Deleted. My mistake. What happened today.

[decay]

remember right after 9/11, if you aren't against the terrorists, you're for them?

jingo-ism. lowest common denominator. F.U.D.

[davester]

Although this is a hoax, I feel quite strongly that there should be a ban on the compulsory pledge of allegiance in schools. Such a pledge is a fixture of totalitarian societies, not free ones. I say this as an immigrant who was forced to say this pledge (and chastised for complaining) when I first arrived in the US (and was not an american citizen at the time).

[Mr Downtown]

Not just schoolchildren. On a couple of occasions I've found myself in a bit of a pickle when a group unexpectedly begins its meeting—where I'm the featured speaker—with the Pledge of Allegiance.

[Ted King]

davester wrote:
Although this is a hoax, I feel quite strongly that there should be a ban on the compulsory pledge of allegiance in schools. Such a pledge is a fixture of totalitarian societies, not free ones. I say this as an immigrant who was forced to say this pledge (and chastised for complaining) when I first arrived in the US (and was not an american citizen at the time).

Well, that's only because your genetic programming and nurturing didn't predispose you to authoritarianism. Authoritarians love this shit. Education...indoctrination... what's the difference.

The Supreme Court has ruled that no one can be compelled to say the pledge. As dense as the Court can be sometimes, even they saw the obvious contradiction in forcing someone to pledge allegiance to a symbol of freedom of choice (liberty and justice for all). Teachers usually don't clearly inform the students that they have the option not to say the pledge and some teachers ignore the Supreme Court ruling. But probably the biggest stinger is the social/peer pressure to conform to what feels like an important and even sacred (under god) thing. Combine peer pressure and teacher expectations of compliance and it feels really oppressive - just what authoritarians love.

[J Marston]

The decision about the pledge is Barnette v. West Virginia. It's well worth reading, and useful synopsis is here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Vir...._Barnette.

Justice Jackson said, paraphrasing here, that the most fundamental element of the constitution is that no official can prescribe what is orthodox in political, moral, religious opinion. And one should remember that this was decided in 1943, when the desire for national uniformity ran very high.

Curiously, a lot of this stuff does not apply to immigrants (sorry davester) who have no "right" to be here, even if they came under a quota or visa program, and for whom expulsion is not considered a criminal punishment. Thus they do not qualify for legal or constitutional protections in immigration hearings--for instance, they have no Miranda rights. (An implication of this is that Trump's idea of banning Muslims, if passed by the legislature, would probably be upheld as legal.)

[Lux Interior]

Too bad. I would have supported the ban.

[Ted King]

J Marston wrote:
The decision about the pledge is Barnette v. West Virginia. It's well worth reading, and useful synopsis is here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Vir...._Barnette.

Justice Jackson said, paraphrasing here, that the most fundamental element of the constitution is that no official can prescribe what is orthodox in political, moral, religious opinion. And one should remember that this was decided in 1943, when the desire for national uniformity ran very high.

Thanks for the link. This is straying way off topic, but I found this interesting:

Frankfurter said that the court was overstepping its bounds in striking down the West Virginia law. He said, too, that freedom of religion did not allow individuals to break laws simply because of religious conscience. Frankfurter argued that, "Otherwise each individual could set up his own censor against obedience to laws conscientiously deemed for the public good by those whose business it is to make laws."

[cbelt3]

Kudos to samintx for continuing to be open minded and willing to admit being snookered. It happens to all of us at one time or another. The real integrity test is willingness to hear truth, recognize it, and then admit to it.

:hail:

[samintx]

cbelt3 wrote:
Kudos to samintx for continuing to be open minded and willing to admit being snookered. It happens to all of us at one time or another. The real integrity test is willingness to hear truth, recognize it, and then admit to it.

:hail:

I don't think they believed me. I went to my Republican Women's meeting today because the Sheriff was speaking. First thing: 3 women started talking about this Obama story. I said "ladies it is a hoax" I had to repeat it 3 times and I don't think one lady believed me. I tried to explain but I'm not sure I convinced them. Like the fake Hillary's health videos. Don't think my friend is still convinced.!:oldfogette:

[Speedy]

samintx wrote: I don't think they believed me. I went to my Republican Women's meeting today because the Sheriff was speaking. First thing: 3 women started talking about this Obama story. I said "ladies it is a hoax" I had to repeat it 3 times and I don't think one lady believed me. I tried to explain but I'm not sure I convinced them. Like the fake Hillary's health videos. Don't think my friend is still convinced.!:oldfogette:

I'm proud of you for putting it on the line at your meeting! (Please don't take that as me being patronizing.)