Is it time to retire the Pledge of Allegiance?

If we are to recite that pledge, we had better live in the country it describes.

Diest TKO wrote:

You're view is far out of focus Finn. You blur the line between ritual and social contract. You blur the line between ritual and rhetoric. In general it would seem you blur the line that borders the concept of ritual on all sides to fit your argument here.

You didn't really tell us why reciting the pledge is meaningful or necessary anymore.

It would be necessary, if it in any way it (or any other words for that matter) truly dictated a person's actions.

It would be meaningful, if we were a nation not willing to sell our honor. Saying "with liberty and justice for all" is meaningless as long as we can bend every rule.

If we are to recite that pledge, we had better live in the country it describes.

T
K
O

We are a nation that is willing to sell our honor?

Really?

How long has that been going on?

I'll hazard a guess that you don't believe this has always been the case, nor that you believe it always will, and so are suggesting that the pledge only be recited when there is an administration in power with which you agree.

By pledging allegiance to a nation's ideal, they keep that ideal as their image of their nation. This is a good thing for our country, because it will continue a tradition where our youth expect their nation to live up to this ideal.

If instead we take your cynical approach and tell our children:

"This nation sucks - and doesn't deserve your allegiance," what is the anticipated result?

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:

You're view is far out of focus Finn. You blur the line between ritual and social contract. You blur the line between ritual and rhetoric. In general it would seem you blur the line that borders the concept of ritual on all sides to fit your argument here.

You didn't really tell us why reciting the pledge is meaningful or necessary anymore.

It would be necessary, if it in any way it (or any other words for that matter) truly dictated a person's actions.

It would be meaningful, if we were a nation not willing to sell our honor. Saying "with liberty and justice for all" is meaningless as long as we can bend every rule.

If we are to recite that pledge, we had better live in the country it describes.

T
K
O

We are a nation that is willing to sell our honor?

Really?

How long has that been going on?

I'll hazard a guess that you don't believe this has always been the case, nor that you believe it always will, and so are suggesting that the pledge only be recited when there is an administration in power with which you agree.

By pledging allegiance to a nation's ideal, they keep that ideal as their image of their nation. This is a good thing for our country, because it will continue a tradition where our youth expect their nation to live up to this ideal.

If instead we take your cynical approach and tell our children:

"This nation sucks - and doesn't deserve your allegiance," what is the anticipated result?

The ideal is useless without action Finn. If our youth have an expectation for our country to live up to this standard, what happens when the country fails to meet it? What then? Say the pledge louder? Edit it more? Add "god" between every sentence?

Either we are the country to which it beautify refers, or it's a matter of mistaken identity, and we just have the same name.

I don't plan to teach any child that the USA sucks, I don't plan to tell them how to feel at all about the country. I rather them understand their rights and then make an opinion of their own.

It's not framing the USA in the worst light possible, it's simply framing it in honest light, and not being afraid to show our flaws.

T
K
O

I'm sorry that you can't handle the truth. As for what side you rather err on, I suppose, you'd rather just plain err. That's a whole lot easier than dealing with harsh realities about our nation.

Go ahead and glorify the nation, sing in adoration about all the things it's not.

"with liberty and justice for all" - That's the baloney. Liberty and justice come in double and triple standards in this country. Give me a USA that provides this, then I'll pass a complements and perhaps a pledge. ...
T
K
O

Brandon, The "pledge" has nothing to do with "freedom" in any country; there exists no relationship.

I've been on the road. Back now...

To address your question 9000, I would begin by saying it doesn't matter what another country does or does not provide. We are talking about what we claim to provide; who we claim to be. Having said that, people in the Netherlands and Denmark live lives which are truly more free than ours, if you still think the question is relevant. Take a cross section of our countries social policies versus theirs, you'll see a clear difference.

Here we police people's womb and bedroom.

We have destroyed Habeas Corpus, and treat due process as if it was optional.

Here we have a justice system which will send blacks to death row while sending whites to life sentences for committing the same crimes.

Where is the accountability? Where is the liberty for all? Justice for all?

"Indivisible?" Nonsense. Our country is encouraged to divide. Those who seek out compromise are labeled negatively.

I don't want to rid of the pledge, I just want it to mean something. I want it to be about the country I live in, not the country I pretend to live in.

T
K
O

Diest TKO wrote:

I've been on the road. Back now...

To address your question 9000, I would begin by saying it doesn't matter what another country does or does not provide. We are talking about what we claim to provide; who we claim to be. Having said that, people in the Netherlands and Denmark live lives which are truly more free than ours, if you still think the question is relevant. Take a cross section of our countries social policies versus theirs, you'll see a clear difference.

What makes them more free? Be specific.

Diest TKO wrote:

Here we police people's womb and bedroom.

Abortion was illegal for most of the history of the US, so it hardly amounts to losing the freedom the Founders gave us. As for the bedroom, please give me an example of how private sexual behavior is regulated to any significant degree.

Diest TKO wrote:

We have destroyed Habeas Corpus, and treat due process as if it was optional.

I assert that although there may be some issues with military prisoners, these things have not been degraded to any significant degree. You give no examples, but just talk in slogans. Give an example or two to show that your assertion is correct.

Diest TKO wrote:

Here we have a justice system which will send blacks to death row while sending whites to life sentences for committing the same crimes.

We set a very high standard for courtroom procedures in the US. If, and I say if, because you haven't shown it to be true, if juries tend to sentence black people to prison more frequently for the same crimes, then how does that indicate anything negative about the law or the government? Do you want to eliminate trial by jury?

Diest TKO wrote:

Where is the accountability? Where is the liberty for all? Justice for all?

What do you mean when you ask where the accountability is? People are held accountable by the law, at least to the degree that they are anywhere.

Diest TKO wrote:

"Indivisible?" Nonsense. Our country is encouraged to divide. Those who seek out compromise are labeled negatively.

I don't want to rid of the pledge, I just want it to mean something. I want it to be about the country I live in, not the country I pretend to live in.

T
K
O

Brandon9000 wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:

I've been on the road. Back now...

To address your question 9000, I would begin by saying it doesn't matter what another country does or does not provide. We are talking about what we claim to provide; who we claim to be. Having said that, people in the Netherlands and Denmark live lives which are truly more free than ours, if you still think the question is relevant. Take a cross section of our countries social policies versus theirs, you'll see a clear difference.

What makes them more free? Be specific.

Read below... I was giving examples.

Brandon9000 wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:

Here we police people's womb and bedroom.

Abortion was illegal for most of the history of the US, so it hardly amounts to losing the freedom the Founders gave us. As for the bedroom, please give me an example of how private sexual behavior is regulated to any significant degree.

Hello? Sodomy laws. Ever heard of them? You know what they do right? They police very specifically what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their home.

As for abortion, after a clear ruling by the supreme court, the laws making abortion illegal were found unconstitutional: That a state could not deny a woman. After a clear and decisive ruling, you have a political movement trying to one up it. It's already happening, the ruling on partial birth abortion, cited the anomaly of P.A.S. (post abortion syndrome) yet in the same decision even admits that no authority on the matter (namely the APA) recognize the syndrome as being legitimate.

Brandon9000 wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:

We have destroyed Habeas Corpus, and treat due process as if it was optional.

I assert that although there may be some issues with military prisoners, these things have not been degraded to any significant degree. You give no examples, but just talk in slogans. Give an example or two to show that your assertion is correct.

A significant degree? You play along here 9000, tell me what would constitute "significant" to you. I could simply remind you of how we detain and torture (without charging) individuals suspected of terrorism. What about domestic wire-tapping? Tell me 9000, at what point does it become "significant" to you?

Brandon9000 wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:

Here we have a justice system which will send blacks to death row while sending whites to life sentences for committing the same crimes.

We set a very high standard for courtroom procedures in the US. If, and I say if, because you haven't shown it to be true, if juries tend to sentence black people to prison more frequently for the same crimes, then how does that indicate anything negative about the law or the government? Do you want to eliminate trial by jury?

I don't want to eliminate trail by jury, but I'd love to have a more detailed review process of our DAs and their record for excusing jury members etc. If we have such a high standard, why don't YOU explain why this is

An umber of articles here: http://www.aclu.org/capital/unequal/index.html
?

Brandon9000 wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:

Where is the accountability? Where is the liberty for all? Justice for all?

What do you mean when you ask where the accountability is? People are held accountable by the law, at least to the degree that they are anywhere.

While we are at it, explain to me the Justice in protecting companies that bankrupt our citizens?

Explain to me why the most able receive the largest help?

Brandon9000 wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:

"Indivisible?" Nonsense. Our country is encouraged to divide. Those who seek out compromise are labeled negatively.

I don't want to rid of the pledge, I just want it to mean something. I want it to be about the country I live in, not the country I pretend to live in.

T
K
O

Why do we buy yellow ribbon magnets that say "support the troops," when not a cent of it does that?

Why do we buy American flags manufactured from Chinese labor?

Never mind, just tell me why it's okay to ignore it. Tell me how loud to say the pledge. Tell me which direction to face. Tell me which god it is that I am under.

Go ahead. Tell me about America, the republic. Tell me what it stands for. Tell me how much it's willing to lose. Tell me about civil liberties, you'll never be asked to give up. Tell me about what rights your okay with others losing as long as it's not yours.

Tell me, and try not to blush.
K
O

Real Americans don't pledge allegiance, they make the government earn it.

What's even scarier is that they have prayer before each session, and they still lie, steal, take bribes, and spend our money like there's no tomorrow.

Either you think this is the country is the country praised in the pledge or you don't think we meet the standard.

Trying to pull your fingers out of your ears is a task I'm not up for. You asked for what, I told you. You asked for more, I told you. the game is obvious, you aren't interested in being convinced. I'm not going to chase my tail for you. I responded to your post, and you cherry picked through mine.

YOU introduced the notion of other countries, so YOU tell me how we are superior to all others in regards to liberty and justice.

I'm not for taking the pledge out, I'm for making it mean something.

T
K
O

No 9000, it doesn't work that way.

You asked me what, and I answered with sodomy laws. You then told me (asserted) that I needed to prove how they were being enforced. You're going to keep changing the rules, and I'm not going to let you keep moving the goal post.

The simple fact of it is that those sodomy laws have in fact been enforced. People have been arrested etc. It doesn't matter if the case is dismissed, what matters is that there are a people who have a second class citizenship. How many times does it take 9000? When is it "significant?" The point is that it shouldn't happen in the first place and homosexuality should not be criminalized.

Enlist in the military, but you can't be openly gay, that would be too horrible. You aren't welcome to fight for our country. 12,000 soldiers have been relieved from duty in the last decade. It doesn't effect your ability to serve, and being dismissed for your sexuality is to be punished unjustly.

You can't marry someone you love, because religious institutions have a firm grip on the countries marriage definitions. You can enjoy the tax benefits, but not enjoy the dignity. Heavens no.

You can be a stable couple with a sound income. You can quite capably provide a home for an orphan, too bad you're gay.

If you don't see injustice in this example, it's your lack of observational skills, not my ability to articulate examples.

T
K
O