By pledging allegiance to the flag, you are acknowledging that while there are differences, there are universal principles upon which the country was founded that you swear to fight for, including religious freedom and the pursuit of happiness. Many people believe in God and many don’t. But here, God is a symbol for peace, love, and unity, ideals to which both christians and atheists can pledge allegiance to.
“With liberty and Justice for all.” This is not a claim that the United States is perfectly free and just, it is acknowledging that these are the ideals that we strive for and promise to do so by pledging allegiance.
Obligating students to pledge allegiance is a contradiction. Allegiance is something that must be given, it can never be taken. It is a choice. Pledging allegiance to the well being of your fellow citizens is a noble choice. Students should be inspired to make that choice. In order for students to make that choice, they must be educated. They must know what the pledge of allegiance really means in order to recite it with any sincerity. Recitation is not beneficial in and of itself. The wording of the pledge is not as important as the message is communicates. We can either teach the meaning behind the symbols in the pledge or reword it entirely. The objective is to educate our citizens on the principles and purposes of freedom.
I am aware that many people do not hold this same interpretation of the pledge of allegiance. I caught myself wondering why I do. I think belonging to a world wide church that encourages it’s members to be active citizens, obey the laws of the lands, and pray for their leaders has instilled this view deeply in my mind and influenced my interpretation of the pledge of allegiance. The new church essay titled “Citizenship” provides a summary of these ideas.
I just became a citizen recently. I took the allegiance once as part of my decision to become and American at a ceremony. I haven’t really thought about whether I should be required to say it subsequently — I would probably just do it since it’s a reaffirmation of what I already agreed to do. Could you look at it in a similar light as some of the rituals in our church (like the sacrament) where we do it to renew our commitment and remind ourselves of what we agreed to?
SilentDawning wrote:
Could you look at it in a similar light as some of the rituals in our church (like the sacrament) where we do it to renew our commitment and remind ourselves of what we agreed to?That’s exactly how I look at it.
It’s something of a right to say it not say. I think it’s far from right to be forced to say it.
But then again I find the need to reassertion your commitment to something a bit odd.
I suppose some people find meaning in that and that’s ok. However forcing people to is not.
What if a spouse came to you and asked you to recite your oaths to her/him in a daily basis?!
I naturally pledge myself to my wife always. But not in a very outward obvious fashion of pledging.
It’s in the little things not a dusky or weekly declaration.
I find the need for a outward expression by someone other them the person feeling they want to give it the trait or need of the insecure or controlling.
However personally, like the relationship with my wife. I do little deeds every day to show her I love her and conjured to her without the need for a formal deceleration.
Likewise for the pledge. I don’t pledge myself to any institution. I pledge myself to protect and serve all people in as much as I am able.
Don’t need a outward declaration for that. Some people do and that’s fine. Just don’t force it.
One thing I find that takes all the joy out of life personally then any other is repetition. Or worrying about outward expression and appearances.
Then again, I’m the first to admit I am more then a bit strange.
Forgotten_Charity wrote:It’s something of a right to say it not say.
I think it’s far from right to be forced to say it.
But then again I find the need to reassertion your commitment to something a bit odd.
I suppose some people find meaning in that and that’s ok. However forcing people to is not.
What if a spouse came to you and asked you to recite your oaths to her/him in a daily basis?!
I naturally pledge myself to my wife always. But not in a very outward obvious fashion of pledging.
It’s in the little things not a dusky or weekly declaration.
I find the need for a outward expression by someone other them the person feeling they want to give it the trait or need of the insecure or controlling.
However personally, like the relationship with my wife. I do little deeds every day to show her I love her and conjured to her without the need for a formal deceleration.
Likewise for the pledge. I don’t pledge myself to any institution. I pledge myself to protect and serve all people in as much as I am able.
Don’t need a outward declaration for that. Some people do and that’s fine. Just don’t force it.
One thing I find that takes all the joy out of life personally then any other is repetition. Or worrying about outward expression and appearances.
Then again, I’m the first to admit I am more then a bit strange.
I agree that no one should be forced. Personally, I do think there is value in outward expression of recommitment if the commitment is sincere and understood. I believe there is power in ritual, it’s poetic. I agree that we should pledge ourselves to serve all people as much as we are able and I think that’s a big part of what we do when we take the sacrament. There is also some value in breaking the commitment into smaller pieces to bring it to a more local and actionable level. Think globally, act locally.
I am committed to what’s best for me. I act in a way that I believe will bring me the greatest health and happiness. When I was married, I pledged myself to my wife and family. I am still committed to my own health and happiness but now I focus those decisions on what will give my family the greatest health and happiness. Likewise, I am committed to my local community, state, country, and ultimately all of humanity. A certain level of commitment to each sphere of influence is required before any real contribution can be made to others. If I am not committed to caring for myself, I will be unable to care for my family, if I do not care for the people in my community, how can I say I care for the people in my state, etc. These are ideals and they’re not always completely realistic. There are conflicts and exceptions.
I also disagree with pledging allegiance to institutions or governments, and that is not how I interpret it, I see it as a commitment to the people, ideals and values. In the temple we pledge allegiance to the COJCLDS. Certainly I am committed to the people in my ward, but as I reconstruct my faith, I am accepting more and more of the church’s teachings as symbolic, which allows me to give it my own meaning. So instead of committing to the institution of the church, I view the church as a symbol for the kingdom of heaven, which is within. It is peace and love. It is the theme of my allegiance to myself, family, and fellowman. It is a commitment to foster peace and love in myself and encourage that in others.
As I’ve said elsewhere, I would be in favor of “under God” being removed from the pledge. The phrase serves no purpose other than to draw dividing lines. Let atheists, muslims, buddhist, and whoever else, pledge allegiance to the republic without compromising their freedom of religion. I’ve heard many times, that the best compromise is for those who are offended to simply stand siliently and not offer the pledge. Really? People who are happy to be Americans and who would otherwise pledge their allegiance shouldn’t do it because of the God thing? As others have said, there should be no forcing, but I have no problem with the expression, and I’m OK with it being done in public schools as long as people are allowed to opt-out. However, I think it is good not to give people any reasons to need to opt-out. Yes, there are certain religions where pledging allegiance would be viewed as putting man before God. That’s fine. Good for them. But the country doesn’t need to do any more than allow them to opt-out, because there is no form of the pledge that would conform to their beliefs. They don’t sing ‘happy birthday’ or participate in Valentine’s Day parties, either.
I don’t have any problem saying it personally, my allegiance is to the US. At the same time I wish there was a way to pledge my support to the entire human race. Some days it feels like I am asked to support an “us vs. them” mindset, and I don’t like that. Orson wrote:I don’t have any problem saying it personally, my allegiance is to the US. At the same time I wish there was a way to pledge my support to the entire human race. Some days it feels like I am asked to support an “us vs. them” mindset, and I don’t like that.
It is, every nation has it’s loyalty programs. Growing up I had friends that suffered from this(Japanese Americans in WW2), from experimentation of What is now called LSD in
Vietnam, Russian friends in the 70s and 80s under then shaped public policy about them.
It caused me to recite my own pledge of allegiance to rally to all their needs.
It was forced when I was growing up and I said it often with pride. After I gained friends from many different backgrounds that brought no light to the table I stopped saying it as worded.
I would say “I pledge allegiance to no symbol of any nation or org. But to all human and animals for which I stand. One world under god with liberty and justice for all.”
My objection after meeting my friends with their experiences had nothing to do with god in the words and everything to do with support liberty and justice for everyone not just the USA or another country and their interest.
It’s a form of brainwashing, a Cold War hangover… regardless of the sentiments in the pledge (which are not really bad in themselves – I can’t object to liberty and justice for all!), but forcing children to say it every day is wrong. The JWs are right on this.
Also it a) violates American separation of church and state, b) says indivisible (what are self-determination?), and c) is a form of bullying.
I come from a nation which has been ruled by another for centuries, hence the “indivisible” bit rankles.
People can express their patriotism by choice, but ramming it down someone’s throat is wrong. I agree with it for someone wanting citizenship, that’s different.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.