House Blocks Court on Pledge of Allegiance Ruling

[michaeledward]

I do not accept that easy way out. While the Republican National Committee can be expected to do and say anything to get its clients re-elected (see the thread on Embarrassing statements), I expect more than that from MisterMike.

MisterMike is generally a thoughtful libertarian. If he chooses, he is able to articulate his positions.

In this instance, he just threw out this outrageous statement to pick a fight. Methinks it is time for him to 'Put Up or Shut Up'.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Good ABC piece--I particularly liked:

"His hands are very soft," she said of Bush's. "He must use some powerful lotion."

At another campaign stop, as Bush spoke at a park in Racine, Wis., a protester revealed a t-shirt with the word, "LIAR," and was escorted from the crowd.

A group led by conservative activist Gary Bauer is launching a television advertising campaign against John Kerry in Pennsylvania and Michigan to criticize his stand on gay marriage."

Uh, is it just me...?

 

[Marginal]

I confess. I just wanted an excuse (however flimsy) to post that article. The winding down into incoherancy... The version my local paper ran lacked that dash of inanity (add an s there if you please.)

 

[qizmoduis]

Here we go again;


Guys, I'm not a full Christian, and I still think they shouldn't even bring it up. Why does anybody care whether "Under God" is in the pledge or not? "Under God" can mean many things. It can mean the universal force or something.

Who cares whether we have the "Under God" part or not. Is it killing anyone? Is it destroying our society? Should we even care? Honestly I couldn't care less, however I think this is such a waste of time to even bring up.

God as a "universal force or something" was certainly not how the members of Congress intended the phrase to be used when they added it into the pledge back in the red-scare days.

Not only that, but the vast majority of those who support the phrase in the pledge don't view it that way either.

If it can have so many meanings, why have it in the first place? Especially since it wasn't in the original.

My question about this is: Where did Congress get the authority to do this? Such authority is explicitly denied to them in the First Amendment, so where did it come from? Why do congresscritters feel that the Constitution can be freely ignored whenever they need a few votes?

 

[Nightingale]

MT MOD NOTE-

Just a general note to thread participants: Please try to stay on topic.

Thanks!

-Nightingale-
MT MODERATOR

 

[loki09789]

When did they ever? The thing's mainly targeted at kids, and last I checked, most kids aren't paying attention to the words, they're just repeating what teacher says. They're not actually swearing fealty to the US every working day.

And, legally, if someone tried to hold a minor to that oath they couldn't because minors can not enter into contractual agreements but are technically represented by their parents or guardians....

I don't mind the rote memorization thing as a way of building a foundation of civic practices (demonstrating at least respect if not reverence for the country symbollically through the flag). The problem IMO is that most people understand the letter or technical outline of the constitution and the elementary level of concept and application that they learned in school (if that much). Basically they understand it to the level of childrens tales (remember "Schoolhouse Rock" 'I'm just a bill...'?) much like the majority of people stop studying their faith beyond the 'bible school' level of understanding....

As far as politics, I am a conceptualist and am probably in the zone of 'elementary level' comprehension of the current event trends myself. On this issue, I can understand the idea of political precedence with the move, though. This kind of thing has happend before though. It will happen again. It will be reversed, modified, flipped back around..... all in time.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Maybe rather than push a 'loyalty oath' down our throats, they should spend some time teaching people why they should care. Maybe a look at how the country was formed, why it was formed, who were the founding fathers, and just what the constitution really says would help.

Then again, maybe those arguing about this pledge could educate themselves more on it's history.
http://history.vineyard.net/pledge.htm

'I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.'
http://pledgeqanda.com/

Of course, we can always return to the real original, if this "God" thing is such a big deal.

When Bellamy wrote his Pledge in August, 1892, he was well aware of the Balch Pledge. In 1892 George T. Balch was the most influential person in the development of a patriotic flag ritual for the classroom. He was a New York City auditor and had developed a patriotic verbal flag salute and ritual, the first verbal flag salute used in American public schools. The students in his New York Public Schools gave his "American Patriotic Salute" as follows: students touched first their foreheads, then their hearts, reciting, "We give our Heads - and our Hearts -to God and our Country." Then with a right arm outstretched and palms down in the direction of the flag, they competed the salute"One Country! One Language! One Flag!"

 

[loki09789]

Maybe rather than push a 'loyalty oath' down our throats, they should spend some time teaching people why they should care. Maybe a look at how the country was formed, why it was formed, who were the founding fathers, and just what the constitution really says would help.

.

I think that is the point of education/social studies and the mission of at least NYS (though I know other states talk about it too) with the pubic school goal of developing citizenship in the students. Even in my ELA classes I talk about the language arts skills as being able to recognize and evaluate how people are trying to bend you to their will (written or spoken) and how you are trying to bend people to your will.

That means comprehending the message, interpretting its meaning, evaluating it based on your own past knowledge and research (if time allows) and then forming your own opinion of agreement/disagreement with reasons.

If, developmentally and/or socially, students don't demonstrate a complete understanding or appreciation for political education/ramifications of knowing how it works - quite possibly it is more than a 'they' issue as a 'we' issue.

Athletes and movie stars are more 'believealbe' to the masses even if they are less educated or making less valid points. There is a constant mistrust of the motives, character or decisions of polititians from the adults in a student's life. How are they suppose to develop any real interest or engagement if the media/social message is 'why bother, it's all corrupt anyway?' MTV has had a long history of trying to promote political awareness/involvement to youth. Nickleodeon and other children friendly networks/shows have tried to do the same. Unfortunately, it isn't going to work if the adult examples around them continue to sit in the dark and complain while they are hold a candle and the match....

It is a we issue. That is why I am always pushing the idea that reform, criticism and activism if FINE as long as the goal is improvement and social/philosophical change that is affects the 'general welfare' (which has to be redefined constantly as the society changes), but constantly bucking/bashing the establishment with no direction or goal of improvement just leads to apathy. I hear it all the time from students. Part of it is that they are teens and self absorbed (part of the age) and part of it is that they don't really see participation as a worthwhile effort (also partly because of the age but another contributor is the adult example).

 

[rmcrobertson]

Given the full history of the Pledge, of which I was not aware, it's good to see that it IS always worse than I think it is.

I'm afraid that I reject the idea that it's wrong to criticize without Having A Plan. In the first place, a big reason teenagers are so apathetic is our society's systematically lying to them throughout their lives.

In the second--here's a plan. Stop lying. Teach real history. From time to time, remind kids that loyalty only to country and wealth is not good for you.

Hell, teach 'em what a, "granfalloon," is.

 

[loki09789]

Given the full history of the Pledge, of which I was not aware, it's good to see that it IS always worse than I think it is.

I'm afraid that I reject the idea that it's wrong to criticize without Having A Plan. In the first place, a big reason teenagers are so apathetic is our society's systematically lying to them throughout their lives.

In the second--here's a plan. Stop lying. Teach real history. From time to time, remind kids that loyalty only to country and wealth is not good for you.

Hell, teach 'em what a, "granfalloon," is.

I think there has always been some version of the "American Dream" or what ever "XYZ Dream" idea that people have as youths. Then the reality hits and you start blaming 'society' for lying to you about something. Well, maybe it was because you only heard what you wanted to as a teen (Not me though, I was PERFECT ). Maybe it was because you 'knew everything' but really only 'knew about it' and didnt really 'know it' as well as you thought..... reality bites when it slaps you in the face, but do you really have to blame 'society' since we are all part of it? I don't think I lie to my son or students. I tell them the way it is to the best of my ability and as appropriately as possible (the 'deliver' carries it's own message after all).

There is a point where it comes down to "Quite your crying and do something about it" ... or just sit back and point the finger forgetting to include yourself in that equation as well.

 

[someguy]

I had to stand for the pledge the national anthem and a moment of silence. So that was about 5 minutes a day. 180 days are in the school year. 12 grades. Any one want to do the mat on time spent not being educated.
180 hours of my life gone.
Of course I missed plenty of days for being sick and what not. Come to think of it I didn't do most of that when I was in the north but I know people who have spent there entire lives in a southern city. Still there aren't too many people who made it through school never being sick.
The main point of this rambling is that I lost a lot of time doing those things to teach me to be patriotic. I'm not really all of that patriotic because of them though. Actually it probably harmed me in that way more than anything else once I reached middle school and high school.
I'm very apathetic but I'm not sure if it is because of society. Hmm maybe I should figure out why I'm apathetic about so much. Nah don't care so I won't

 

[Feisty Mouse]

If we're lucky, students will come away with a little sense of pride in their Flag, and the Republic for which it stands. I know that's not too popular with the left these days.

Well, MisterMike, I think you would consider me left-of-center, and so far I've been the most ravingly fanatical (at least in this thread) about treating the flag with respect and showing it honor.

Telling people they have to mention GOD in the pledge is something different.

 

[rmcrobertson]

The most passionate, brilliant defenses of this country and its best traditions I've ever heard have ALL come from "the left," whatever the hell that means these days. Kerry, Mario Cuomo, Jimmy Carter, Clinton, the Kennedys, Mario Savio...there's a long tradition there, and a good one.

And personally, I like Laurie Anderson's discussion of the national anthem...hey, did you know we have the ONLY anthem that's just a bunch of questions? What is that over there? Can you see that?

I also recommend the last song on her, "Strange Angels," album...or David Byrne's "We're on the Road to Nowhere."


"Karen Coyle, 1999
One of the basic concepts of Bokononism, the secretive island religion of Kurt Vonnegut's "Cat's Cradle," is that of a granfalloon. A granfalloon is a recognized grouping of people that, underneath it all, has no real meaning. The prototypical granfaloon in Vonnegut's book is Hoosiers: the main character of the book finds himself journeying to an island nation in the company of fellow Indianans, but other than the fact that they hail from the same state they have no significance in each other's lives.

The opposite of a granfalloon, or at least one alternative, is the karass. These are the people whose lives are entwined in yours in mysterious yet profound ways. Often they are not part of any of your more obvious granfalloons, but in the end it is their presence on this earth that has great influence of the direction of your own life. Recognizing members of your karass is not an easy thing and some you may never identify, but part of the spiritual mission of Bokononists is to celebrate their karass."

 

[loki09789]

Uh...our society IS lying to kids. Moreover, a lot of what's taught in schools is big fat lies.

"Abstinence-only," sex ed is a beautiful illustration. Why do we pretend to teach kids about sex, then teach them stuff that they know perfectly well is lies? because of political pressure from the right wing and fundamentalist Protestants.

One way to stop lying--and call me crazy, but while I agree with everything justv said about education, I nonetheless think that the foundation of teaching is, TELL NO LIES--is to dump the silly Pledge, which traces back to what sure as hell looks like a home-grown version of Nazism.

Or, again, we could teach the Pledge in terms of its original intent, as propganda for the UN.

Well considering that you are at the higher end of the educational lie spectrum are you including yourself as part of this institutional lie?

Are you distinguishing between 'lie' and 'socialization' or 'cultural indoctrination?'

We can lay out facts and discuss interpretations, trends, patterns and such but to tell me that your interpretation of 'truth' and 'lie' is THE WAY is pretty oppressive in its own right.

I believe in the principles/values and ideals, I promote questioning with the goal of 'leaving it better than you found it' not so that people stop at the emotional point of 'what is the point, it all sucks anyway'.....

where am I lieing to my students, son, or myself?

There is also the age appropriateness of information or the goal/purpose of education that drive content.

The purpose of public education, simplified for this discussion, is to educate children in citizenship/civic responsibility and academic skills that they can use as a foundation to jump into work or college (college more than work now a days).

Educational science covers developmental issues about what a person can generally (though not perfectly accurate by any means) handle at certain ages/grades and the content, skills and volume are built around that idea along with the goal of skills and citizenship.

Where is the lie?

There are parts of history or applications of academics where certain details that are not included because of time limits, developmental ability to absorb/use the information or skill. If something, fact or skill or scenario, isn't going to accomplish the skill or citizenship goal (that does include who to promote and generate personal opinion and productively disagree with the establishment) then it isn't included. It isn't a lie so much as out of alignment with the goal at hand. I wouldn't spend time during martial arts class talking about the politics, personal history (dirty secrets/gossip...) and financial decisions of my instructors/leaders within the organization because the goal/purpose is to teach martial arts. How is that lying to my students there?

If the idea is to build critical thinking skills (in my case) that wouldn't be a lie because I am using current even issues, literature and their own daily experiences to draw examples from for how that skill applies...

I would stay that introducing students to higher education with the tone, message and philosophical position that "your previous teachers all lied to you. The educational system lied to you...but I will show you the truth..." is setting up a pretty strange dynamic for the promotion of 'self directed' and 'self reliant' application of critical thinking.

It isn't so much lieing as 'culturalization' which is what happens in any group orientation/initiation process - whether small or large, classroom or city/state.
If you don't like the 'culture' (which I don't about parts and pieces of it) then you have to form your own way on those things. If it is a really big problem in your opinion, then you can play activist and lobby, vote and support your cause.

I think the real 'lie' is when critics of education form an opinion about education first and then end up proving that opinion with their biased research instead of being truly scientific and observing and forming opinions based on the total package and trends wholistically.

There is the personal motive of 'Publish or Perish' in Academia that can sneak into a persons motives at times....

 

[Nightingale]

MT MOD NOTE:

Get this thread back on topic or I'm locking it. The topic is the House attempting to block the Supreme Court from ruling on the Pledge.

-Nightingale-
MT MODERATOR

 

[loki09789]

MT MOD NOTE:

Get this thread back on topic or I'm locking it. The topic is the House attempting to block the Supreme Court from ruling on the Pledge.

-Nightingale-
MT MODERATOR

I would be glad if you could either tell me how or just split the thread at the tangent point. It is an interesting discussion, but, as you said, off topic.

 

[rmcrobertson]

My point is that the Pledge--and a lot of the education in history, civics, etc. that American students get--rests on some fundamental lies.

To me, the reason the House carried out such a silly vote (which, incidentally, violates the very principles and rules of American government and the separation of powers that they taught me about in school) boils down to trying to protect basic myths about this country and its history.

In other words, they're trying to put a fairy tale beyond question.