"Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance

[Arkhane]

You will get it, if you, once more, read the previous post my friend :>

If all you're going to do is keep repeating "lol just read the previous post :>:>:>" then am I to conclude you're wasting my time?

If you really think I'm wasting your time, then you are free to ignore me and label me as an ignoramus.

[Ifreann]

We're talking about the pledge of allegiance, not some petty robbery :>

Yet they're both agreements.

You said there's no such thing as an illegal agreement. He just pointed out an illegal agreement.

Farn's a lady, like most moderators.

[Divair]

If all you're going to do is keep repeating "lol just read the previous post :>:>:>" then am I to conclude you're wasting my time?

If you really think I'm wasting your time, then you are free to ignore me and label me as an ignoramus.

When you keep repeating the same post and smilie, then I have reason to believe you're trying to bug me or you're incapable of debate. If you actually explain how any of this is relevant, maybe you wouldn't appear as if you're attempting to fuck with everyone.

[Arumdaum]

Yet they're both agreements.

You said there's no such thing as an illegal agreement. He just pointed out an illegal agreement.

Farn's a lady, like most moderators.

Ack, crap, forgot about that. Fixed.

[Arkhane]

If you really think I'm wasting your time, then you are free to ignore me and label me as an ignoramus.

When you keep repeating the same post and smilie, then I have reason to believe you're trying to bug me or you're incapable of debate. If you actually explain how any of this is relevant, maybe you wouldn't appear as if you're attempting to fuck with everyone.

Well, the problem is, I keep repeating it over and over again to new people, that's the thing about debate here, it never ends, and I didn't even started a debate in the first place, I just gave my opinion and some gentleman raged.

[Divair]

When you keep repeating the same post and smilie, then I have reason to believe you're trying to bug me or you're incapable of debate. If you actually explain how any of this is relevant, maybe you wouldn't appear as if you're attempting to fuck with everyone.

Well, the problem is, I keep repeating it over and over again to new people, that's the thing about debate here, it never ends, and I didn't even started a debate in the first place, I just gave my opinion and some gentleman raged.

Oh, life is just so hard. The utter horror.

[Arkhane]

Well, the problem is, I keep repeating it over and over again to new people, that's the thing about debate here, it never ends, and I didn't even started a debate in the first place, I just gave my opinion and some gentleman raged.

Oh, life is just so hard. The utter horror.

I know, that's why its good to loosen up and throw my mouth off even for a few minutes.

[Divair]

Oh, life is just so hard. The utter horror.

I know, that's why its good to loosen up and throw my mouth off even for a few minutes.

If you get frustrated, don't post. It's better than posting nonsense.

[Arkhane]

I know, that's why its good to loosen up and throw my mouth off even for a few minutes.

If you get frustrated, don't post. It's better than posting nonsense.

What are you saying, I'm having a lot of fun :> And its not really that much of a non-sense, at least not to me.

[Narland]

Yes, you would. "Pledge" doesn't mean "legally binding agreement".

---

pledge (plj)
n.
1. A solemn binding promise to do, give, or refrain from doing something: to abide by agreement.

There is no such thing as an illegal agreement.

Illegal? I just said it wasn't legally binding. As part of my Confirmation, a Catholic sacrament, I made a pledge to abstain from alcohol until I was 18. I made a point of sneaking a drop of whiskey from my parents' liquor cabinet that very night. I was 12, in my defence. Do you know what the legal consequences would have been if I was caught breaking my pledge? Absolutely nothing.

---

But it is.

No, it's not. All it does is add a sense of officialness and solemnity to ceremonies.

A flag is only as good as the moral courage of its people. If a governing body must dictate what that is, then it is mere jingoism and pompousness.

No governing body is dictating the moral courage of anything. They're just setting out the official design of the flag, the etiquette of flying it, and what not. Perhaps this offends your sensibilities, but that's rather a problem with your sensibilities.

---

We're talking about the pledge of allegiance, not some petty robbery :>

I assure you that if I were involved with a bank heist it would be no petty robbery. Never mind Danny Ocean, Rube Goldberg would eat his heart out, such would be the intricacy and complexity of my plan.

Sorry about the delay. The oxygen machine needed maintenance. This is a very enjoyable topic.


Re: 1. I didn't mean to be ambiguous. "It" being the flag and its ancillaries (what it is emblematic of, the pledge, etc), not the conscience or moral courage of the people.

Re: 2. It offends enough sensibilities (regardless of stance) to be a national issue. It should not be an issue at all. Congress has enough problems with its own oath to the Constitution (and serious matters to attend), let alone over-reaching its delegated tasks and deciding for the nation what we as a nation can determine for ourselves. Congress should pass legislation for how government officials, petty bureaucrats and the military are to conduct homage. It is their obligation to do so.

Congress legislates the construction of the stars and stripes for purposes of the State (official purposes), but not necessarily for the People. We have historically flown our own flags and our own versions and variations of the Stars & Stripes, especially during times of national concern. Congress bears the Flag only as well as they represent the People and the States in their fealty to the Constitution. As self-governing individuals, we are competent enough to respect our heritage without needing to make a Federal Offense of a presumed slight to a "sense of officialness and solemnity to ceremonies." That is mere pomp.

The national motto had been self-determined until the 1950s, some preferring “E Pluribus Unum”, some “In God We Trust.” We didn't need an “official” one for over 150 years. Same with the a national anthem, some preferring “America the Beautiful,” some “God Bless America,” some “The Star Spangled Banner,” etc. It didn't change the fact that we were all Americans.

A pledge to the flag or a lack thereof is the same. However, it arose because someone thought there was a lack of his brand of patriotism. Fine, (for the sake of argument) no objections. If your conscience allows for it, go ahead. Many of us who love our country, love our heritage, and love our flag, do not pledge to the flag. We did not need Congress making a federal issue out of it then, and we do not need it now. It is a mistake that should stay in the 20th century.

Re: Orignial Question. There shouldn't be a congressionally mandated pledge regardless of the inclusion or exclusion of the phrase, "under God."

[AiliailiA]

Well, he might get in trouble with his employer for going off script, or with the FCC if he decides to segue into Carlin's Seven Words bit, but the federal government won't do a damn thing if you say the pledge wrong, or salute the flag wrong, or violate the Flag Code in any way.

I have never heard of the Pledge being recited at a World Series game, ever. That would be bizarre. It's enough we sing the National Anthem, a four-octave range, from an English drinking song originally written for a goose.

The World Series should have it's own pledge: some stirring words about the shape of the ball, the woody goodness of the bat and so on.

[Ifreann]

I have never heard of the Pledge being recited at a World Series game, ever. That would be bizarre. It's enough we sing the National Anthem, a four-octave range, from an English drinking song originally written for a goose.

The World Series should have it's own pledge: some stirring words about the shape of the ball, the woody goodness of the bat and so on.

I pledge obedience to the umpires of Major League Baseball...

[Dyakovo]

This is mind numbingly dumb. The Supreme Court first made a ruling on it in 1940. Until it is torn down, it will always face criticism. Either the Courts need to say "Enough is enough; this is the last time our court (Roberts) will hear this or the states need to do a Constitutional amendment to make it constitutional. But the fact that we are still seeing cases brought up over the very same issues (whether we can be compelled, whether the phrase is constitutional, etc) that they were brought over 70 years ago is plain absurd.

Don't lie. The pledge wasn't added to the Flag Code until 1942, and "under God" wasn't added to the pledge until 1954.

---

Yes, you would. "Pledge" doesn't mean "legally binding agreement".

---

pledge (plj)
n.
1. A solemn binding promise to do, give, or refrain from doing something: to abide by agreement.

There is no such thing as an illegal agreement.

Wrong. If we make an agreement for me to kill someone for you it is an illegal agreement.

---

Ah here, I was 12. That I broke a promise as a child is hardly a great indictment of my character.

But my personal character is beside the point. The point is that breaking that pledge was not a crime. That doesn't mean it wasn't a pledge. The same is true of the pledge of allegiance.

Ooh, If you can equally compare a 12 yr old promise and an oath not to drink booze to some solemn patriotic statute, its only showing me how you view your nations integrity, which is to say, pathetic.

A "solemn patriotic statute" that is only recited routinely by children...

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Bollocks sir.

What?

Provide some evidence how many muslim where living the 50s in the US.

Seriously, you're too lazy to double check for yourself to ensure that your claim had any merit?

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

http://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/tse ... /islam.htm

http://www.colostate.edu/orgs/MSA/find_more/iia.html

And those are just the first three entries from a Google search for "History of Islam in the United States".

[Dyakovo]

What?

Provide some evidence how many muslim where living the 50s in the US.

Seriously, you're too lazy to double check for yourself to ensure that your claim had any merit?

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

http://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/tse ... /islam.htm

http://www.colostate.edu/orgs/MSA/find_more/iia.html

And those are just the first three entries from a Google search for "History of Islam in the United States".

inb4 "you cited wikipedia therefore all your sources are invalid."

[Theranis III]

Just remove the two words. The pledge is supposed to be some sort of oath, to promote the civic collectiveness of the people of the United States. Those two words, seem to exclude a sizable population of non-believers.

[Rocket rider]

The government is expected to remove the smallest symbol that could be interpreted as christian from its state's seal, but then it is supposed to turn around and use our tax money to build areas with special faucets at airports so people can wash their feet before prayers.


Source?
Monday, June 10, 2013
San Francisco Airport Uses Public Money to Construct Foot-Washing Station for Muslims
San Francisco continues its surrender to Islam. Remember, they gave the ad revenue from our AFDI jihad truth ads to the Muslims. But not the money from the anti-Jewish ads -- they kept that.
Airport’s garage now Muslim house of worship SFGate, June 9, 2013 (thanks to Ishai)

Muslim cab drivers pray inside San Francisco International Airport garage. Airport has furnished them with a cleansing station to wash their hands and feet. Chronicle photo by Andrew Ross
Here’s a sign of the changing times — Muslim cabbies now have their very own place at San Francisco International Airport to wash their hands and feet before they pray.
Under Islamic law, Muslims are required to pray five times a day — a ritual that also calls for a ceremonial cleansing.
For many cab drivers, that’s meant either lugging bottled water around or using one of the bathrooms inside the terminal to wash — a practice not always welcomed by airport passengers.
So Royal Cab driver Hasan Khan, 52, a Pakistani immigrant, collected some 300 signatures from fellow cabbies, urging the airport to give them their own cleansing station.
Airport brass obliged — and the wash equipment was installed on the ground floor of the main garage, right next to where the drivers congregate for their breaks.
“The way we look at it…this was in the interest of maintaining a good relationship with ground transportation providers,’’ says airport spokesman Doug Yakel.
As for using public resources?
Yakel says the costs were nominal, with the work done by in-house plumbers.
As for Khan, he recognizes not everyone might appreciate the religious accommodation. But then he points out that Christians generally pray at church on Sundays — while for him and his fellow working Muslims, the ritual is woven into their daily routine.
Airport adds foot basins for Muslim cabbies [HOMELAND INSECURITY]
WND ^ | April 28, 2007
Posted on Saturday, April 28, 2007 1:30:23 AM by jdm
The Kansas City International Airport has added several foot-washing basins in restrooms to accommodate a growing number of Muslim taxicab drivers who requested the facilities to prepare for daily Islamic prayer, WND has learned.
The move concerns airport police who worry about Middle Eastern men loitering inside the building. After 9/11, the airport beefed up its police force to help prevent terrorist attacks.
"Why are we constructing places of worship for them inside our airports?" said an airport official who requested anonymity. "Why are we catering to their rituals? We don't do it for any other religion."



Conflict resolved outside the court system:
Los Angeles County, CA: The city seal was redesigned by the former Supervisor Kenneth Hahn circa 1957 to include a small cross. It is seen grouped with two stars and a depiction of the Hollywood Bowl -- a symbol of culture -- at the 3 o'clock position on the seal.
The two stars represent the movie and television industries. Some people in the county read about the Redlands case described elsewhere, and complained to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) about the Los Angeles County seal. The ACLU sent a letter to county officials noting that the seal "prominently depicts a Latin cross, a sectarian religious symbol that represents the beliefs of one segment of the county's diverse population" [and is an] impermissible endorsement of Christianity." Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich responded with a letter referring to the Roman Catholic missionaries who established missions in what is now Los Angeles County. He wrote: "The cross on our county seal reflects these historical facts. It does not mean that we are all Roman Catholics or that everyone who resides in our county is a Christian - it only reflects our historical roots." Supervisor Don Knabe introduced a motion during the week of 2004-MAY-23 to "begin preparations to protect and defend the county seal if such frivolous litigation is brought against the county." The motion was voted upon on JUN-01, and did not pass. Instead, the Board of Supervisors decided by a 3 to 2 vote to remove the cross symbol. Ironically, by far the largest image is at the center of the seal. It represents Pomona, the Roman Pagan Goddess of fruits and trees. She represents the county's agriculture industry. No one seems to have complained about the presence of a Pagan symbol. Of course, it is probably not obvious to the casual observer that Pomona is anyone other than an ordinary woman carrying agricultural products. 2

References used:
The following information sources were used to prepare and update the above essay. The hyperlinks are not necessarily still active today.
1. Baptist Press, "Town removes Christian symbol from seal," 1999-JUL-22. On line at: http://www.mcjonline.com/
2. John Antczak, "ACLU demands removal of cross from Los Angeles County seal," Associated Press, 2004-MAY-25, at: http://www.sacbee.com

[Condunum]

The government is expected to remove the smallest symbol that could be interpreted as christian from its state's seal, but then it is supposed to turn around and use our tax money to build areas with special faucets at airports so people can wash their feet before prayers.


Source?
Monday, June 10, 2013
San Francisco Airport Uses Public Money to Construct Foot-Washing Station for Muslims
San Francisco continues its surrender to Islam. Remember, they gave the ad revenue from our AFDI jihad truth ads to the Muslims. But not the money from the anti-Jewish ads -- they kept that.
Airport’s garage now Muslim house of worship SFGate, June 9, 2013 (thanks to Ishai)

Muslim cab drivers pray inside San Francisco International Airport garage. Airport has furnished them with a cleansing station to wash their hands and feet. Chronicle photo by Andrew Ross
Here’s a sign of the changing times — Muslim cabbies now have their very own place at San Francisco International Airport to wash their hands and feet before they pray.
Under Islamic law, Muslims are required to pray five times a day — a ritual that also calls for a ceremonial cleansing.
For many cab drivers, that’s meant either lugging bottled water around or using one of the bathrooms inside the terminal to wash — a practice not always welcomed by airport passengers.
So Royal Cab driver Hasan Khan, 52, a Pakistani immigrant, collected some 300 signatures from fellow cabbies, urging the airport to give them their own cleansing station.
Airport brass obliged — and the wash equipment was installed on the ground floor of the main garage, right next to where the drivers congregate for their breaks.
“The way we look at it…this was in the interest of maintaining a good relationship with ground transportation providers,’’ says airport spokesman Doug Yakel.
As for using public resources?
Yakel says the costs were nominal, with the work done by in-house plumbers.
As for Khan, he recognizes not everyone might appreciate the religious accommodation. But then he points out that Christians generally pray at church on Sundays — while for him and his fellow working Muslims, the ritual is woven into their daily routine.
Airport adds foot basins for Muslim cabbies [HOMELAND INSECURITY]
WND ^ | April 28, 2007
Posted on Saturday, April 28, 2007 1:30:23 AM by jdm
The Kansas City International Airport has added several foot-washing basins in restrooms to accommodate a growing number of Muslim taxicab drivers who requested the facilities to prepare for daily Islamic prayer, WND has learned.
The move concerns airport police who worry about Middle Eastern men loitering inside the building. After 9/11, the airport beefed up its police force to help prevent terrorist attacks.
"Why are we constructing places of worship for them inside our airports?" said an airport official who requested anonymity. "Why are we catering to their rituals? We don't do it for any other religion."



Conflict resolved outside the court system:
Los Angeles County, CA: The city seal was redesigned by the former Supervisor Kenneth Hahn circa 1957 to include a small cross. It is seen grouped with two stars and a depiction of the Hollywood Bowl -- a symbol of culture -- at the 3 o'clock position on the seal.
The two stars represent the movie and television industries. Some people in the county read about the Redlands case described elsewhere, and complained to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) about the Los Angeles County seal. The ACLU sent a letter to county officials noting that the seal "prominently depicts a Latin cross, a sectarian religious symbol that represents the beliefs of one segment of the county's diverse population" [and is an] impermissible endorsement of Christianity." Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich responded with a letter referring to the Roman Catholic missionaries who established missions in what is now Los Angeles County. He wrote: "The cross on our county seal reflects these historical facts. It does not mean that we are all Roman Catholics or that everyone who resides in our county is a Christian - it only reflects our historical roots." Supervisor Don Knabe introduced a motion during the week of 2004-MAY-23 to "begin preparations to protect and defend the county seal if such frivolous litigation is brought against the county." The motion was voted upon on JUN-01, and did not pass. Instead, the Board of Supervisors decided by a 3 to 2 vote to remove the cross symbol. Ironically, by far the largest image is at the center of the seal. It represents Pomona, the Roman Pagan Goddess of fruits and trees. She represents the county's agriculture industry. No one seems to have complained about the presence of a Pagan symbol. Of course, it is probably not obvious to the casual observer that Pomona is anyone other than an ordinary woman carrying agricultural products. 2

References used:
The following information sources were used to prepare and update the above essay. The hyperlinks are not necessarily still active today.
1. Baptist Press, "Town removes Christian symbol from seal," 1999-JUL-22. On line at: http://www.mcjonline.com/
2. John Antczak, "ACLU demands removal of cross from Los Angeles County seal," Associated Press, 2004-MAY-25, at: http://www.sacbee.com

Because it's horrible to allow them to successfully complete their practices.

[God Kefka]

Why does the USA even NEED a pledge in the first place?

Can someone answer that?

Other democracies get on fine without pledges... what is the purpose of the pledge? Why should children be made/strongly encouraged to recite it when they likely can't have a mature understanding of what their country is about? Does this count as a form of suggested indoctrination?

Also... I find it unsettling that places like Russia and Singapore (correct me if I'm wrong) which are supposed to be authoritarian countries, don't have their little kids reciting pledges of allegiance but you have that in a democratic country like the USA...

[The Orson Empire]

Why does the USA even NEED a pledge in the first place?

Can someone answer that?

Other democracies get on fine without pledges... what is the purpose of the pledge? Why should children be made/strongly encouraged to recite it when they likely can't have a mature understanding of what their country is about? Does this count as a form of suggested indoctrination?

Also... I find it unsettling that places like Russia and Singapore (correct me if I'm wrong) which are supposed to be authoritarian countries, don't have their little kids reciting pledges of allegiance but you have that in a democratic country like the USA...

It's only purpose is most likely for child indoctrination. They want us to serve the state to our highest extent, and to do this, they drill it in children early on.

[Hallistar]

Why does the USA even NEED a pledge in the first place?

Can someone answer that?

Other democracies get on fine without pledges... what is the purpose of the pledge? Why should children be made/strongly encouraged to recite it when they likely can't have a mature understanding of what their country is about? Does this count as a form of suggested indoctrination?

Also... I find it unsettling that places like Russia and Singapore (correct me if I'm wrong) which are supposed to be authoritarian countries, don't have their little kids reciting pledges of allegiance but you have that in a democratic country like the USA...

It's a good thing that legally it's not mandatory, and that legally you can't be made to stand up for it either. I suppose though that an issue is that several people still don't know that they aren't required to do so -- leaving them under the impression that they are forced to do it and without information to help them in gaining legal recourse against those who violate that. There should be a greater awareness of it.

[Scholencia]

I doubt it, if Allah is in the plegde then it would be "Under Allah" (Yes, I know it means God in Arabic). BY the time when the pledge was introduced there was no muslims in the US, it is just that American patriotism and religiosity fits to each other. A person who is not christian can not also be a good American patriot.

So you're saying that the founding fathers (mostly deist) weren't "good American patriots"?

yes, in sort of way.

[The Black Forrest]

If you're being sarcastic...

Anyway. We all know that's not true, regardless if we have 'Under God' in the Pledge of Allegiance.. It doesn't necessarily mean the Christian God. It could mean Allah.. Or whatever.

If you take out 'Under God' you might as well get rid of the entire Pledge of Allegiance, which I'm sure many American NSers would like.

I doubt it, if Allah is in the plegde then it would be "Under Allah" (Yes, I know it means God in Arabic). BY the time when the pledge was introduced there was no muslims in the US, it is just that American patriotism and religiosity fits to each other. A person who is not christian can not also be a good American patriot.

You are funny. Of course you have proof of the no Muslims in the US right?

[Hallistar]

If you're being sarcastic...

Anyway. We all know that's not true, regardless if we have 'Under God' in the Pledge of Allegiance.. It doesn't necessarily mean the Christian God. It could mean Allah.. Or whatever.

If you take out 'Under God' you might as well get rid of the entire Pledge of Allegiance, which I'm sure many American NSers would like.

I doubt it, if Allah is in the plegde then it would be "Under Allah" (Yes, I know it means God in Arabic). BY the time when the pledge was introduced there was no muslims in the US, it is just that American patriotism and religiosity fits to each other. A person who is not christian can not also be a good American patriot.

The first mosque in North America was built in a rural as fuck town in North Dakota (Of all places) in like 1929.

[Hexhamshire]

Seriously, you're too lazy to double check for yourself to ensure that your claim had any merit?

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

http://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/tse ... /islam.htm

http://www.colostate.edu/orgs/MSA/find_more/iia.html

And those are just the first three entries from a Google search for "History of Islam in the United States".

inb4 "you cited wikipedia therefore all your sources are invalid."

well, there are other sources

But in a state that is increasingly multicultural, multiethnic (as in built on immigration) and has within it more diverse religions being practiced, is it really appropriate to have an overtly Christian oath. You can argue that Allah is just Arabic for God but Allah is a loanword, we don't translate it, even though it could be argued that Christians, Muslims and Jews worship the same God.