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.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Just curious, but why does a democracy need a pledge of allegiance from its children anyways? That is something normally only found in totalitarian states:

Spoiler:

spot the differences?

Is the US pledge of allegiance compulsory or are people allowed to reject it?

But regardless of that, being mad about the pledge being recited in Arabic seems incredibly racist.

I don't know when the second photo there was taken, but when I was in elementary school in the 70's, the pledge was said with your hand over your heart, not with an outstretched arm.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Why would anyone complain about that? Do people there enjoy painting themselves as terrible bigoted xenophobes with hateful ignorance? I wish for them to see the errors of their way and make amends. Also apologize to everyone else in the school.

Simple narcissistic behavior. The most typical 1st-world response.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Just curious, but why does a democracy need a pledge of allegiance from its children anyways? That is something normally only found in totalitarian states:

Spoiler:

spot the differences?

Is the US pledge of allegiance compulsory or are people allowed to reject it?

But regardless of that, being mad about the pledge being recited in Arabic seems incredibly racist.

You can't get more American than the pledge: a marketing gimmick by a Socialist to support Capitalism which vent viral due to Patriotism and then was changed to support Deism and now causes discussions about Nationalism.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BairdEC wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Just curious, but why does a democracy need a pledge of allegiance from its children anyways? That is something normally only found in totalitarian states:

Spoiler:

spot the differences?

Is the US pledge of allegiance compulsory or are people allowed to reject it?

But regardless of that, being mad about the pledge being recited in Arabic seems incredibly racist.

I don't know when the second photo there was taken, but when I was in elementary school in the 70's, the pledge was said with your hand over your heart, not with an outstretched arm.

Initially it was an outstretched hand (Palm up I think) but was changed around WW2 for the obvious reasons.

 Eilif wrote:
Glad the pledge was said in Arabic.

Disappointed that the principal apologized to those who didn't like it.

My wife is a teacher. Being forced to apologise when you are not in the wrong, just to make mommy and daddy happy, is a constant problem. She's still having to play peacekeeper on maternity leave, for things pther teachers have don but mommy is pissed about, just because she's distantly involved.

 d-usa wrote:

BairdEC wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Just curious, but why does a democracy need a pledge of allegiance from its children anyways? That is something normally only found in totalitarian states:

Spoiler:

spot the differences?

Is the US pledge of allegiance compulsory or are people allowed to reject it?

But regardless of that, being mad about the pledge being recited in Arabic seems incredibly racist.

I don't know when the second photo there was taken, but when I was in elementary school in the 70's, the pledge was said with your hand over your heart, not with an outstretched arm.

Initially it was an outstretched hand (Palm up I think) but was changed around WW2 for the obvious reasons.

It was called the Bellamy salute and was used from 1892 until 1942 when Congress pass the Flag Code. It wasn't quite the same as the Nazi salute, but it was pretty similar which is why FDR instituted the hand-over-heart gesture that we use today.

Also, the reciting of the Pledge is not compulsory and students are free to choose. It's been that way since the West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette decision in 1943.

It's not compulsory. But our lawmakers in Oklahoma make performing the pledge each morning in school mandatory, with the option not to participate. They don't need to pass a law for individuals to participate, that's what peer pressure is for.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Spoiler:

spot the differences?

Military-looking uniform and gender-segregated class? Or was it rhetorical ?

 Medium of Death wrote:
Having loyalty and unity in your country isn't a bad thing.

Everybody should speak a common language at the very least.

Realy? Why? Very few contries have a single language. We have between 2 and 11 native languages in the UK depending on how you count them. There is an argument that having a single common language leads to being insular.

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Medium of Death wrote:
Having loyalty and unity in your country isn't a bad thing.

Everybody should speak a common language at the very least.

Realy? Why? Very few contries have a single language. We have between 2 and 11 native languages in the UK depending on how you count them. There is an argument that having a single common language leads to being insular.

What is a nation other than people united by their commonality?

How can speaking the one language in one country lead to being insular?

The areas in the UK where Gaelic variants are spoken are the most insular places.

I'm an American who speaks Arabic as my second language. People give me dirty looks a lot when arabic phrases (for example, I tend to say Alhadulillah fairly often (despite being buddhist, but that's another story)) slip out during english conversation. When someone learns that you speak Arabic, a common response is to act as though you've yelled the F word at the christmas dinner table. As a nation, we're far from the melting pot that we should be.
I forget who coined the expression, but I agree that America is a nation of immigrants who hate newer immigrants.

 Medium of Death wrote:
Having loyalty and unity in your country isn't a bad thing.

Everybody should speak a common language at the very least.

but will it be deep south redneck or valley girl?


Also

/

O course theey are mad and well should be. This is America by God and important things like that should be spoken in the mother tongue...Spanish!

 Frazzled wrote:
O course theey are mad and well should be. This is America by God and important things like that should be spoken in the mother tongue...Spanish!

Oh, ciera la boca!

 Medium of Death wrote:

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Medium of Death wrote:
Having loyalty and unity in your country isn't a bad thing.

Everybody should speak a common language at the very least.

Realy? Why? Very few contries have a single language. We have between 2 and 11 native languages in the UK depending on how you count them. There is an argument that having a single common language leads to being insular.

What is a nation other than people united by their commonality?

How can speaking the one language in one country lead to being insular?

The areas in the UK where Gaelic variants are spoken are the most insular places.

When you insist on a single language or enforce one language you tell anyone who has a diffrent language their history and culture is inferior to your own. Scots and Welsh history was suppressed for many years. My mother was caned for speaking any Welsh at school. You are telling people they are inferior. You also tell people who's language you are promoting they are superior. The British Empire did many good things as well as bad, but one of the worst they did was to try and wipe people's culture. This creates divides and promotes racism. Culture that accept many languages accept value in other peoples history and culture.

Secondly, places that speak Gaelic are some of the most open and welcoming I have been. I have never been to the Isle of Mann, but the Highlands and Islands of Scotland are full of loverly open people. However I suspect you were referrering to Scots and Welsh, neither of which are variants of Gaelic.

Cultures are measurably different though. You can definitely say that some are inferior to others.

As an example, a culture which regards women as second class or of lower worth would be an example of an inferior culture to a lot of people living in the UK.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

Also, the reciting of the Pledge is not compulsory and students are free to choose.

The guardian of the student is free to choose, but the student is not; at least assuming the student is also a child.

I once got scolded by a teacher for not standing and reciting the pledge. That was fun. I love self-riotous people with no clue what the feth they are talking about.

Nobody can stop you from refusing to say the pledge, but if you do it without a good reason, you're just a massive donkeycave.

How so? I do not feel inclined to pledge myself to any country or government. That's all the reason I need.

 Squidmanlolz wrote:
Nobody can stop you from refusing to say the pledge, but if you do it without a good reason, you're just a massive donkeycave.

Why should you give a feth about a reason?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
More so: what would be a "good" reason vs a "bad" reason?

 Medium of Death wrote:
Cultures are measurably different though. You can definitely say that some are inferior to others.

As an example, a culture which regards women as second class or of lower worth would be an example of an inferior culture to a lot of people living in the UK.

Steven Harper? Is that you?

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Computron wrote:

 Hordini wrote:
The pledge was also "one nation under Allah" which given what ISIS is doing at the moment is a pretty stupid thing to say. God at least can be stretched to mean non-christian gods, allah is muslim only which hi-jacks the pledge for attempted political points.

Arabic-speaking christian use the word Allah for their god too. Allah literally means god. If the pledge was in Arabic, there was no other word they could have used instead. This only serves to highlight how this pledge is discriminatory to polytheists and atheists.

I didn't say what you have me quoted as saying.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
How so? I do not feel inclined to pledge myself to any country or government. That's all the reason I need.

Because pledging yourself to a country is the basis of the social contract? The pledge of allegiance is the reaffirmation that you submit yourself to the social contract between yourself and your nation's government.

On the subject of "good" excuses to refuse the pledge of allegiance, freedom of religion is an acceptable excuse as some religions may view the pledge as idolatry. Another excuse that can be acceptable given the circumstances might include an act of protest against the federal government.
Wanting or planning to expatriate is not a good excuse for a child to refuse the pledge.

Of course, civil liberties grant that anyone may refuse the pledge, and I agree with that. My argument is that if you refuse the pledge, you should have a reason to deny the reaffirmation of your social contract with the nation.

EDIT: to clarify, nobody should be forced to pledge allegiance. However, from the perspective of the individual, they should have a good reason to deny the pledge.

 dogma wrote:

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

Also, the reciting of the Pledge is not compulsory and students are free to choose.

The guardian of the student is free to choose, but the student is not; at least assuming the student is also a child.

That isn't exactly how it works.

Students, even minors, are still protected by the Free Speech Clause... That was the outcome of the Barnette case and has be reaffirmed in subsequent cases (like Tinker v. Des Moines for instance, which was about Symbolic Speech).

And that's the point. I do not submit to any contract or pledge I have no control over. I will obey laws (other than ones that are blatantly civil or humn rights violation), but I will not revere and country, government, or flag.

edit: ninjed

I also see a big difference between pledging yourself to a country, and pledging yourself to a symbol.

I don't pledge to the flag, but I had zero problem doing my oath for federal employment.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
And that's the point. I do not submit to any contract or pledge I have no control over. I will obey laws (other than ones that are blatantly civil or humn rights violation), but I will not revere and country, government, or flag.

edit: ninjed

Understood. I appreciate your point, though i myself am more than happy to salute the flag. For me the flag salute has a lot to do with my support of our constitution, as much as I hate the modern government (I'm a libertarian).

 Squidmanlolz wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
And that's the point. I do not submit to any contract or pledge I have no control over. I will obey laws (other than ones that are blatantly civil or humn rights violation), but I will not revere and country, government, or flag.

edit: ninjed

Understood. I appreciate your point, though i myself am more than happy to salute the flag. For me the flag salute has a lot to do with my support of our constitution, as much as I hate the modern government (I'm a libertarian).

For me it is the wording that pushes the pledge to far. I always repeat the Oklahoma Flag Salute since it has different language in it.

And even though I don't do the pledge, I always stand and face the flag and place my hand over my heart. It is still an important and revered symbol to me personally.

 d-usa wrote:

 Squidmanlolz wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
And that's the point. I do not submit to any contract or pledge I have no control over. I will obey laws (other than ones that are blatantly civil or humn rights violation), but I will not revere and country, government, or flag.

edit: ninjed

Understood. I appreciate your point, though i myself am more than happy to salute the flag. For me the flag salute has a lot to do with my support of our constitution, as much as I hate the modern government (I'm a libertarian).

For me it is the wording that pushes the pledge to far. I always repeat the Oklahoma Flag Salute since it has different language in it.

And even though I don't do the pledge, I always stand and face the flag and place my hand over my heart. It is still an important and revered symbol to me personally.

I don't like the wording of the modern pledge either. I'd have to say that it hit its peak with its second version in 1982:

Short, sweet and to the point.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

Students, even minors, are still protected by the Free Speech Clause... That was the outcome of the Barnette case and has be reaffirmed in subsequent cases (like Tinker v. Des Moines for instance).

I'll be sure to tell that to my cousin the next time she calls her Principle a charlatan.