Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Breotan wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

4oursword wrote:How would a child who refused be dealt with anyway?

I'm pretty unfamiliar with the gravity of the Pledge, but if some kid just kept their lips shut, what would be done?

The gravity of the pledge is on par with the gravity of any modern Christian-rock song. It has no meaning whatsoever, and is nothing more than an opportunistic throwback to McCarthy-era forced patriotism.

I wasn't aware that the McCarthy era began in the late 1800s.

McCarthyism was in the 1950s, at the same time that the "God" slogans were added to the money and the Pledge.

 d-usa wrote:
I would not be surprised if it passes. It would probably get vetoed due to the anti-common core language.

What the feth is "common core"? An extention to No Child Left Behind? My cursory google-fu is wonkey today...

Breotan wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

4oursword wrote:How would a child who refused be dealt with anyway?

I'm pretty unfamiliar with the gravity of the Pledge, but if some kid just kept their lips shut, what would be done?

The gravity of the pledge is on par with the gravity of any modern Christian-rock song. It has no meaning whatsoever, and is nothing more than an opportunistic throwback to McCarthy-era forced patriotism.

I wasn't aware that the McCarthy era began in the late 1800s.

Pledge wasn't adopted by congress until '44, I think... and the god part wasn't added until '54

 azazel the cat wrote:

Breotan wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

4oursword wrote:How would a child who refused be dealt with anyway?

I'm pretty unfamiliar with the gravity of the Pledge, but if some kid just kept their lips shut, what would be done?

The gravity of the pledge is on par with the gravity of any modern Christian-rock song. It has no meaning whatsoever, and is nothing more than an opportunistic throwback to McCarthy-era forced patriotism.

I wasn't aware that the McCarthy era began in the late 1800s.

Pledge wasn't adopted by congress until '44, I think... and the god part wasn't added until '54

1942, actually, but close enough. The great irony of the whole thing is that Bellamy was the closest thing to a Communist that the 19th century had.

It was officially included (against the strictures of the constitution) in the 1950s during McCarthyism.

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
I would not be surprised if it passes. It would probably get vetoed due to the anti-common core language.

What the feth is "common core"? An extention to No Child Left Behind? My cursory google-fu is wonkey today...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Core_State_Standards_Initiative

In a nutshell:

There was a report saying that high school diplomas are basically crap and lack uniform standards.
State governors got together to come up with a plan to make their diplomas more uniform and meaningful.
The State Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers came up with a common core of standards for the school curriculum in their states (aka: Common Core).
The states then adopted this "common core" curriculum, and somehow this has all been tied to the federal government telling stares what they must teach.

tl;dr

States got together and decided what they will teach and that they will all teach the same stuff.
People are angry because Obama is telling them what they must teach now and won't let states decide what they should teach

Ah... I see.

Not sure where I stand with this. At a cursory look... it seems like a good idea.

However, I'm usually in the camp that part of the problem with our education system is the Top-Heavy directive our schools are forced to comply with...

I'd rather give the local schools/parents as much power to formulate teaching regimen rather than some one-size-fits-all program. That way, it can be tailored appropriately for the student population.

Thanks dude.

Nothing cripples education like a broadly base authoratitative body laying down standards and content.

Nothing empowers education like minor special interest groups pushing their micro agenda.

As an outsider, I have to say that I find the idea of kids having to pledge their allegiance to a flag everyday absolutely horrible.
It is something that belongs more in the Third Reich than in a nation that claims to be the epitome of 'freedom and democracy'.
What purpose does it serve?

To remind republicans the america is still great.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
As an outsider, I have to say that I find the idea of kids having to pledge their allegiance to a flag everyday absolutely horrible.
It is something that belongs more in the Third Reich than in a nation that claims to be the epitome of 'freedom and democracy'.
What purpose does it serve?

There are large swaths of Americans who are convinced that their way of life is on the verge of being snuffed out by liberalism, communism, gays, secular progressives, Sharia law, socialism, and Left Coast elitists... so they need to fight the good fight and take a stand against tyranny by passing a law to make students recite the Pledge of Allegiance.

Or something like that.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:
[
and Left Coast elitists...
Or something like that.

Everyone knows it's the right coast elitists combining forces with the idiots from California.....

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Everyone knows it's the right coast elitists combining forces with the idiots from California.....

I can spot a couple of redundancies in that sentence.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

Everyone knows it's the right coast elitists combining forces with the idiots from California.....

Facing North at the moment?

 dogma wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

Everyone knows it's the right coast elitists combining forces with the idiots from California.....

Facing North at the moment?

Always

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
As an outsider, I have to say that I find the idea of kids having to pledge their allegiance to a flag everyday absolutely horrible.
It is something that belongs more in the Third Reich than in a nation that claims to be the epitome of 'freedom and democracy'.
What purpose does it serve?

There are large swaths of Americans who are convinced that their way of life is on the verge of being snuffed out by liberalism, communism, gays, secular progressives, Sharia law, socialism, and Left Coast elitists... so they need to fight the good fight and take a stand against tyranny by passing a law to make students recite the Pledge of Allegiance.

Or something like that.

Making it law to recite the pledge is going from extreme to another but considering how many institutions stomp on the American flag, the American way of life and tearing down all things traditional brick by brick maybe this law isn't too bad but could use a little more finesse.

I suppose I could be part of the large swaths of Americans who have grown tired of seeing my parent's generation of America being dragged through the dirt and torn apart. I just want these left coast elitist to take their elitism and shove it where the sun don't shine and take all these other tenets of the far-left and get ouf of my face with it or get the business end of my fist. I am part the "leave me the hell alone" group of Americans.

Heavy Metal wrote:

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
As an outsider, I have to say that I find the idea of kids having to pledge their allegiance to a flag everyday absolutely horrible.
It is something that belongs more in the Third Reich than in a nation that claims to be the epitome of 'freedom and democracy'.
What purpose does it serve?

There are large swaths of Americans who are convinced that their way of life is on the verge of being snuffed out by liberalism, communism, gays, secular progressives, Sharia law, socialism, and Left Coast elitists... so they need to fight the good fight and take a stand against tyranny by passing a law to make students recite the Pledge of Allegiance.

Or something like that.

Making it law to recite the pledge is going from extreme to another but considering how many institutions stomp on the American flag, the American way of life and tearing down all things traditional brick by brick maybe this law isn't too bad but could use a little more finesse.

I suppose I could be part of the large swaths of Americans who have grown tired of seeing my parent's generation of America being dragged through the dirt and torn apart. I just want these left coast elitist to take their elitism and shove it where the sun don't shine and take all these other tenets of the far-left and get ouf of my face with it or get the business end of my fist. I am part the "leave me the hell alone" group of Americans.

Institutions that stomp on the American flag? Tearing all things "traditional" down brick by brick? What part of your "parent's generation" is being dragged through the dirt? Examples would be nice.

If you are truly part of the "leave me the hell alone" group of Americans, you would reject a law that forces people to do something that they might not want to.

Heavy Metal wrote:

Making it law to recite the pledge is going from extreme to another but considering how many institutions stomp on the American flag, the American way of life and tearing down all things traditional brick by brick maybe this law isn't too bad but could use a little more finesse.

Part of the American way of life is being able to stomp on the American flag, take a crap on it, and then light it on fire.

If you can't do that, then you don't have the American way of life anymore.

 d-usa wrote:

Part of the American way of life is being able to stomp on the American flag, take a crap on it, and then light it on fire.

If you can't do that, then you don't have the American way of life anymore.

It is part of American life for a group of people to scream racist when they don't agree with the other group of people to the point they're coerced to keep silent too, eh?

It is abused by either side but you shouldn't be forced to say the pledge nor should it be reserved to a particular group of people. I like how the liberals hide behind fake patriotism and freedom of speech when its benefits them but so quick to tear it down when it benefits political enemies.

Heavy Metal wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

Part of the American way of life is being able to stomp on the American flag, take a crap on it, and then light it on fire.

If you can't do that, then you don't have the American way of life anymore.

It is part of American life for a group of people to scream racist when they don't agree with the other group of people to the point they're coerced to keep silent too, eh?

Freedom of speech means you can bitch about what you want and other can bitch about what you are bitching about.

It is abused by either side but you shouldn't be forced to say the pledge nor should it be reserved to a particular group of people. I like how the liberals hide behind fake patriotism and freedom of speech when its benefits them but so quick to tear it down when it benefits political enemies.

I see that you will fit in just fine here...

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:


Making it law to recite the pledge is going from extreme to another but considering how many institutions stomp on the American flag, the American way of life and tearing down all things traditional brick by brick maybe this law isn't too bad but could use a little more finesse.

I suppose I could be part of the large swaths of Americans who have grown tired of seeing my parent's generation of America being dragged through the dirt and torn apart. I just want these left coast elitist to take their elitism and shove it where the sun don't shine and take all these other tenets of the far-left and get ouf of my face with it or get the business end of my fist. I am part the "leave me the hell alone" group of Americans.

Institutions that stomp on the American flag? Tearing all things "traditional" down brick by brick? What part of your "parent's generation" is being dragged through the dirt? Examples would be nice.

If you are truly part of the "leave me the hell alone" group of Americans, you would reject a law that forces people to do something that they might not want to.

Heavy Metal wrote:
It is abused by either side but you shouldn't be forced to say the pledge nor should it be reserved to a particular group of people. I like how the liberals hide behind fake patriotism and freedom of speech when its benefits them but so quick to tear it down when it benefits political enemies.

This is one of the more incoherent rants in recent memory. Who is the right to say the pledge "reserved" to? What "fake patriotism"? Who has had their rights torn down when it benefitted political enemies? It really feels like you're repeating catchphrases you've picked up from talk radio without understanding what they mean.

d-usa wrote:

I see that you will fit in just fine here...

That's not exactly comforting.

[

Ouze wrote:
This is one of the more incoherent rants in recent memory. Who is the right to say the pledge "reserved" to? What "fake patriotism"? Who has had their rights torn down when it benefitted political enemies? It really feels like you're repeating catchphrases you've picked up from talk radio without understanding what they mean.

And speaking of freedom of speech I can easily say to you go yourself? I really don't give a damn what you think. How about them apples? I really don't like you.

Heavy, can you address this point rather than just insulting other users? I'm interested to hear your response.

"If you are truly part of the "leave me the hell alone" group of Americans, you would reject a law that forces people to do something that they might not want to."

I'm curious because it seems to be a common stance for conservatives in the US to hold, that they are for small government but also for this sort of legislation.

Interesting influx of new users here lately...

 motyak wrote:
Heavy, can you address this point rather than just insulting other users? I'm interested to hear your response.

"If you are truly part of the "leave me the hell alone" group of Americans, you would reject a law that forces people to do something that they might not want to."

I'm curious because it seems to be a common stance for conservatives in the US to hold, that they are for small government but also for this sort of legislation.

It comes from a few separate and not very compatible ideas. One, there's Conservatism that basically says that America was created to be land of the free for all people. We shouldn't be afraid to show our religion to others and the government should stay out of people's private lives. They want low taxes, family values and the opportunity to increase their position in life without government getting in the way or molesting their kids at airport screening stations.

Then you have the Republican party which says they represent those kind of people, but in reality, they don't. The Republican party doesn't want lower taxes or smaller government, they want things pretty much how the Democrats want it, but due to their voters, they have to go about it a different way. Both parties want corporate money to keep going and don't care about their supporters. Its like a new aristocracy that the peasants are fighting over for which noble gets to rule them.

There's also the Religious Right which are a stark minority but shout the loudest and longest so the Republican party feels they have to cater to them in order to win elections, even though the exact opposite happens. They get on the news, say ridiculously stupid stuff that basically goes against the sort of thing America was founded for. I'm pretty sure the Founding Fathers didn't want a theocracy ruled by the Bible or they would have mentioned it.

It's statism and authoritarianism, just like the Democrat Party, only going about it in a different way.

That's where a lot of confusion comes from, many separate ideas all intertwined into one schizophrenic political movement.

 MWHistorian wrote:


That's where a lot of confusion comes from, many separate ideas all intertwined into one schizophrenic political movement.

I love that as a summation, thanks MW. I was being a bit snarky in my asking though, sorry. I am aware of the what you summarised, but I wanted Heavy to explain his stance, and which one he fits into.

Oh, sorry. There should be a snark symbol or something.

 MWHistorian wrote:
Oh, sorry. There should be a snark symbol or something.

Haha yeah, I should really use emoticons more than just the smiley and pokey tongue, it'd help. But it was still a really good explanation.

Heavy Metal wrote:

d-usa wrote:

I see that you will fit in just fine here...

That's not exactly comforting.

[

Ouze wrote:
This is one of the more incoherent rants in recent memory. Who is the right to say the pledge "reserved" to? What "fake patriotism"? Who has had their rights torn down when it benefitted political enemies? It really feels like you're repeating catchphrases you've picked up from talk radio without understanding what they mean.

And speaking of freedom of speech I can easily say to you go yourself? I really don't give a damn what you think. How about them apples? I really don't like you.

DakkaDakka is not a forum where we allow users to just shout at each other.

You must develop your argument with substantive points, or you will fall foul of the moderation system either for rudeness or spam.