Is The Pledge of Allegiance Un-American?
Is The Pledge of Allegiance Un-American?
The Pledge of Allegiance has always struck me as a ritual that is in complete opposition to the principles upon which the U.S. was founded. It reeks of blind obedience to the state; something that is more in line with totalitarianism. The whole controversy over whether or not the words under-God should be included in the text of the Pledge has always been a non-issue, to me. The bigger issue is whether or not we should even be clinging to such an antiquated notion of patriotism which, in my opinion, has never represented the philosophies of our founding fathers.
I believe only one other country, The Philippines, has such an allegiance to the flag. While I'm grateful our school children are not forced by law to perform this daily ritual, there is certainly a very strong compulsion to do so. Failure to join in would most certainly lead to ostricization of the pupil by his or her peers.
We are sending our children some rather confusing mixed messages as they travel along the conveyor belt of education, eventually deposited into the real world where they make their way as adults. On the one hand, we try to instill in them a sense of individuality, and a tolerance of those who are different from themselves. Then we compel them to recite, like mindless zombies, a pledge with more in common with Hitler's Germany than a country that is supposed to represent freedom and Democracy. What makes this even creepier is the fact that prior to placing the hand over the heart during The Pledge's recital, the routine involved an outstretched arm and raised palm that is very similar to the Hitler salute. This, of course, was done away after the Nazis came into power. It's also interesting to note that the author of The Pledge of Allegiance, Francis Bellamy, was a socialist, and critic of the capitalist system.
To me, The Pledge represents a particularly ugly side of patriotism. Unfortunately, there are far too many people who are raised with the idea that you support your country, right or wrong. Any criticism of the U.S. is seen by such individuals as downright treasonous. In my mind, it is those who are willing to stand up and speak out against the policies and actions of their government they believe are not in the best interest of its citizenry who are the greatest patriots. Somewhere along the way, we really lost the original plot.
Patriotism is something that should come from the heart, and be a free choice. You can't instill true patriotism in your country's citizenry by having them perform such a ridiculous ritual as The Pledge of Allegiance. Traditions die hard, I guess. I'm likely to be branded "anti-American" for even questioning it. But I'm thankful I was raised by parents who instilled in me the value of questioning everything.
Submitted by 
I think everyone knows the Pledge. But for our foriegn readers, just in case, it goes like this:
I Pledge Allegiance to the flag, Of the United States of America
And to the Republic for which it stands
One nation, under God, indivisable, with Liberty and Justice for all.
I think.
The phrase - under God, was added during the McCarthy era (1950's) to prove we were a God fearing county and not a Godless communist state.
Unlike kj here I take more issue with the "under God" phrase being unAmerican than the rest of the Pledge. For me, a country where the people supposely wanted religious freedom should not have such a phrase in their Pledge nor anywhere in their government publications. We are not one nation under God. We are a nation under many gods - like it or not, remember it is a Right. I think the Pledge as it originally read is the way it should be and is a powerful statement. I see it as a learning opportuntiy. What do these words mean to you as you say them?
Shirt says "Don't call me a Cowgirl until you've seen me ride"
The phrase "under God" certainly isn't in keeping with the ideal of separation of church and state. But it never really concerned me as much as the idea of compelling school children to stand up and pledge allegiance to their country.
Of course, the words are a lie to anyone who chooses not to subscribe to the concept of God. And nobody is required under law to recite the pledge. It's the compulsion to do so that is really the issue.
Under God being added to the pledge of allegiance.
Reminds me of a poll King David took in Israel. He wanted to know the population of Israel.
God had already told him.
As many as the grains of sand on the ocean.
God punished him for that. Reckon maybe King David was showing off some.
King David was a little arrogant.
He lost some land for that.
No nation on Earth has had lasting success if God was not supreme Lord over it.
Disagree? Join Here, Be Heard!
Imagine if you did have children standing up, -placing their hands over their hearts and -reciting their true pledge-of-allegiance: "I pledge allegiance/ To the nearest grown-ups/ Because they're bigger than me/ And/or have stuff I want,"
Actually, not all kids are 'the same kind of "smart"' (i.e. they don't all get what they want in the same way–some just sit there and smile real cute, some cry, etc.); so the 'pledge-time' would generally be a mumbling cacophony that would more-likely get some kids in trouble than help them focus.
Because focus is really what 'school' is all about; not about 'focusing on your plan,' but rather 'focusing on the plan the weathy hirers inherited from their parents (who inherited it from their parents, etc.)
Maybe "patriotism" itself is one of the World's true evils. What good does it do, anyway, other than instill an "us & them" kind of mentality?
If everyone in the world suddenly stood up and declared they were no longer citizens of this country, or that country, but rather citizens of the World, imagine what a powerful movement that would be?
I know, what a load of "Utopian" nonsense, right?
... Emperor of the World, (Whichever Xombie Is Reading This)
(just like "The New Testament," my most important content is in my titles!)
Jingoism is pretty pathetic in all its guises. I have nothing against people showcasing an American flag, but don't tell me that my politicians need to have one on their lapel--or they're not patriotic. I think more people need to question things, instead of just going along with the majority or what the people in power would have them do. Unquestioning blind patriotism is not good for anyone or the country.
Too often the word "patriotic" is translated or skewed to mean, "do whatever I say or you're with the enemies," and that's just plain wrong. But we're all used to fear tactics these days. It's old hat by now.
Click here for 30 days of free Blockbuster movies.
See my recent posts:
http://www.xomba.com/user/chris_crow
Yeah, "You're ever for us or against us." That raised the bar for simple minded rhetoric. That there were so many people who bought into it is a very sad commentary on the general intelligence of the US public.
Dissent is the highest form of patriotism -- Thomas Jefferson
And I think most Americans are idiots...the majority voted for Bush in 2004 already knowing what a screw-up he was.
The nonbeliever uses tolerance.
The believer uses impersonal love.
That is how you tolerate me.
And that is how I understand you.
So why can't we communicate.
I agree with what you said: " . . . it is those who are willing to stand up and speak out against the policies and actions of their government they believe are not in the best interest of its citizenry who are the greatest patriots." Most definitely!
I have 2 elem. age kids and their school (unfortunately) makes them recite this junk. Both mine are under 4th grade and the funny thing is my youngest, doesn't even understand some parts of the pledge. I think I will write a note next year exempting them from reciting it.
Your Xombyte was thoughtful and nicely written. Thanks.
It is the resposibility of the parents to teach the kids the Pledge of Allegiance. And explain to them what it means.
They should be reciting the Pledge of Allegiance already before they get to kindergarten.
Half the fun is watching them do it.
http://www.xomba.com/our_pledge_allegiance_under_god
The primary responsibility here is for parents to make sure 'the kids know what they're doing everything for' (i.e. 'where their allegiance lies' ... any Justin Burley fans out there, I almost said 'aley'-giance [inside joke]).
Disagree? Join Here, Be Heard!
They should be reciting the Pledge of Allegiance already before they get to kindergarten.
Let's get them programmed, and shaped into good little drones, as soon as possible. It's never to early to fill their heads full nationalistic nonsense.
I am glad you agree with me here jhak.
The difference between a liberal and a conservative. Is you program your kids.
I teach mine. There is a thing called History. I teach them this history of America. What it cost to found our country.
This freedom that you use to hide behind is freely given but was not free. It was paid for in blood. And has been kept because of American blood. You are welcome.
You owe America an apology.
This week sister philosophy is a general democrat strategy to use you and others like you as the stick to stir his bucket of crap. Quite frankly it stinks.
http://www.xomba.com/our_pledge_allegiance_under_god
read something with substance.
... animal desires shape them into barbaric murderers.
That's just an example; not the point ... The point is, it's pledging allegiance to 'principle,' not to 'commanders.'
A little confession: I still stand up every morning, face our nations banner, and say, "I pledge allegiance To the flag Of the United States of America, And to the republic For which it stands---One nation under God, Indivisible, With liberty and justice for all."
Put in "the life of humanity" for 'the United States of America,' and understand it before you comment; thanks.
Disagree? Join Here, Be Heard!
The kids are IN SCHOOL ... not an individuality workshop!
What they're chanting is 'allegiance to the ideal of America,' the America they are being taught.
Would you rather have them strive for the ideal of the popular-culture buzz?
I'm sorry they're not being taught that their parents are irredeemably evil. Do you want them to stand up, place their hands over their hearts, and say, "This world is gonna screw my soul raw"?
Disagree? Join Here, Be Heard!
I appreciate the kind words. Your children are lucky to have you for a mother; one who is not afraid to question traditions.
Silly women and week sister men
Tradition and History are two different things
http://www.xomba.com/our_pledge_allegiance_under_god
How do you measure "lasting success" for a nation? And are you arguing on behalf of "God" (a concept) or a particualr God?
You define this with substance and from positions of strength. Not from stupid questions from an idiots point of view that has no answer in the first place.
week sister liberal democrat.
Freedom is not free. It costs blood. God ordained war to protect Nations.
God will use Good to destroy evil.
God will let evil destroy evil.
Who cares what a cockroach does.
This is a character problem here. It is these types of frames of minds that are a cancer to America. This will ensure lasting success will not be. And would be to any country, period.
Other countries without our Freedoms, like we AMERICANS enjoy, that were not free, know this and take care of it before it ever can make a free thought statement twice.
You ought to be thanking your lucky stars you were born in America. Where under our constitution even a cannablizing cockroach like general democrat can eat.
Freedom is not free. It costs blood. God ordained war to protect Nations.
God will use Good to destroy evil.
God will let evil destroy evil.
Yes, freedom has often come at a heavy price. That's an unfortunate aspect of the human condition we've created.
But the whole idea that some all powerful deity has sanctioned this slaughter...well, that kind of thinking is about as twisted and sick as it gets.
You are kiding right or did you just figure this out?
Your quote,
Yes, freedom has often come at a heavy price. That's an unfortunate aspect of the human condition we've created.
Are you for real? In a liberals fanastyland do you take yourself serious?
DUH. Who else is going to cause a human condition? A dog, a cat? I know the extraterestials. Oh I know, the diverse animal population on the Serengetti causes our human conditions. That's it.
What is the lasting success of extraterestials? Seeing as we are being philosophers here I thought I'd throw in that question. Of course there are no absolutes here. What is an absolute.
Your quote
But the whole idea that some all powerful deity has sanctioned this slaughter...well, that kind of thinking is about as twisted and sick as it gets.
What is twisted and sick is liberals hiding behind the word TOLERANCE here in America. So the arrogant liberal can still condone actions that are the overt reasons our enemies are sworn to kill us. Our enemies are obliged to do so because of what you condone
Giving America a reason to PROTECT OUR NATION.
Would you stick up for your own Mother.
What is a mother the philosopher says before stomping his foot and voting for change.
I vote to change my kids diaper. I vote to change the dishwater. I vote you change your underware your liberal ways stink and have no foundation.
I vote you change that.
http://www.xomba.com/our_pledge_allegiance_under_god
I vote we all stop arguing with eggsovresy. He's been brain-washed by Republican propoganda. (No offense). Seriously eggsovresy, you speak the same way our "enemies" speak and the same way the Crusaders spoke before going off to try and steal land in the Middle East...
Join the Debate | My 'bytes and 'blurbs | Free Online Games and Music
In Germany they had a book burning to block the points of views that did'nt align with hitlers agenda allso.
Is this the mentallity of the liberal democrat to block everything you don't agree with, in the same respect I have to tolerate you?
It makes me think of the question
What side of the face do liberals talk out of?
Answer Both.
WRAWK tolerate WRAWK block button WRAWK
http://www.xomba.com/our_pledge_allegiance_under_god
Deviation tests the system. Causes changes.
Was there true thought of points behind the comments, Or Not?
smile?
BTW I like your pic and grin.
Explain taranitely. How one who preaches tolerance says LETS STOP ONES PARTICIPATION? I read your remarks and do not agree. What do you teach the young girls taranitely?
And here we go again with our emotional parrot remarks
WRAWK...He's been brain-washed by Republican propoganda. (No offense). Seriously eggsovresy, you speak the same way our "enemies" speak and the same way the Crusaders spoke before going off to try and steal land in the Middle East...WRAWK.
Steal land? You meant give Jerusalem back the Jews? I believe they built that city.
It was a noble thought the Crusaders had. But it was arrogant. Israel has it's own country but still has not been restored to it's original size. It is only a fraction of what it will be again. But that is when Jesus comes back Riding the white horse. After the rapture and after the tribulation.
Firstly, I did not say that you should not be allowed to participate, simply that people shouldn't be sucked into arguments with you if they value their sanity. These are not the same things. Please think about what you say before posting.
The Crusaders weren't as noble as they'd have you believe. The kings and nobles went to war with the Muslims to steal their land. However, their followers are hardly going to throw down their lives to enrich their superiors without any gain to themselves are they? No! So the kings, nobles and priests all preached the line about Holy War to incite their minions to fight. They weren't going to give the land to the Jews. They wanted it for themselves!
My remarks were not emotional. Merely another possible interpretation of the facts.
To be honest, I find your mindset to be the same as that of the Crusader minions. Think about this.
And guys... be nice...
Join the Debate | My 'bytes | Free Online Games and Music
Yes I am still asking that silly question. Where is your picture?
The mind set of the Crusader minions. You mean the intent of the Crusaders hearts?
The intent was to restore Israel to it's former Glory. And recapture Israel The holy land. Althought arrogant. They were trying to do what only God can fix. God cast the Jews out of Israel for the last time 90 years after Jesus was crucified.
All of the land you are saying they tried to steal is all ISRAEL. Israel now is a fraction of the size she was. But still Turkey, Iraq, alot OF Egypt, Lebanon, Beirut.... is all ISRAEL.
Basically Israel stopped being Israel thousands of years ago when it was lost. You can't use the fact that the Jews once lived on that land thousands of years ago to say that it belongs to them. This is not what happens anywhere else in the world. Many other peoples also lost there lands and we do not use the same argument to restore their lands to them. No... this special treatment strikes directly to the heart of the matter: kings, nobles and priests incited their people to religious gain because they wanted the land. If they wanted to restore Israel because they felt it had been stolen, why did they not restore other peoples' land as well?
Please don't use the religious argument that Israel is the Holy Land which gives them the right either because Judaism, Christianity and Islam all claim this land as theirs.
Anyway, I don't expect you to change your opinion because I know you won't. I am merely trying to open your eyes to other points of view and get you thinking. That is what I am teaching; not that the Crusades were wrong or that your "enemies" are right.
Oh... and I took my picture off so that you couldn't complain about it in debates =D
Join the Debate | My 'bytes | Free Online Games and Music
Well, the pic could've been a little more-tasteful; but 'tasteful' doesn't sell so easy! lol
With the royalty: it's been written that the winners are the ones who write the history. (I did a little research on that word 'history': turns out the Greek meant 'the wisdom of the elders' while the Latin [language of 'the winners'] meant 'the way it was told.')
Disagree? Join Here, Be Heard!
Try to agree. When you encounter a statement that seems to go against your previous reasonings, try to agree with it. You'll then be able to more-directly deny the falsity ... attacking the infection at its cause rather than at its fruit.
Disagree? Join Here, Be Heard!
Your read things into my words that simply aren't there. You continue to pin a "liberal" or "Dem" label on people from your narrow political perspective. I am not a "liberal", nor do I belong to any party. I may have ideas that would be considered "liberal", while other are more "conservative".
You seem to be out to vent your hostility, egg. If you want to have a civil discussion, that's fine. But I won't get into a childish flaming war with you.
You are right it is typical. It is typical for the liberal view to rant rave and throw darts. And than say I don't belong to a party and slander the other party.
By you letting me know what you deny being. It makes me really wonder are you really the one who is sending the children in our Country mixed messages. Obvious there is confusion here.
I am the only one here who will stick up for the Pledge of Allegiance.
If you read my xombyte. Under God is not an issue nor has anything to do Republican or democrat. What I see being expressed here is alot of rebellion, mahem, chaos, and the running of a muck by spoiled people who have tolerance for only they're point of view. And what taranitely is suggesting here is restrictive thinking. That is not what we do in America.
Read this
http://www.xomba.com/our_pledge_allegiance_under_god
How can offering another point of view possibly be restrictive thinking? Don't make wild allegations without any backing. I am being open-minded, considering other points of view whereas you insist that your way is right and are not willing to consider other points of view. No sir, your way of thinking is restrictive thinking.
And I noticed you didn't offer any counter argument?
You seem to exhibiting a far more "intolerant" attitude that anyone else in this thread. If you would only put your thoughts across in a more intelligent, less derogatory and combative fashion, you'd fare much better.
I have not "slandered" any party, at this point. I have, of course, "slandered" the manner in which you try to lump people into categories from an opinion with which you disagree.
Now your talking. We can both point to intolerance in our frame of minds. I will also as long as you are writing continue to share my opinions with you. I have fared fairly well in the two weeks I have been writing here thank you.
I beg to differ with you in the subject of slander. I read your xombytes. My manner in how I write is mine. You can read if you want and comment on it if you want. Does not matter to me.
In the mean time tell me what you think of this. I dare you.
http://www.xomba.com/in_fantasy_land_there_is_no_family
Steve Sjogren
You seem to be doing the Shark, egg. Ripping apart any movement other than yourself.
You might see the Dolphin (the one who could 'attack' but doesn't) as a weakling Carp (totally passive bottom-feeder), and the Dolphin doesn't care ... but this Dolphin doesn't want you to get too stuffed on the mindless Carp!
Disagree? Join Here, Be Heard!
I searched the bible for a passage that held both the words "Jesus" and "war," thinking I would find a passage like, "And Jesus said, 'War is ...'," but the only thing I found (besides Jesus' warnings as Peter warmed himself by the fire, lol) was the imaginary war that 'gave birth to evil,' in which the followers of Jesus were the ones being attacked.
According to True Gnosis, the Old Testament idea of an 'Angry' God was simply to instill fear—and it works for those who need it. But I looked for a list of the Gods of War, and saw 'Our Father' nowhere.
Disagree? Join Here, Be Heard!
... a nation, I would define as 'continued unity within its decision-making vehicle.'
God--whatever you assign that pronoun to--is the prime unifying power.
I sense disagreement arising as to 'what exactly the decision-making vehicle is': the false ideal of democracy would hold it to be 'the people,' but (as I've mentioned elsewhere) 'People are stupid en mass!' (E.g. None of them want war, but none of them want to-risk their safety and -trust that no one far-away is a 'powerful- and crazy enough to jihad innocent MidWest Americans'-terrorist either!)
Disagree? Join Here, Be Heard!
P.S. It's a shame that not all replies in comments are shot to the top of the list even if they're replies to responses near the bottom, I agree; but--if it matters that much that your personal reply is 'seen'--each reply has its own address for you to use to direct people to it---you can click 'reply' on the comment you're responding to, and then post that addy in a reply to the main article (for all I care ... i.e. there may be other rules about it in the Xomba-guides).
Eggsovresy, better start taking your meds.
Or change the meds altogether?
Several times in this post's 'Sense,' I've gotten the message that we should "teach our children how to read."
I've even written a Xombyte on reading-for-real, but I'm not going to $P@M the comments with it ... I trust those who wish to know to find out where they can find out from me!
Disagree? Join Here, Be Heard!
Yes, my question was indeed directed at you. I'm not sure I totally agree with your definition, but I think it's an interesting one; more importantly, it your answer did answer my question directly, so that I know that your definition of lasting success of a nation is not something else (whether that something else is "ability to crush its enemies" or "status as an economic superpower" or "consistent development of Top 10-rated situation comedies" or whatever).
BTW, your P.S. about "It's a shame that not all replies in comments are shot to the top of the list even if they're replies to responses near the bottom" - was that in response to something I posted or to something someone else posted? I complain about a lot of things, but I don't think that's one I've complained about.
Stephen Colbert's 'first word' illustrates an unsettling 'truth' of the world (also seen in the fact that each word in the dictionary has about five differing definitions): That what's 'true' to you maybe 'hellbound' to me, that what's 'ideal' for me may be 'lazy' to you, that what's 'best' for all may be 'impossible' for some.
To the P.S.: I'm telling you that you should click 'Reply' BELOW THE COMMENT YOU'RE REPLYING-TO! You HAVEN'T BEEN DOING THAT, AND I AM 'COMPLAINING' TO YOU! (though Nick is the only one with the power to fix this)
Even above, I'm not completely sure which 'definition' you're talking about! If you weren't such a 'everyone must see me'-drama-queen, you would see that ... that 'clarity of reference' is sometimes more-important than 'position on the discussion's billboard.'
Disagree? Join Here, Be Heard!
You know it’s interesting when people like “mythman” and “eggs . . . whatever” rant and rave about what they believe — it just makes me laugh. You talk about history, but the history and the beliefs you rant about are one sided. Your posts reek of dominance, arrogance, bias and intolerance. It is exactly that BS that makes this world we live in ugly and cruel.
How I CHOOSE to raise and teach MY children is a fundamental right guaranteed by our nation's constitution, a nation that didn’t recognize my ancestors as citizens until 1924! I know this nation’s history very well and ALL the tall shadows it casts over all our lives. I am an enrolled member of one of the federally recognized tribes of North America. Please!!! You think I don’t know our history. Both you fools need a history lesson.
“Mythman:” your tag name suits you perfectly, you seemed wrapped up in myths . . . bet you even hold onto the myth that Columbus discovered this land. And “eggs…” whatever the name is — do what one of the other posts suggested: re-evaluate your meds.
Kjhack: I still support and agree with your post. These fools need to BACK OFF ‘cause all they come with is BS! Kjhack, keep writing your posts, I’ll be reading.
That's the first "history lesson:" I know it sounds corny, but the word 'history' actually is rooted in 'his story.'
Whether I do or don't believe that the Flying Spagetti Monster hit Isaac Newton on the head doesn't change whether it is or is not actually true to you. Sure, if I keep on saying it over-and-over then you'll be more-and-more convinced (gradually); but it's still just as true as if I never said it!
As for 'myths you believe,' you probably believe the 'myth' that religion is not based on 'myth.'
(Now, I'm sure you can look at that definition and -etymology and pick out statements that disagree with me as surely as I can pick out statements that don't disagree; so please just read them and be sure that you 'won.')
Disagree? Join Here, Be Heard!
I understand we say and write things that are to edify self.
Even me. Thus we have Xomba.
Even in a round about way you have introduced yourself to us. By telling us what you know and where your heritage comes from. WELCOME.
Though I agree with the fact the constitution gaurantees we can raise our children ANY way we want. I know that other countries do not promise these type of the same freedoms we enjoy. So I wonder where the hostility toward America comes from in our own population.
I have noticed in the households where kids do not have much of a supervised upbringing, with a strong family structure. The state teaches them what they didn't learn at home, when they get older. That is called the system.
So I reckon it is'nt that I can raise my kids any way I want to. As much as the importance of what I am teaching them while they are growing up.
The word of God are guidlines that insists humility is strenth, that some like myself choose to follow. But I have learned thru discussions here on this one post.
That even Americans who do not choose this Christian lifestyle have their own forms of humility. Just in different ways. A good example is tolerance. Whereas a Christian will use Impersonal Love.
This keeps a Christian from judging a person whereas tolerance means I have to let THEM be themselves. Both are forms of Humility.
you have to tolerate ME. I don't judge you.
To force a point of view on anything is building a foundation on clay feet. Which means it would fall.
The word of God are guidlines that insists humility is strenth, that some like myself choose to follow. But I have learned thru discussions here on this one post.That even Americans who do not choose this Christian lifestyle have their own forms of humility. Just in different ways. A good example is tolerance. Whereas a Christian will use Impersonal Love.
This keeps a Christian from judging a person whereas tolerance means I have to let THEM be themselves. Both are forms of Humility.
you have to tolerate ME. I don't judge you.
Thank you 'soversy! That is exactly what I've been wanting you to say. Your words bring joy to my heart.
Recent comments
2 min 35 sec ago
1 hour 55 min ago
2 hours 59 min ago
3 hours 8 min ago
3 hours 33 min ago
4 hours 42 min ago
5 hours 35 min ago
5 hours 42 min ago
5 hours 51 min ago
6 hours 3 min ago