GOP: One Nation Under God

[Beorn]

One Nation Divided (http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-uspled0627.story)
On Island, 9/11 Made Pledge Even More Vital (http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-lipleg0627.story)

In a Ninth Circuit Court ruling, for nine western states, it is unconstitutional to force children to say 'Under God' in the Pledge of Allegiance:

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.

Read the articles posted above, vote, and post your reply to the topic...

[ReadWryt]

It actually should be unconstitutional to make kids speak ANY pledge to ANYTHING, especially kindergarteners who have no way of knowing what they are getting told to do. So far as I know, no public school forces anyone to say this, or any other pledge, and if they DO they should be taken to task for it.

As for kids not wanting to say it, if they were being silent instead of fueling lawsuits for the ACLU, it would be moot. I know that I stopped saying the Pledge of Allegiance in the 6th grade and was sent to the office because I stood silent, hand over heart while my fellow sheep...er..students all recited the words that they had memorized and were not giving any thought to whilst repeating them. *I* was accused of disrupting class by saying nothing and being the quietest person in the room, and when asked WHY I wasn't saying the pledge I asked the principal if she was married, to which she said yes, and then I asked how many times she had married her husband and how many times I was going to be forced to say this Pledge...it seemed to me once should be enough, unless I really wanted to say it...my point here is that anybody who doesn't want to say the pledge should not be forced to, just as anyone who does not want to attend a High School Pep Rally for the football team should not be required to either...(another fiasco I had to deal with later in my scholastic career).

But it never seems to be enough for the "Civil Libertarians" who's only desire is to make certain that those who don't want to do something that other people want to do in schools, pray...eat peanut butter...Say the Pledge of Allegiance, never have to witness this happening. They will never remove prayer from schools so long as there are final exams...and nobody is forcing prayer, peanut butter or pledges on kids in public schools...but they sure are making certain that such horrible and corrupting influences will not be permitted in schools that teach Evolution as a fact, force children to choose Islamic names for themselves in world history classes that only mention Christianity in terms of their role in the Crusades (This actually happened here in California last year...throughout the Public School's 5th grade) and such. I don't know about you, but it seems to me that if these same students were forced into Civil Lawsuits to collect real and punative they would be hard pressed when the Judge asked for a description of the damages done to the poor oppressed student who was forced to stand or sit quietly while the rest of the students who wanted to spoke this pledge...

In a nut shell, yes...I am an agnostic and I would say the pledge if I felt like it...I would just be silent at the "under God" part and let the faithfull be free to express themselves. Christians or Muslims or Jews speaking the name of their Diety in the course of a pledge that they are permitted to say should they care to do NOT constitute Congress passing a law which infringes upon my right to practice the religion of my choosing, and so isn't at all in conflict with the Bill of Rights.

[Thorin]

Personally, I think the US (and Canada for that matter) are the most messed up, hypocritical and wishy-washy nation when it comes to religion and politics.

On one hand you can't say boo about God or Christianity, yet Satanism and occultic rock groups are the norm for music and shirts that kids wear to school in promotion of their religion, and as RW pointed out, evolution is forcing academia into a one track thought mode, yet Creation can't even be taught as a theory. Teachers are reprimanded in even discussing religon as a philosphy and an important facet of wholistic education is ignored and stifled in students....As an educator, I have a real problem with such a narrow mindset....

And yet "In God We Trust" is stamped on all the coins and bills, "One Nation Under God" is still being preached and prayer is okay and acceptable anywhere when a national tragedy like 9/11 occurs. I have a problem with the "Let's put God in a box for when we need Him and neglect Him the rest of the time" mindset that permeates our countries here in North America...I have more respect for atheists and agnostics who know what they believe and stand strong than these waffly half-religious people who run the bereaucracy.....Come on, either you're a Christian nation or you're a nation that promotes religious tolerance...Get off the fence, North America.

As for schools, nobody should be forced to do or say anything that goes against what they believe, but come on, let people express what they believe and wherever they want. As long as they aren't forcing anyone, big deal...If I'm so offended as a Christian because one of my Hindu classmates, or my teacher for that matter talks or prays to Vishnu, then I have bigger problems in my life...Problems like intolerance....If that teacher in a position of authority says, "Let us bow our heads and pray to Vishnu!" And expects me to do so, then I have a problem with it....And as a Christian teacher, if someone doesn't want to bow there head to pray while I pray, all the more power and grace to him...I'm not going to persecute him as I know that he will not be offended by my beliefs....


Oh by the way, RW, I have a joke for you. "What do you call it when you cross an agnostic with an insomniac and a dyslexic?....Someone who lies awake in bed at night and wonders if there really is a dog"....

Okay, I'll shut up now.... :)

[ReadWryt]

Thorin,

Be carefull now...as I pointed out in another thread you have to watch out for us radical agnostics going out at night burning Question Marks on people's lawns.

[Beorn]

Originally posted by ReadWryt
Be carefull now...as I pointed out in another thread you have to watch out for us radical agnostics going out at night burning Question Marks on people's lawns.

Now I finally know who did it! I just need to find out Ed Anderson in San Diego you are!

hehe...Anyway, I think that the idea given by 'Under God' is one that all people should appreciate. Not that we're all monotheistic, or religious, but that there is something common between the majority of us. Majority rules. Unfortunately, in this case, the Majority was 2-1, which scarcely represents the nation, or even 9 states, or even a town for that matter because errors are more prone when you've a small sample size.

Whether or not you are religious, or aren't sure, you can still unite with other people, even if they are uniting for something you don't belive in.


Personally, I think the US (and Canada for that matter) are the most messed up, hypocritical and wishy-washy nation when it comes to religion and politics. Here, Here!




BTW, if your religion is not on there, let me know what it is, your vote (you can PM me if you would like it to remain confidential), and whether or not to remove a vote from Other in your name (b/c your religion wasn't on there).

[ReadWryt]

Well...when an application for something asks what religion I am, I always put down "Southern Pedestrian". That always keeps them scratching their heads...

[DGoeij]

Well, everytime I see TV-news-flashes from the US about these kinds of issues, I somehow expect somebody to shout "WITCHCRAFT!!!!" and setting fire to the first woman spotted.
Every form of critique , from either inside or outside is met with disturbingly aggresive opposition.
Can you imagine how it looks to the average non-US citizen?

A debate about something like that is more than healthy IMHO, especially when the issue is apparently a complete taboo. Did it never occured to the people representing the nation that not everybody believes in the christian god? Judging from the responses to the issue, they either really don't or do not wish to know. Currently they look more to me like people very afraid of changes than as people capable in making sound decisions.

I hope that when the smoke clears, something good has happened.

Oh, and I wouldn't say the pledge of the nation, because I'm no US citizen. I'll sing our own national hymne with some dignity, but that's about it.:)

[Legolam]

I also can't really comment on the American thing, but here's a wee anecdote about religion:

On the last British census, there was a box for religion and you could add your own. Apparently, if 10,000 people put a religion that wasn't already recognised, it would be an officially recognised religion in Britain. There was a campaign to put down Jedi Order or Cult of the Spoons or something.

I guess we don't really take religion seriously!

[ReadWryt]

Any aggression that may appear to come from myself on this subject is due to the fact that I have yet to see where it is harming any child to just NOT say those particular words. It's when people decide that silence and pacifism is a less logical means to an end then Litigation and Media Attention when they would be hard pressed to prove any damages against themselves that I get my hackles up.

Truth to be told, since nobody has been put on trial for FORCING anybody to say this pledge, and nobody has been punished for NOT saying it...there IS no damage to anybody's civil right...and more importantly since this is not a matter of Congress passing a law which infringes on anybody's rights, it's not even a Constitutional issue, but instead more spurrious litigation that does not serve the public good, but instead wastes the tax payer's money...

[Tar-Ancalime]

I think some americans have problems confusing religous tolerance with religous persecutions.Seriously, you don't have to say the pledge in school you can just stare at a flag and not say it if you want to. so I don't see why they're complaining.

[Rangerdave]

Originally posted by ReadWryt
Well...when an application for something asks what religion I am, I always put down "Southern Pedestrian". That always keeps them scratching their heads...

Better be careful with that one RW, people get mighty scared when you use a big word with "ped" in it. You sould see the dirty looks I get when I tell people that I'm a pedalogue. One person even tried to have me arrested. (for those not versed in obsecure language, a pedagogue is a male teacher or professor)

But to get back on topic. I think the point is rather moot whether the "under God" phrase remains or not. With or without it, I will still be against forcing childern to pay homage to either a government or creator in a supposedly secular enviroment. My main objection is that the original pledge as James Bellemy wrote it in 1892 is simply blatent nationalism (or as my Welsh friends would say, Jingoism). By adding the two words "under God", the pledge becomes even more reactionary.

The way I see it, If parents want their kids to say the pledge, the put a flag up in the front yard and say it there. Also, if parents want their kids to pray, pray at home. It is neither the responsibility or place of public schools to promote religous or idological dogmas.

"I pledge impertinence to the flag waving, of the unindicted co-conspiritors of America, and to the republicans for which I can't stand, one abomination, underhanded fraud, indefensible, with Liberty and Justice... Forget it."
Matt Goening

Thanks for letting me rant.
RD

[Thorin]

Originally posted by Rangerdave
Better be careful with that one RW, people get mighty scared when you use a big word with "ped" in it. You sould see the dirty looks I get when I tell people that I'm a pedalogue. One person even tried to have me arrested. (for those not versed in obsecure language, a pedagogue is a male teacher or professor)

Hmmm...I do not think I will try that one in front of my students, being a fellow....pedagogue. :)

Originally posted by Rangerdave
But to get back on topic. I think the point is rather moot whether the "under God" phrase remains or not. With or without it, I will still be against forcing childern to pay homage to either a government or creator in a supposedly secular enviroment. My main objection is that the original pledge as James Bellemy wrote it in 1892 is simply blatent nationalism (or as my Welsh friends would say, Jingoism). By adding the two words "under God", the pledge becomes even more reactionary.

I guess my question is, is the real issue being forced to give homage to some form of nationalism, or is it really just because of the two words, "under God". Would people really be offended to say that pledge were those two words not in there?

Originally posted by Rangerdave
The way I see it, If parents want their kids to say the pledge, the put a flag up in the front yard and say it there. Also, if parents want their kids to pray, pray at home. It is neither the responsibility or place of public schools to promote religous or idological dogmas.

So where does religious tolerance come in to play? Can't an institution not take a stance directly in what religious views it will or will not promote, yet allow freedom of religious expression within itself? Why not? I think it is absolutely ridiculous the paranoid and toletarian stances a supposed "nation under God" takes to squelch any sort of Christian allowance in any way...Nobody should be forced, but don't go the opposite side either....Having a school enforce a prayer policy and allowing a student to talk about God are two totally different things. Unfortunately, our society has thrown the baby out with the bath water.

[ReadWryt]

With or without it, I will still be against forcing childern to pay homage to either a government or creator in a supposedly secular enviroment.

This is my point R.D., there is already presidence made not 20 miles from me in a town called Santee that ruled that saying the Pledge is NOT compulsary. Nobody is forcing these kids to say ANYTHING. The fact that the administration at my elementary school understood this in 1974 but then it had to be tested again in this day and age confuses me to some degree, but then we ARE talking about THIS day and age.

So long as it is not compulsary I have no problem with kids obstaining from invoking the name of God, an act I practice myself and never get noticed for, or even standing quietly while other say they pledge while they refrain.

[Tar-Ancalime]

I still think this whole issue is pointless,a minority of people object to saying two words when they're children could really care less. I state again if you don't want to say it than don't say it!!! I would object to however people being persecuted for not saying it, and i haven't seen that yet so i find the issue stupid.

[Beorn]

When you think about it, it is really quite pathetic and ridiculous that there is such a big problem over this. All the rest of the world laughs at us for things like this...

I think that kids are affected and imprinted much more by their parents who taught them how to live than by saying two words every day for half a year.

If you're athiest, you may even find it amusing that people swear to God, yet you still may say 'under God,' because you understand the concept on which that phrase is based. It's something that was put in to unify the country, something that nearly everyone (the majority) could unite for/with.

Why does this bring up memories of the Nit-Picking Weenie Guild and the Film Adaption Defense Guild?

[Tar-Ancalime]

Boern that makes perfect sense! Like the only people complaining are nit-picking weenines(he,he).Which is merely another case of the "Silent Majority" vs. the far too loud if you ask me minority

[LadyGaladriel]

I have never heard of that but i am shocked .


Talk about repressed children being forced into saying the Pledge. ReadWryt , your story made me think . Children have rights just like adults not to be forced into saying something they don't belive in . what do they teach them in America ? Ahh the American dream I bet .

[ReadWryt]

Talk about repressed children being forced into saying the Pledge. ReadWryt , your story made me think . Children have rights just like adults not to be forced into saying something they don't belive in . what do they teach them in America ? Ahh the American dream I bet .

...who was talking about anybody being forced to say anything?

[LadyGaladriel]

Children are being forced into swearing this Oath thing

[HLGStrider]

My school doesn't say the Pledge of Alliegance. My school reads the Bible. My school has three students....

I am a homeschooled student. Truthfully, I don't believe in state funded schools with mandatory attendance. If people could choose what schools their kids went to they could choose the praying school, the non-praying school, the pledge of allegiance school... etc. As it is, the private schools are too hard to afford and the public ones are a mess and I am homeschooling, sitting above it all rolling my eyes.

No one is being forced to say anything. What I have a problem with is hearing stories like the kid who brought veggietales cupcakes to his school for his birthday and got in trouble because they had the "God thinks you're special" motto on it. Come on... that is petty.

My answer for the whole mess would to be give parents a choice of teachers. Most schools have more than one teacher per grade... I know there was at least two different kindergarten teachers for my cousins to choose from (Though I am completely ignorant about public school workings other than this second had information). Why not have the parents interview the teachers before school starts asking them questions like "Will you pray in front of our kids? Will you put under God in the pledge?" and then pick the teacher with the answers they like?

It just makes common sense.

[ReadWryt]

HLGStrider,

...hence the debate in the U.S. over using a system of Vouchers to pay for the education of young students giving the parents the right to choose where their children attend and what kind of education they receive. My main problem with Vouchers as they are being promoted is that they exclude Home Schooled children. The parents of Home Schooled kids are paying taxes that get used to pay for education yet they receive no support for that education the way that parents who wish to send their kids to a Catholic run school do, which in my opinion is grossly unfair.

I myself though am for vouchers were they to include Home Schooling. If there is an acredited Madross that Muslim parents want to send their kid to they should get the fiscal benefit that they payed for. The only hang up will be when Tom Metzger or some other Racist nutcase get a bunch of White Supremisist teachers together and start a fully acredited school for educating kids in Racist beliefs...then you will see folks freak out about vouchers...

It seems to me though that somewhere along the way some folks have gotten the impression that kids are being "FORCED" to say the Pledge, which is not the case. I mentioned earlier that right here in San Diego county a case was tried in which a young lady had been punished for not participating in the saying of the pledge and she successfully sued the school district, setting precidence that the saying of the Pledge is voluntary and not compulsary.

[HLGStrider]

The only hang up will be when Tom Metzger or some other Racist nutcase get a bunch of White Supremisist teachers together and start a fully acredited school for educating kids in Racist beliefs...then you will see folks freak out about vouchers...

How many people would willingly send kids to this school??? It'd have no students and go out of business.

Homeschoolers are very afraid that with the Vouchers will come rules. "You have to do this and teach so much of this." We're a very independant minded breed.

[Rangerdave]

Originally posted by HLGStrider


How many people would willingly send kids to this school??? It'd have no students and go out of business.


If only that were so.
There is still quite a bit of irrational racist hate in the good ole US of A. In fact, in my home state of Texas the Klu Klux Klan has petitioned to open a charter school. Sadly, they have filed all the necessary paperwork and hired legally certified teachers and staff.
Never underestimate the power of ignorance in public policy.

RD

Just as a side not. Even if I were a pig-ignorant racist, I wouldn't send my kid to be educated by any institution that can not spell Clan correctly.

[Gloer]

Originally posted by HLGStrider


How many people would willingly send kids to this school??? It'd have no students and go out of business.

Homeschoolers are very afraid that with the Vouchers will come rules. "You have to do this and teach so much of this." We're a very independant minded breed.

What makes you think people are not racist?
I am sure Mr. Farrakhan would start his own school where they teach black men to stand up straight and despise the weak white people... rather than the public school where they learn drug dealing.
And then you'll have another million men marching in Washington in favour of racial segragation???:confused:

Ranger:

I thought it was: Ku Klux Klan , not Klu Klux Klan

What on earth does it mean anyhow?

[HLGStrider]

I am in a state that has very few racist problems. However, I believe that most people, call them the silent majority if you want, are ashamed of any prejudice they might have. Few people will openly admit it. The ones who do are just much louder and more dangerous.

It is human to divide into groups, I suppose. It is also human to say your group is better than other groups.

Personally, I don't think that the radical racists groups are big enough to start that much of a problem in any sort of private school system.The Klan members will send their kids to those schools, but they would've just lectured their kids about their beliefs at home so the only difference would be the amount of exposure.

This is why I believe that a LOT of parent involvement is required. Parents should know everything their children are learning.

[Rangerdave]

Originally posted by Gloer

Ranger:
I thought it was: Ku Klux Klan , not Klu Klux Klan


Might very well be. I will take your word for it. I really don't pay close attention to those guys.

RD

[HLGStrider]

Then you didn't hear the one about the one who was suing 'cause they wouldn't let him burn his cross in a public parking lot. He said it was religious disgrimination or something like that...

The real problem was a no burning ordinance...

[Gloer]

I also live in a state with few racist problem.
And why is that? Here is one angle:

I just read an article about how the SS Reichsfuhrer Heinrich Himmler was instructed to take a vacation in Finnland in july 1942. Himmler was the numbewr two in Nazi regime, in charge of the feared political SS and GESTAPO. He was responsible for resolving "die Judenfrage" so our government and military leaders were very anxious to hear that this man would be visiting Finnland in case he had other agenda than fishing - such as asking us to deport our jews to Germany.

Himmler was mainly occupied in vacationing and the finns that accompanied him were deliberately from the military leadership and university since Himmler had interest in myths and ethnic history. Both of these could easily avoid the race subject if brought up. The one time Himmler met the prime minister Rangell and asked about the jews he was icily answered that Finnland has no "jew question" after which Himmler did not continue the topic. I guess he knew that the jewish population was minute and could prehaps be delt with later.

The fact is that Finns have never understood anti-semitism: We never have really had jews living here. The few thousand we have have blended in.

[ReadWryt]

Then you didn't hear the one about the one who was suing 'cause they wouldn't let him burn his cross in a public parking lot. He said it was religious disgrimination or something like that...

The real problem was a no burning ordinance...



...actually if it were being tried as a First Ammendment violation then they would win. State, County or City ordinance, code and law are always "trumped" by Federal Law, especially Constitutional in nature. It's like the case of the practitioners of Santaria who were shut down by a city in Florida because they were cerimonially sacrificing Chickens on their property and it was thought to be a Health Code violation. If it's a matter of Religious Freedom the Federal Law will win out in the end, and the Santaria case was no exception, so they are free to perform their sacrifices as they are protected under the First Ammendment.

[HLGStrider]

Personally I think that if he were burning the cross on his own property he'd have every right to make a fool out of himself, but on public land he shouldn't be able to... Not as a matter of religion, but as a matter of that the clean up will be tax funded...:rolleyes:

My state is a very liberal state :rolleyes:. You can come here to commit suicide anytime you want.

Also our minority level is small. We do have a high Hispanic population, but there are very few problems involving that. There was one issue where a white man shot a hispanic man around here that I think did have some racial undertones (The story was that the Hispanic man was across the street having a party that the person thought was too noisy. The white guy went across the street with his shot gun, he strikes me as a real idiot from the paper reports, and the Hispanic men got out their guns to protect themselves. They did not apparently point them at the man or anything but he shot one of them and got off with a light charge for self-defense after appealing the first decision... My facts might be a little off. It's been a while and I don't have a subscription to the paper that was covering it. I just read it at my granparents from time to time).

Anyway, I know one family of Asian Americans, have had contact but don't really know any African Americans, and I know a few Hispanic Americans... I don't like to view any of them as Minorities. The biggest problem is language barriers around here.
I'm trying to learn Spanish.

My state was also extremely pro-Union during the Civil War for what it is worth. You can see it in the names around here (Grants Pass... Sherman...).

My grandmother is crazy about Isreal... I mean she loves them. Netenyahu... Neten... I can't spell it... is one of her favorite people. She watches any movie about the Holocaust she can. She snorts at anyone on TV who is anti-Isreal, and she is always trying to find Jewish branches in our family tree. It's sort of cool...

[Shadowfax]

I think this (http://www.satirewire.com/news/june02/pledge.shtml) might bring the situation into perspective...and provide a few laughs. And yes, HLG, OR is an incredibly Liberal state. Here in the countryside surrounding Eugene/Springfield, one has to be careful about telling people about indian artifacts or types of wildlife and plant life on your property. If any greengroups got wind of it, they can freeze your property so you cannot develop it AT ALL. Or are forced to sell it to the govt. I wish I was joking.

But I digress.

As a capitalist pigdog, I think that anytime you let the people decide what they are going to do in a situation instead of trying to rule thier lives, the problem usually sorts itself out. The main problem is that we as a nation are trying to eliminate all unpleasantness from stupid people's lives. Pain and suffering is a part of life. Get over it. Also, I do believe that there is NO clause about "separation of church and state" in the constitution, It only has that there can be no govt. sponsored religeon. People seem to forget that the wording is "freedom OF religeon" not "freedom FROM religeon"

[ReadWryt]

...well the really rediculous thing about this entire affair is that the mother of the girl for whom this man was bringing this case to trial has come out and reported that she is a Christian, her daughter, whom she has custody of, is being raised in a Christian household and she has no problem at all with saying the word "God" in any situation...so this clown who started this case isn't even being honest about WHY he started the case when he told the court it was on behalf of his daughter.

It's just another case of some yahoo nutcase extremist trying to force the taxpayers to shell out money on court costs to solve a "problem" that doesn't really exist...

[HLGStrider]

I think that anytime you let the people decide what they are going to do in a situation instead of trying to rule thier lives, the problem usually sorts itself out.

HERE HERE!!!

The property trouble stuff around my area happens because of the senic gorge act. We can get a tad bit socialistic at times...

I feel sorry for the poor little girl.

[Tar-Ancalime]

NO I"m not a commie! sorry that just had to come out. All your points are valid people. Is it not true that as a child (under 18) you are not a reciepent of such rights as free speech (by law of course,I don't agree with it. I really quite hate it but regardless)

[HLGStrider]

I think children are protected somewhat by the Constitution. However, I believe that a parent has a right to govern many of the child's actions unti they are of legal age... perhaps until the child is out of the house. After that the kid is his own person. Parental authority should not be nulified by any law... unless the parents are attempting to beat the kid to death, but I think that goes without saying.

However, school authority is different in someways. That is why I believe the parents should have a number of school options... so that the parental authority is the final say in what the child is learning or being forced to recite. If one signs up for a school that has a rule that says one has to say for the pledge of allegiance, one should say the pledge of allegiance and if he or she doesn't like it they should find another school.

[Ciryaher]

I don't think anyone should be forced to say the Pledge. In fact, unless you completely understand and accept what it means, I don't think you should be allowed to say it...but I'm ultra-patriotic and that's just me. I say it with pride and think about the words as I say them, so there's no problem here.

[Shadowfax]

I totally agree with that. I went to a Christian Elementary/Middle School, where we said the Bible and Christian flag pledges as well. At the beginning of each school year we had an in class discussion about the pledge, and what it meant, and that one was not forced to say what they did not want to, stuff like that. The teachers even encouraged us when we would say the pledge to different rhythms and tones of voice, etc. It really meant that we were thinking about the words, and not just running on auto pilot.

[Tar-Ancalime]

Ciry I totally agree with your post as well

[ReadWryt]

...but this whole thing isn't about anybody being forced to say the pledge...

[HLGStrider]

No, no one is.

That sounds like a good school Shadowfax.


My mother never wanted to pretend that we were doing it anything like the public schools. I memorized the pledge, but we never had a time where we said it together or anything.... anymore than we actually did our work at desks or had a set starting or stopping time.

[Aerin]

I totally agree with Ciryaher on this one.
I attended public high school last year, and every day, before class started, we had to at least stand while the principal recited the Pledge of Allegiance. I doubt there were more than two or three people in the entire bloomin' school who really knew what the pledge meant.
(Nearly all the teachers required us to stand for the pledge; not one required us to say it. Standing during the recitation was merely a form of respect for not only the flag, but for what it stands for.)

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America" - if you just take that much of the pledge, you have an extremely powerful sentiment.
Pledge: A solemn binding promise to do, give, or refrain from doing something
Allegiance: Loyalty or the obligation of loyalty, as to a nation, sovereign, or cause
To 'pledge allegiance' means more than just 'being an American'; it means to stay true to what the flag stands for - America - and to fight, if need be, for that country.

"And to the republic for which it stands" - that means you are pledging, or promising, yourself to the republic (A political order whose head of state is not a monarch and in modern times is usually a president) of the United States of America. In other words, you're not going to sell out on the U.S. when it becomes profitable to you.

"One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all" - that seems to sum up all the trouble, doesn't it? "Under God" is such an ill-used and mis-treated phrase lately.
That part of the pledge was not incorporated until the ... 1950s, I believe, and is, in my opinion, not necessary to the Pledge. (I'm not quite sure on the date; I heard of it from someone who was there at the time)

America was founded on the idea of freedom: freedom from religious persecution (that's why the Quakers came here in the 1600s), freedom from political persecution (yes, political prisoners of Great Britain were sent here for some time... until America declared its independence, so Britain had to send its wrong-doers somewhere else), and freedom from tyranny (King George).
The Constitution is arguably one of the most important papers in all of American history. The First Amendment, Free Speech, is extremely important and really separates America from so many other countries around the globe. According to the First Amendment, you can go out on a street corner, as long as you do not do any physical damage to anyone or anything, and preach as long as you want about whatever you want.
During the late Victorian era, the Suffragettes would go out and, quite literally, stand on their soapboxes and talk to the crowds. (That's where the expression "Get off your soapbox" comes from) They were using their right, guaranteed by law, of free speech.
Also, under the First Amendment, you can choose not to preach to the masses; it's your choice, and should always remain that way.

If a child in school is in any way uncomfortable, or does not wish to, participate in the rather monotonous droning of the Pledge, let them stay quiet. They should be made to stand to show proper respect for the symbolic flag, but they don't have to recite the Pledge. I would rather have two people say the Pledge, and really mean it, than have schools nation-wide of children droning on and wondering when they can sit down again.

For myself, I hadn't said the Pledge since I was in third grade, and for the first few weeks of school, mindlessly recited it with the class. One day, when I had nothing better to do, I sat and wondered about what the Pledge *really* means.
Once I understood it (and by no means do I fully understand it even now), I said the Pledge every day and really meant what I was saying. I am extremely proud of the country I live in, and I am glad that I have the opportunity to stand up in front of people and pledge *my* allegiance to the flag - whether or not I include "Under God" is not important.
If people do not want to add those two words in, then don't. It doesn't spoil anything by changing it that little, tiny, miniscule bit. :rolleyes:

Whew, rant mode off. Can anyone tell I consider myself a patriot? ;)

[HLGStrider]

I agree Aerin.

[Tar-Ancalime]

Dude that is what i've been trying to say....just couldn't find the right words.I mean if you at least say the pledge know what your saying or else because of your ignorance you have no right to pledge to what is a foreign idea to you

[Aerin]

Wow, I really have a talent for stopping a discussion...:eek:

[ReadWryt]

The point is that nobody is being forced to say the Pledge, and on the odd chance that they actually ARE LEGAL PRESIDENCE HAS BEEN SET FOR A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE SCHOOL. The Pledge is not compulsary, so all this talk about "under God" being unconstitutional is not a Constitutional issue, it's a CIVIL CASE. If you feel that you have been harmed by having to hear the words "under God" spoken 5 days a week in a classroom then you have a Civil lawsuit available to sue for damages...although I think the chances that you would even get a hearing are slim to nothing...

[Tar-Ancalime]

I know I mean what freak thinks their children even comprehend the pledges meaning at age 5 or 6. Today thier are misunderstood terms, free speech, sex, god, and love...I'm sure their are more but indeed I don't want to name them all

[HLGStrider]

Don't you believe that children should hear that it is good to respect our country and what it stands for? I'm not talking about blind patriotism, but our country was an experiment in a new form of government, a government based on freedoms rather than supression. Most children, at least before Sept 11th, had no respect for it whatsoever. I think the pledge should not be compulsory, but I think saying it is a good thing, even for the very young.

[Tar-Ancalime]

Although your points are most valid my friend. But if a child even knows of struggles taken a parents influence is just as crucial. If one grew up with only respect toward things and not of greater powers they naturally would hold only respect for things and not care of nations or gods

[HLGStrider]

I'm sorry, Tar... maybe it is just late, but I cannot make head or tails out of what you just posted...

[Tar-Ancalime]

-the behaviour of a child often mirrors the behaviour or likes of the parents.
-If the parents cared only of materiel things than the child will most likely grow to not appreciate things like nations or gods.

[HLGStrider]

You have a point also... I just like my point better. :D

[Tar-Ancalime]

well what can I say, my opionons my change but not the fact that i'm right!:D :D :D