The W
Views: 99976836
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
24.10.07 0303
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - School Pledge Unconstitutional. . . Again Register and log in to post!
Pages: Prev 1 2(236 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (25 total)
BigSteve
Pepperoni
Level: 64

Posts: 782/1091
EXP: 2205062
For next: 9047

Since: 23.7.04
From: Baltimore, MD

Since last post: 2842 days
Last activity: 2570 days
#21 Posted on 19.9.05 2045.33
Reposted on: 19.9.12 2046.05
    Originally posted by Messenoir
    They took great pains to push the concept of freedom of religion, and despite the sheeplike "but that's not freedom from religion" mantras, forcing a kid to sit in a required classroom while those around them chant "one nation under God" is the same as having a preacher in the classrom promoting Christianity while saying kids in the classrom aren't required to be Christian.


It is, except for the fact that it's completely different. If children hear their classmates say "under god" for a split second, it really isn't at all like being preached to by a preacher.

So far, I've heard that kids can't forced to say the pledge because it coerces a religious oath out of them, they can't just have the option of the not saying it because it's like being preached to by a preacher, and they can't have the option to leave the room because that would be ostracizing them from their classmates. This seems unreasonable.

And besides all of that, "under god" is as much a historical description of this country as it is a testimony of one's own faith.

    Originally posted by spf
    An agent of the government, in this case a publically funded school, has ruled requiring students using their facilities to say the pledge of allegiance. Therefore, by definition, the government is doing this, as the public school system is an agent of the government.


And again, no one is forced to say anything. Would it be permissible for schools to lead students in singing God Bless America?




(edited by BigSteve on 19.9.05 2204)
wmatistic
Andouille
Level: 87

Posts: 191/2171
EXP: 6330649
For next: 62150

Since: 2.2.04
From: Austin, TX

Since last post: 50 days
Last activity: 13 hours
AIM:  
#22 Posted on 20.9.05 0724.38
Reposted on: 20.9.12 0724.41
    Originally posted by BigSteve
    It is, except for the fact that it's completely different. If children hear their classmates say "under god" for a split second, it really isn't at all like being preached to by a preacher.

    So far, I've heard that kids can't forced to say the pledge because it coerces a religious oath out of them, they can't just have the option of the not saying it because it's like being preached to by a preacher, and they can't have the option to leave the room because that would be ostracizing them from their classmates. This seems unreasonable.



Apparently you didn't read my earlier post where I said that a kid simply not saying it can lead to problems as well. What's unreasonable is that you can't understand even a little bit that having those words in there does in fact cause problems and removing them causes no one any pain. How about if they remove it and if your family is religious you can teach your kid to throw in those words on his/her own.

It's really ridiculous that anyone would put forth this "why can't the kid just not say those words" theory. There is ZERO good reason why a kid should be put in that position in the first place. What do you care more about, that kid and the position you are putting him/her in, or your God? The answer should damn well be that kid.
CTX
Italian
Level: 34

Posts: 71/240
EXP: 250750
For next: 2904

Since: 11.5.02

Since last post: 35 days
Last activity: 1 day
#23 Posted on 20.9.05 1337.40
Reposted on: 20.9.12 1338.37
Not being from the US this whole thing seems utterly ridiculous.

I remember when I first started school and they always made us say a prayer before lunch. Most of us didn't believe in god, but we still said the prayer just because it's what we were asked to do. It didn't cause some great controversy or offend anyone. It was just a case of doing what the teacher told us to.

At the end of every term they would take us to the local church down the road (this was just a normal school, no religious connections whatsoever despite what it sounds like) to sit through some boring service, but again it was just something that was part of school at the time. I don't know one person to this day in real life who really believes in any kind of god, so it obviously didn't work properly if they were trying to brainwash us into believing in something.

Seriously, to any kids who don't care about religion it's just like being asked to read out something from the blackboard. It's not something they even pay attention to. These people who complain about the whole thing are just being awkward for the sake of being awkward. It's a two second part of a speech that nobody even pays attention to unless they're looking to cause trouble.

The idea that any kid is put in a position of harm just because he's forced to say "under god", whether there's a law or not, is laughable.
BigSteve
Pepperoni
Level: 64

Posts: 783/1091
EXP: 2205062
For next: 9047

Since: 23.7.04
From: Baltimore, MD

Since last post: 2842 days
Last activity: 2570 days
#24 Posted on 20.9.05 1355.16
Reposted on: 20.9.12 1355.33

    Apparently you didn't read my earlier post where I said that a kid simply not saying it can lead to problems as well. What's unreasonable is that you can't understand even a little bit that having those words in there does in fact cause problems and removing them causes no one any pain. How about if they remove it and if your family is religious you can teach your kid to throw in those words on his/her own.

    It's really ridiculous that anyone would put forth this "why can't the kid just not say those words" theory. There is ZERO good reason why a kid should be put in that position in the first place. What do you care more about, that kid and the position you are putting him/her in, or your God? The answer should damn well be that kid.


You missed my point. Whether or not it's good policy to lead students in reciting the pledge is not the issue I'm looking at right now. Never having went to public school and not having any children in a public school, I'm really not affected by whether or not they do or do not say the pledge.

I am concerned by a judicial ruling that says they can't say the pledge. I was trying to point out that I didn't think it was unconstituional given there was no requirement for anyone to recite any part of the pledge and therefore no requirement to take part in a "religious oath". Constitutionality isn't determined by hurt feelings or policy preferences (or at least, it shouldn't be) so the idea that this would theoretically lead to some sort of embarrassment if a student stands and doesn't recite the pledge should be irrelevant to the ruling.

(And with that I think I should probably back slowly away from the thread and agree to disagree with everyone since I've said more than my piece).

(edited by BigSteve on 20.9.05 1456)
EddieBurkett
Boudin blanc
Level: 92

Posts: 1233/2315
EXP: 7617454
For next: 139513

Since: 3.1.02
From: GA in person, NJ in heart

Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 2 hours
#25 Posted on 20.9.05 1726.12
Reposted on: 20.9.12 1726.41
    Originally posted by wmatistic
    What's unreasonable is that you can't understand even a little bit that having those words in there does in fact cause problems and removing them causes no one any pain.


If removing them caused no one any pain, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Clearly some people are very sensitive to the concept of striking those words from the Pledge.


    Originally posted by wmatistic
    What do you care more about, that kid and the position you are putting him/her in, or your God? The answer should damn well be that kid.


I would expect that someone who cared more about their God would believe that the answer should damn well be that God. You can't apply your values (and logic) to the problem, because the people coming from the other side have their own values (and logic), and that difference is the fundamental cause of all this.

    Originally posted by CTX
    Seriously, to any kids who don't care about religion it's just like being asked to read out something from the blackboard. . . The idea that any kid is put in a position of harm just because he's forced to say "under god", whether there's a law or not, is laughable.


I agree with your whole post except this part. The problem is that there are kids that do care about religion (or a lack thereof), and for that small percentage, saying "under God" can be painful.
ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE
Pages: Prev 1 2Thread ahead: Unions
Next thread: Tornado in St. Paul?
Previous thread: Cindy Sheehan on NOLA
(236 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - School Pledge Unconstitutional. . . AgainRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.182 seconds.