PDA

View Full Version : The Latest Attempt to Ban the Pledge of Allegiance!


Cat's Pajamas
Nov 11th, 2006, 05:41 PM
California Students Ban Pledge of Allegiance
Leaders Do Not Want to Recite Loyalty to God or Government

LOS ANGELES (Nov. 11) - Student leaders at a California college have touched off a furor by banning the Pledge of Allegiance at their meetings, saying they see no reason to publicly swear loyalty to God and the U.S. government.


One Pledge... Under Attack
http://cdn.news.aol.com/aolnews_photos/0f/00/20061111093109990004http://cdn.news.aol.com/aolnews_photos/00/00/20061111093509990008


The move by Orange Coast College student trustees, the latest clash over patriotism and religion in American schools, has infuriated some of their classmates -- prompting one young woman to loudly recite the pledge in front of the board on Wednesday night in defiance of the rule.

"America is the one thing I'm passionate about and I can't let them take that away from me," 18-year-old political science major Christine Zoldos told Reuters.

"The fact that they have enough power to ban one of the most valued traditions in America is just horrible," Zoldos said, adding she would attend every board meeting to salute the flag.

The move was led by three recently elected student trustees, who ran for office wearing revolutionary-style berets and said they do not believe in publicly swearing an oath to the American flag and government at their school. One student trustee voted against the measure, which does not apply to other student groups or campus meetings.

The ban follows a 2002 ruling by a federal appeals court in San Francisco that said forcing school children to recite the pledge was unconstitutional because of the phrase "under God." The U.S. Supreme Court struck down the ruling on procedural grounds but left the door open for another challenge.

"That ('under God') part is sort of offensive to me," student trustee Jason Ball, who proposed the ban, told Reuters. "I am an atheist and a socialist, and if you know your history, you know that 'under God' was inserted during the McCarthy era and was directly designed to destroy my ideology."

Ball said the ban largely came about because the trustees didn't want to publicly vow loyalty to the American government before their meetings. "Loyalty ought to be something the government earns through performance, not through reciting a pledge," he said.

Martha Parham, a spokeswoman for the Coast Community College District, said her office had no standing on the student board and took no position on the flag salute ban.

"If their personal belief is that they don't want to say the Pledge of Allegiance, the district certainly isn't going to dictate what they do," she said.

More than 28,000 students attend the community college, located in conservative Orange County, California, south of Los Angeles.

Sophomore Chris Belanger, one of several students who attended the meeting to support keeping the pledge, waved an American flag and accused the board of "radical views and anti-Americanism."


11/10/06 07:34 EST

http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/california-students-ban-pledge-of/20061110073709990026?ncid=NWS00010000000001

--------------------

:rolleyes:

Rtael
Nov 11th, 2006, 05:47 PM
Sounds good to me.

Mother_Marjorie
Nov 11th, 2006, 05:53 PM
What some people fail to point out is that "under god" in the Pledge of Allegience wasn't added until the 1950's when the Republicans controlled both congress and the presidency.

I don't see any harm pledging allegience to a country, but there are so many different religions that "under God" should be removed from the Pledge.

SelesFan70
Nov 11th, 2006, 09:07 PM
I'm with Christine Zoldos on this one! :worship:

RVD
Nov 11th, 2006, 09:33 PM
Sounds good to me.Yep. I see no problem here. :shrug:

Chris 84
Nov 11th, 2006, 10:24 PM
Good for the Californian student leaders.

Steffica Greles
Nov 11th, 2006, 11:10 PM
It's an appalling thing to have to swear allegiance in a so-called democracy.

I love my country, Britain, like a parent loves its child. Even if I disapprove, even if I worry, it'll always be my home and my first concern.

But would I support a movement which took control of my country and then emotionally blackmailed me into kowtowing to them else I would be unBritish?

Never. I'm foremost an individual. Then I am British.

And I think that is how these students feel in this so-called nation which purports to assure all its citizens "freedom of conscience".

Wannabeknowitall
Nov 11th, 2006, 11:39 PM
I just find it to be as usual inconsistent.

Here in my hands is an American one dollar bill with the words IN GOD WE TRUST on the back of it, yet I never hear anyone ever going out of their way to protest getting rid of it.

I never see anyone saying they will not touch the American currency just because it has a possible backing of God behind it.

I doubt the atheist in this article would do it because although he does have a stance of not believing in a God, he's not retarded enough to be poor for that stance.

Once you get out of organized schools, the pledge of alliance for most people becomes obsolete.
Uber-Liberals are attacking the pledge of alliance because they have nothing to lose.

I hope they know Republicans love stories like this in the news for the next two years.
Yes let's take away everything that deals with God in school when it seems that most of these children need Jesus in the first place.
Yes. Smart.

Steffica Greles
Nov 11th, 2006, 11:49 PM
I just find it to be as usual inconsistent.

Here in my hands is an American one dollar bill with the words IN GOD WE TRUST on the back of it, yet I never hear anyone ever going out of their way to protest getting rid of it.



Yes, that's a good point.

But I think when spending money people tend to get lost in a world of their own :lol: . Some would say that invoking God on a bank note is a little inappropriate in any case.

But let me put it to you like this: if your country reverted to slavery, or a fascist junta seized power and re-defined what it is to be an American, would you support it?

You may argue that military coups and slavery are distinctly un-American in your constitution. But does a constitution obligating those without religious affiliation to swear allegiance to beliefs which are anathema to them not also smack of tyranny?

Scotso
Nov 11th, 2006, 11:52 PM
I don't see why it bothers people so much, really. If you don't like it, no one can FORCE you to say it.

Lord Nelson
Nov 12th, 2006, 12:50 AM
The leftists seem quite radical. Fortunately I was in an international school and did not have to endure such extremism (left wing).

Wannabeknowitall
Nov 12th, 2006, 12:59 AM
Yes, that's a good point.

But I think when spending money people tend to get lost in a world of their own :lol: . Some would say that invoking God on a bank note is a little inappropriate in any case.

But let me put it to you like this: if your country reverted to slavery, or a fascist junta seized power and re-defined what it is to be an American, would you support it?

You may argue that military coups and slavery are distinctly un-American in your constitution. But does a constitution obligating those without religious affiliation to swear allegiance to beliefs which are anathema to them not also smack of tyranny?

The Constitution is religious neutral at the same time whose to say that the word God can't be religiously neutral?
Even with atheism, to not believe in a diety means that the universe as we see it moves on its own accord (most atheist believe in the validity of science).
Wouldn't a validity of science in itself be a belief of some sort of cosmic force or energy, something that Jefferson himself considered the real explanation of God in the first place?

If that's the case wouldn't that mean it's not a smack of tyranny after all?

Scotso
Nov 12th, 2006, 03:15 AM
The leftists seem quite radical. Fortunately I was in an international school and did not have to endure such extremism (left wing).

I'm leftist and I'm not radical, so I would thank you to keep your stereotyping to yourself.

Scotso
Nov 12th, 2006, 03:16 AM
The only sad thing about the pledge is the "with liberty and justice for all" part :lol:

Lord Nelson
Nov 12th, 2006, 01:51 PM
I'm leftist and I'm not radical, so I would thank you to keep your stereotyping to yourself.
Did I say that all leftists were extemists? I said that there were left wing radicals just like there can be right wing extremists. I don't think that you are a radical. I actually agree with a lot of what you say on the Middle East. :)