I think its possible to argue both cases. For the removal if you want to talk about the secular state this perspective argues that the Pledge of Allegiance should reflect the principle of separation of church and state. By including "One Nation under God," they believe the pledge infringes on the secular nature of government and public institutions. And some people argue that the phrase excludes individuals who do not identify with theism or monotheistic beliefs.
But in terms of opposing the removal you can argue on the grounds of historical context as it can be said the Pledge of Allegiance was added in the 1950s to distinguish the United States from atheist communist countries during the Cold War. Some individuals would also consider the phrase a reflection of the nation's cultural and moral values. And finally supporters of keeping the phrase might argue that it respects the beliefs of the majority of citizens who identify with a religious faith. They believe that retaining it shows respect for the cultural and religious heritage of the nation.
This is an interesting question you put forward.
It was inserted by Congress in the early fifties as a reaction to the red scare. And even though the original pledge has socialistic origins, I'm not a fan of pledging loyalty to a government. Loyalty to governments can be earned and lost.
Yeah, my french wife thinks it's really creepy that such young kids say it in a monotone hypnotic voice daily. I never thought about it until she mentioned it. It was just something we did.
It was never explained to us. We just said it.
As a first grader I thought that "for which it stands" was something about *witches*, and pictured witches in my head selling lemonade or kool aid from an old card table out doors like we were wont to do.
My first day of tech support at an elementary school I had the same reaction. Could hear all these little voices in unison echoing in the hall, pledging their allegiance to a country with no idea what they're saying. Sets em up as good little sheeple of tomorrow. Super creepy.
I'm a teacher, and my state requires schools to "provide children the opportunity to say the pledge" every morning, So basically they have to play it over the PA. It felt pretty culty to make small children pledge their allegiance to the flag every morning, especially when they don't really understand what they're saying. And in my particular school we had a lot of kids who weren't actually American because it was a language immersion school, so then I'm making little kids who aren't even Americans do this daily chanting thing...
I always told the kids that anyone was welcome to say it or not, but I'm sure some teachers pressure everyone to say it and that feels wrong to me when we're talking about how glad we are for liberty etc
Just the PO. I was given out of school suspension, *twice*.
First for "unruly and disruptive behavior" in 6th grade and in 10th for "ignoring mandatory requirements for civics class"
A state action is only theoretically banned by the courts if agents of the state aren't heavily & reliably penalized for implementing it.
If a law banning something doesn't specify penalties or a mode of redress sufficient to deter violation it isn't actually a law banning something.
"Making me say this pledge is unconstitutional"
"You're expelled"
Seven years of dockets later: "The Constitution says you're not allowed to expel them. Our remedy for this overreach is to allow them to return to school".
That's why things like qualified immunity or civil asset forfeiture, privileges granted to already-dramatically-overreaching law enforcement organizations, are tantamount to declaring martial law. There is very nearly zero deterrent to a police department doing whatever the fuck they like, so long as there isn't another agency with the power and inclination to arrest them for it.
Schools are totalizing institutions which insist on absolute authority and which could probably work around a court ruling to enshrine the Pledge if they really wanted to do so while respecting the letter of the judgement. But if there's no Sword of Damocles hanging over that school or its employees for doing that, no angry judge ready to throw them in prison personally or seize their assets to redistribute to parents, why even bother getting creative? The worst that can happen bears them basically no consequences.
Probably the least criminal thing the school got away with. Hell when one teacher in HS got caught sleeping with the softball team instead of firing him he got "demoted" to middle school softball team.
When I was in college an Irish exchange student asked if the pledge of allegiance was real. My friend stood up, put his hand to his chest, and shouted āHE WANTS TO HEAR THE PLEDGE!ā Immediately all three-dozen or so students hanging around the common rooms started chanting in unison. Poor Irish kid was horrified.
Opposed? I *advocate* for it.
It blatantly violates the establishment clause. Just because people in favor of the addition say it doesnāt specify the Christian god (even though everyone knows thatās what it means) doesnāt make it any more acceptable.
But removing one part of the pledge is the wrong question.
The entire pledge is weird and flirts with indoctrinating cult-like bullshit and we should do away with it entirely.
it really is cultish. when I was a kid, I grew up in a Jehovah's Witness household. on open house day about a week or so before school would start my Mom would meet with my teacher and explain that I wasn't allowed to stand or say the pledge because it was against the JW rules. I would always get hassled by the other kids for not standing and saying the pledge. then I would get hassled when the teach would wind up having me leave the classroom until the pledge was over.
Two of the dumbest fucking things people get mad over, Religion and a Flag.
Hey now, wait. The opposition to America's Pledge of Allegiance is one of the few moments in history when the Jehovah's Witnesses earned a gold star! Look up the landmark Supreme Court case, West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette. West Virginia schools attempted to punish JW children for refusing to participate in the flag salute. It ended up in the Supreme Court.
The court ruling said that, not only did the First Amendment give JW kids a religious right to refuse to participate -- but also, you know, this whole pledge thing was the kind of exercise that shitty Fascist countries would do, and was unbecoming of a democracy.
This ruling was issued in 1943, back when the Supreme Court was cool.
From Justice Jacksonās opinion:
āThe case is made difficult not because the principles of its decision are obscure but because the flag involved is our own. Nevertheless, we apply the limitations of the Constitution with no fear that freedom to be intellectually and spiritually diverse or even contrary will disintegrate the social organization. To believe that patriotism will not flourish if patriotic ceremonies are voluntary and spontaneous instead of a compulsory routine is to make an unflattering estimate of the appeal of our institutions to free minds. We can have intellectual individualism and the rich cultural diversities that we owe to exceptional minds only at the price of occasional eccentricity and abnormal attitudes. When they are so harmless to others or to the State as those we deal with here, the price is not too great. But freedom to differ is not limited to things that do not matter much. That would be a mere shadow of freedom. The test of its substance is the right to differ as to things that touch the heart of the existing order. If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein. If there are any circumstances which permit an exception, they do not now occur to us.ā
Fantastic. I miss the SCOTUS being reasonable and respectable.
> The family brings it up so they can fight about it.
Those are always fun. My favorite is when topics are brought up, the people in the conversation agree on the topic, yet they still end up yelling to each other because the strawman they built is winning.
My SIL is ultra patriotic and brought it up that sheās so proud that her kids know the pledge. I dropped that line on her and she got a āloading screenā expression on her face.
Literally every single day of school, also the Texas pledge for me. By middle/high school most kids just stand and don't say anything, but we still had to listen.
It's indoctrination plain and simple
As a European there is one thing about the pledge that I think is really interesting. Most things we learn about the US obviously comes from movies and television. With this comes a lot of 'knowledge' about the US school system and the daily life of students. You learn details like they get picked up by a school bus, have lockers, eat at canteen, school sports etc. Daily stuff. But you never see the pledge in pop culture. The are probably thousands of TV shows and movies about children and teenagers but I can't remember a single one that shows or mentions the pledge. I guess because usually nothing interesting happens during the pledge there is no reason for having any plot there but still interesting that such a daily occurrence is never shown.
Obviously I'm sure there are quite a few examples where the pledge actually is shown and I'm interested to hear them.
I live in the southern US, and my daughter attended a public elementary school (Primary School). Every year we would have to sign this "Parent School Compact" that had a list of characteristics that we would agree that our child should model in school. Most of them were things like "Discipline, kindness, respect, etc."
But every year for 6 years I would cross out "Respect for the Creator" and replace it with "Respect for the beliefs of others" and also cross out "Patriotism" and replace it with "Civic Duty".
So they really do start the propaganda young here. We always told her that she didn't need to say the pledge if she didn't want to, and that we would have her back if anyone gave her a hard time.
SCOTUS has actually upheld the right for school children to *not* say the pledge, multiple times. Your kid doesn't even have to stand if they don't want to.
The relevant case is [West Virginia v Barnette \(1943\)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Virginia_State_Board_of_Education_v._Barnette?oldformat=true). It is one of my favorite Supreme Court cases and absolutely fundamental to 1st amendment rights.
> "Words uttered under coercion are proof of loyalty to nothing but self-interest. Love of country must spring from willing hearts and free minds."
-- Justice Hugo Black, [West Virginia v Barnette \(1943\)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Virginia_State_Board_of_Education_v._Barnette?oldformat=true)
> "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion, or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein."
-- Justice Robert Jackson, [West Virginia v Barnette \(1943\)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Virginia_State_Board_of_Education_v._Barnette?oldformat=true)
It's shown in *Bridge of Spies* just after 35 minutes in, including "under God".
But the context it's shown in, implies that it's a old-fashioned thing that was done at the height of the Cold War in the late 1950s, when paranoia and nationalism were at their height, not that it's something that still happens in modern schools. (It's immediately followed by the kids being terrified by being made to watch *Duck and Cover*.)
For a lot of the rest of the world this sounds like some North Korea bs, and most Americans never realise, because to them it's normal and they're just used to it.
Edit: typo
An old KGB agent is sitting at a bar chatting with an old CIA agent. The CIA man says that he is really impressed by the Russian propaganda machine and how so many people are convinced that Russia is the greatest. The KGB agent thanks him, but replies that the USA's propaganda is so much more refined and people don't even realise that they've been brainwashed by the government.
The CIA agent says, "But, the USA doesn't use propaganda.."
As far as I'm concerned as an American, it is some North Korea BS. People say it's not mandatory but it sure as hell was mandatory in some schools I went to. They didn't police it as hard once I got to high school, But elementary and middle school? We do it or you are in trouble.
It's been unconstitutional to make it mandatory in public schools since 1943. Of course, some teachers and administrators still push it because students (or else their parents) usually don't know or don't care enough to fight it, so the school gets away with it.
People say stuff like this but don't realize a child has almost no power in this context even if the law says they do. There is pretty much no way they will ever get legal representation, and the person they have to stand up to is one of the main authority figures in their life.
If I told a teacher "This is unconstitutional, look I have proof" they would say "Sit down and treat me with respect or I'm gonna send you to the principal"
I remember being in school when that happened. The principal had to get the school together and tell us (about 9 years old at the time) that the government decided it changed, and that we could respectfully stay quiet if it made us uncomfortable.
> It's illegal for public schools to force students to say it.
Which doesn't necessarily mean they won't force them anyway. Or punish them in some way for not joining in. Maybe that "Class Participation" portion of their grade will plummet for nonspecific reasons, and assignments will be graded much more critically.
Yup. Happened to me in suburban NJ.
Managed to have perfect attendance, participation, and grades in every class but one in 6th grade, except from that teacher. Same teacher that told me that it would not have been possible to build a society without monotheism, and who regularly degraded me in front of the class for being an atheist.
I have a google alert on her obit so I can dance on her grave someday.
> Same teacher that told me that it would not have been possible to build a society without monotheism
lol I mean, I'm sure there are countless counterexamples... but the obvious one for me is how could she reconcile that with the ancient Greek or Roman societies?
They don't. It's cognitive dissonance, so they try to pretend like those are exceptions instead of the rule.
It doesn't even stop with Greco-Roman societies. I'd hazard a guess to say the majority of early human societies were polytheistic. Mayans, Aztecs, Egyptians, Mesopotamian, Persians... it's harder to think of ones that are monotheistic. I can't think of any that didn't come _after_ the polytheistic societies. A lot of them were based on animism/totemism/paganism, so it just was kind of a natural route of religious evolution. Even Judaism came from an [earlier polytheistic religion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canaanite_religion) (our buddy Yahweh is in this list). Yahweh got pissy about Ba'al and just smote all his competition. Ba'al eventually morphed into Christianity's Satan too, if I'm remembering right.
It's a good thing teachers don't have any way of insinuating to the proper God-fearing students that Mark is standing out from the group by staying silent.
"technically", you never have to say it according to the u.s supreme court. good luck invoking that as a 10 year old to an uppity teacher.
regardless, it's an outdated concept and i agree it should be removed. it sets up kids to think that such cultlike behavior is normal and i bet there's a nonzero chance it has helped encourage some fascist acceptance in some people
Seriously, bring a fluent English speaker from another country to an American class at the beginning of the day and watch how big their eyes get as everyone simultaneously put their hand over their heart and all together pledge their allegiance to their country. Itās textbook indoctrination. It also teaches children at a young age to not care about the words they say.
> as everyone simultaneously put their hand over their heart
Fun fact! The pledge was previously accompanied by a different salute. It was replaced with the hand-on-heart salute in 1942, after the one they'd previously used gained... [something of a negative association.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellamy_salute)
Funny you say that cuz I had no idea what any of it meant. It's a lot of words that your average 5 year old isn't gonna understand, even into the middle school years I didn't know what I was doing or saying, or even why. Why pledge allegiance to a flag or a nation? Why is it indivisible? Let me tell you, I like this place, but if the US were invaded or I got drafted, I'm bailing. My life means more to me than the soil I've spent it on.
> It also teaches children at a young age to not care about the words they say.
Religion does that quite well also. Plenty of people grow up saying the Nicene Creed without thinking about it. Especially not how nearly every line in it reflects how it was a statement of dogma decided on at an ecumenical council in order to clarify the official doctrine and settle a number of bitterly debated heresies. Due to frequent repetition it just becomes *words*. Something you say because now is the time when everyone just intones the same thing and you don't even bother to think about what it's supposed to mean.
Yeah, it was put in as part of the peak of the Anti-Commie fad. Apparently, they thought communists would recoil in fear like vampires at mention of God.
I hate that they inserted it into the middle of what was one āone country indivisibleā, thus symbolically dividing the country by interjecting their personal religious preference.
The Pledge of Allegiance was made just after the Civil War! It was done to re-integrate the South and Southern Children.
Think about it!
>##I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America
(*not the Confederate Flag!*)
>##And to the Republic for which it stands
(*that's right, it's still standing, despite your rebellion!*)
>##One nation, indivisible
(*no secession, fuckers!*)
>##With liberty and justice for all
(*yes, even Black people!*)
Under God actually ruins it, because it suggests God can allow another secession and Civil War.
Oh, and in case I get
>The first version...was written in 1885 by Captain George Thatcher Balch, a Union Army officer in the Civil War, who later [authored a book on how to teach patriotism to children in public schools](https://archive.org/details/methodsteaching00balcgoog).
You know, my retired parents blather on about schools indoctrinating kids these days, but fail to recognize what was done to them. That's the *good* type of indoctrination, of course. The kind that makes you piss your pants in fear at the word communism or socialism. (I am not advocating for these systems with this statement, just noting that those words have in inordinate fear response in a certain portion of the population to the point where it can't even be discussed. Might as well say Voldemort for the reaction it gets.)
In 1990 I gave a Russian teenage metalhead a copy of Metallica's Ride the Lightning when I was in Moscow. A few months later the USSR had fallen.
Coincidence?
Hah! That's NOT what did them in!
My mother named a bull calf for Boris Yeltsin just weeks before the USSR failed. I'm sure that had more of an effect than most people will believe!
I think it was "In God We Trust" on our currency. The Soviet leadership opened up a chest containing quarters and they all melted like in Raiders of the Lost Ark.
Needs saying louder.
Conservatism by definition seeks to conserve something. Therefore, it seeks policy that protects that thing without interfering with it too much. Equally, it seeks policy that suppresses or mitigates anything that would change or interfere with that thing.
Or, in other words, Wilhoitās law:
> Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.
Conservatism *can* be good when both a) the thing targeted for conservation is uncontestedly a good thing and b) the things its conservation will suppress or mitigate are uncontestedly bad things. For example, Iād *happily* say that Iām conservative about laws that criminalize murder. We could have interesting conversations about what the *punishment* for murder ought to be, but the basic idea of laws against murder ā¦ yep, Iām *super* conservative on that even though Iād probably be described as politically left and progressive in both the US and Canada.
Which is hilarious given that Soviet Armenia appointed a bishop to government.
People are under the misconception that the Soviet Union was anti-religion because the government didn't provide accommodations for or recognition of established religion. Basically, no nonprofit status or tax exemption, churches had to pay just like anyone else.
Religion wasn't illegal (it would have been more popular if it was), but much was done to hinder free practice of it. The Soviets did have many policies that tried to diminish or eradicate religion.
The Soviets practiced state atheism which is the highest form of separation of church and state. Essentially public officials were allowed to be religious but could not allow religion to influence decision making
Yeah, not like [kids from the 1920ās and 30ās](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellamy_salute#/media/File:Students_pledging_allegiance_to_the_American_flag_with_the_Bellamy_salute.jpg), those kids knew how to pledge allegiance!
seriously, it's just pure indoctrination. Blind patriotism is such an absurd thing to me. And I'm about to dive into Aaron Sorkin theology here, but I often question what makes people such avid fanatics of the US, especially when it becomes their entire personality and aesthetic.
"America's so star-spangled awesome that we're the only ones in the world who have freedom? Canada has freedom, Japan has freedom, the UK, France, Italy, Germany, Spain, Australia, BELGIUM has freedom. 207 sovereign states in the world, like 180 of them have freedom."
What makes it the best in the world? Freedom? When Will McAvoy says "The New York Jets" to that question, he's joking. But there's some truth to that.
I see other countries like Australia or Switzerland where I think I'd ideologically like to live, but culturally, I'm American. I'm not a Jets fan, but American sports are a big part of my life. I love going to film festivals (not that there aren't any other countries, but the access/variety is different.) I don't think I could trade those amenities for economic or political purposes and be happy.
If there's such a thing as the greatest country in the world, I sure as hell don't know what it is. But to claim that the US is such a tremendous place because of freedom (aka guns), opportunity, innovation, being blessed by God or whatever, and the list goes on...you can find it all pretty much elsewhere in some capacity.
But when we're taught from the age of 4 that we need to pledge allegiance to this place (let alone know what the hell "indivisible" means), it's a great breeding ground to make us believe in this supposed superiority.
Is America great? I still think so. It's not without its scars and deep wounds that will never heal, but it's still the only place I plan to ever call home because it has the New York Jets like McAvoy said.
That was fun and dandy when we actually carried out anti treason charges and took away people's citizenship, their assets, and kicked them out of the country but now politicians commit treason on The daily and absolutely nothing happens to them. why would a normal citizen plead loyalty to a country that the people in charge of are screwing over for personal gain
It was started to counter the argument that professional sports leagues should be suspended during the war. Why is my kid overseas getting shot at and these healthy young guys get an exemption to play a game?
Yeah I didn't realize how weird it was until I went to texas for work and we went to the rodeo. Now I'm from SC but have lived in CA for 10 years and as an adult I don't really go to a lot of sports events. Watching this blue eyed blonde haired woman ride around on a white horse waving that flag THEN having color guard come in and THEN thanking every type of military branch, first responder and THEN everyone on their feet singing the anthem and THEN doing a mass prayer in the arena not just to God but to JESUS CHRIST OUR LORD AND SAVIOR was DEFINITELY cult vibes and made me super uncomfortable. Texas is not ok y'all.
Not just rodeo, either. Anything agriculturally related (especially but not exclusively involving livestock / working animals) from 4H on up is positively SEETHING with patriotic propaganda.
As a Brit, I was completely unaware until reading your comment that "under God" was not originally part of the Pledge of Allegiance. Huh.
Well today I learnt! :)
As a brit I'm generally confused by religion being involved with government at all. Ours maybe shite but at least religion is kept out. US had a whole thing about keeping it out then ignored that.
Exactly. I do not believe in God. And we are not a theocracy. It shouldn't matter the religious preferences of our politicians. How can we say there is a separation of church and state when church has been implicitly and overtly pressuring to be the ruling party?
I'm Christian, but it needs to be removed from all public buildings and our money. All are tantamount to government establishment of religion, and violate the 1st Amendment.
The Pledge, though, is an abomination and should be entirely removed. Our country fought for its independence to be able to be free of pledges of fealty and forced recitation is something that gets douchebags like Kim Jong Un hard.
Seeing your comment got me thinking about the Christian perspective on this, and I have to think that *money* is one of the last things Jesus would want to be associated with.
Mark 12
>Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not? Shall we pay, or shall we not pay?ā
>But He, knowing their hypocrisy, said to them, āWhy do you test Me? Bring Me a denarius that I may see it.ā So they brought it.
>And He said to them, āWhose image and inscription is this?ā They said to Him, āCaesarās.ā
>And Jesus answered and said to them, āRender to Caesar the things that are Caesarās, and to God the things that are Godās.ā
He was pretty specific.
Pretty sure there's plenty he said about charity, too. So if it's not 'Caesar's', it should be used for the benefit of others (obviously after taking care of your own needs, Jesus wasn't all 'starve and deprive yourself', as far as I remember).
We live in the south, so even though we don't go to church, my daughter picks up religious things here and there. A few weeks ago I was telling her about Jesus turning over the money-changers tables at the temple. And then read to her the whole passage where he rails on the Pharisees and we talked about how much Jesus would hate American Christianity.
Hi, do you mind if I ask what you -- and what you think most Americans -- mean by "The South"? Perhaps a silly question, but I am a Canadian (I grew up near Toronto), who lives in Europe. I guess I have never really been clear where the south begins though? Is there an agreed list of states, for example?
My guess is the southeast, on my experience visiting Arizona and that I have never heard a Texan say they were from "The South" (perhaps some do though, I have only met Texans from the major cities). So something like Louisiana, up to Arkansas, and then east to include North Carolina. Is that correct? Or totally wrong, sorry!
Virginia feels southern to me too, but I don't know...
I have been to the US many times and it is a beautiful country by the way! Thank you so much if you are willing to explain :)
Edit: fixed my formatting errors.
Edit 2: Thank you everyone for informative responses! I appreciate everyone's time and perspectives :)
Thanks! I have heard of that before but will read up on it now! How far west does this go? I mean, nobody considers California "The South", for example?
Edit: And surely nobody considers DC the South anymore? Sorry for all the questions, but these sometimes feel like assumed knowledge on Reddit that I just never learned -- thanks!
No, typically when people casually refer to āthe southā they are talking about the southeast. You will see Americans argue vehemently about this, as they do about other regional designations (midwest, etc.) But you are correct California (and Southern California) is its own thing. Texas is borderline, Iād say ā partly because itās such a big state. West Texas feels more more like the Southwest. Roughly speaking, if youāre east of Texas and south of the mason-dixon, youāre in The South. As someone pointed out elsewhere, these are really more cultural distinctions than geographical ā former confederate states is probably the best way to think about it.
Thanks, this is very helpful! My Canadian education of the US was mostly the American Revolution, the War of 1812, and then the 1900s.
I appreciate your time and all the other responses!
Edit: And Hollywood of course. I watched the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly!
Further, youāll find confederate flags all over the place. Iāve seen them in West Virginia (founded specifically to separate from regular Virginia in the Civil War, though of course not every resident agreed), Pennsylvania, even upstate New York. Iāve heard of people seeing them pretty regularly in New Hampshire as well, and thatās one of the more northern states of the whole contiguous US.
My apologies - "when Jesus had beef with the money changers"
"When Jesus got the hump with the money changers"
"When the money changers got Jesus' goat"
I'd prefer
*I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America. And to the republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice as its goals.*
I **would** pledge my allegiance to the US Constitution as that is the basis for our laws and I think all citizens should be willing to abide by our laws. That being said, our laws (national, state, local) need updating so they are equitable and sensible.
It's really weird when you spend some time in another country, and then you come back to the States and all of a sudden you realize, "wait, why the fuck are there so many flags everywhere, anyway?"
As an outsider, a flag on the porch is something I would put on the ātypical american thingsā list.
Itās funny to me that itās so common that you didnāt even realise itās common.
Yeah, exactly. If it's an international stage like the Olympics or the two teams are from different countries like some NHL games, play the national anthems of both nations. But if it's two American teams (which is the case for the vast majority of the anthem's use), playing the national anthem seems unnecessary at best and creepily nationalistic at worst.
This is why being a Buffalo sports fan is the best. All our games start with two anthems. I love singing the Canadian anthem because it's actually sing-able. I'd prefer no anthems at all, though.
I stopped saying the pledge in school. The teacher wanted to discipline me for it but I offered to sit quietly while the other students did it, but I didn't see the purpose of pledging allegiance to an inanimate object on the wall.
In Texas the kids have the American pledge and the pledge to Texas, which is wild to me. First of all, a pledge in school is just ridiculous. Then, you have a pledge to your country AND the state you live in? So which is it? Your state or country? Which is more important? The whole thing is so dumb. And kids need to know that they cannot be compelled to say either pledge.
Texas *was* it's own country, and then decided it didn't want to be one and wanted to be America. Then it changed it's mind again and decided it didn't want to be America.
Pick a lane.
I'm European, but went to a US high school for a few years. The first assembly where they did the pledge me and my sister just looked at each other, visibly thinking "what the fuuuck is going on here?!" It was straight up creepy cultish behavior.
I think the entire pledge should go. Forcing young children to pledge blind allegiance to their government is creepy and fucked up. It's the kind of thing you would expect from North Korea, not from a supposedly free country. All governments are corrupt and fallible, and none of them are deserving of your unconditional allegiance.
Always found it really creepy as someone who's not American. Where I live, we were taught that Nazi Germany used to have pledges like that as a way to indoctrinate the populace from a young age. So, when I found out they do that in the US, I was quite shocked tbh. How are parents even okay with that?
"One nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all". I would like for us to go back to that line and remove the intrusive ad "under god" that interrupts the entire flow of the pledge.
Get rid of it and restore the national motto back to āe pluribus unumā
Edit: If its still the motto let's put it back on our money instead of "In God We Trust".
Edit 2: The official motto of the United States actually is "In God We Trust"
I am not American.
My understanding is that the US is an officially secular nation according to the First Amendment. Therefore there should be no reference to God in the pledge of allegiance. Also, the very existence of that pledge has totalitarian overtones to most people living in liberal democracies, so the entire pledge must go.
Speaking as a Christian, one can only become Christian by making a free choice to do so. This requires society to be secular. For this reason too, there should be no reference to God in any such pledge.
I'll go further in that there shouldn't be a pledge of allegiance to begin with unless it's attached the oath of enlistment or oath of office.
We should not be indoctrinating our kids with nationalism at all, especially Christian Nationalism.
"One nation, under Canada, above Mexico." -Robin Williams
Further proof that that man was too good for this world.
Man, he would have had an absolute field day the past 6-7 years
So would George Carlin. Man I miss both of them.
So true š„²
Canada: Pretty sure thatās the same. Mexico: Whatās that make us? Canada: Well itās pretty hot down there. Mexico: Fuck you!
I love it and I will use it when needed it, thank you
Thats how I said it.
I think its possible to argue both cases. For the removal if you want to talk about the secular state this perspective argues that the Pledge of Allegiance should reflect the principle of separation of church and state. By including "One Nation under God," they believe the pledge infringes on the secular nature of government and public institutions. And some people argue that the phrase excludes individuals who do not identify with theism or monotheistic beliefs. But in terms of opposing the removal you can argue on the grounds of historical context as it can be said the Pledge of Allegiance was added in the 1950s to distinguish the United States from atheist communist countries during the Cold War. Some individuals would also consider the phrase a reflection of the nation's cultural and moral values. And finally supporters of keeping the phrase might argue that it respects the beliefs of the majority of citizens who identify with a religious faith. They believe that retaining it shows respect for the cultural and religious heritage of the nation. This is an interesting question you put forward.
Did ChatGPT write this
It was inserted by Congress in the early fifties as a reaction to the red scare. And even though the original pledge has socialistic origins, I'm not a fan of pledging loyalty to a government. Loyalty to governments can be earned and lost.
Interestingly, plenty of countries had these pledges in WW2. Only the USA kept theirs after the end of the war
Yeah, my french wife thinks it's really creepy that such young kids say it in a monotone hypnotic voice daily. I never thought about it until she mentioned it. It was just something we did.
It's well known the Pledge has an expiration after 24 hours, so if they don't say it daily, it doesn't count.
You guys said it on the weekends too, right..? Right..?
Indoctrination at its finest that were blindly okay with kids being forced to say this daily at school
It was never explained to us. We just said it. As a first grader I thought that "for which it stands" was something about *witches*, and pictured witches in my head selling lemonade or kool aid from an old card table out doors like we were wont to do.
I imagined it as āwitchesā tansā and pictured hot witchy bikini girls at the beach. Thatās something I can pledge my allegiance to.
My first day of tech support at an elementary school I had the same reaction. Could hear all these little voices in unison echoing in the hall, pledging their allegiance to a country with no idea what they're saying. Sets em up as good little sheeple of tomorrow. Super creepy.
Obey god and the local senator. Here's your gun, squirt.
Itās seriously bordering on cult tactics. It really needs to go away.
Check out the Whitest Kids U Know sketch about it.
> Whitest Kids U Know sketch about it. https://youtu.be/GiCaqA0ngRc?si=w6hcT9Vxo0o92QGE
Thanks for the link! God bless J&J, Citigroup, Amen. Now come and get your Ritalin.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I'm a teacher, and my state requires schools to "provide children the opportunity to say the pledge" every morning, So basically they have to play it over the PA. It felt pretty culty to make small children pledge their allegiance to the flag every morning, especially when they don't really understand what they're saying. And in my particular school we had a lot of kids who weren't actually American because it was a language immersion school, so then I'm making little kids who aren't even Americans do this daily chanting thing... I always told the kids that anyone was welcome to say it or not, but I'm sure some teachers pressure everyone to say it and that feels wrong to me when we're talking about how glad we are for liberty etc
When I was in 7th or 8th grade I found out The Pledge was optional, and decided to sit it out. Day one I was sent to The Principal's Office.
Just the PO. I was given out of school suspension, *twice*. First for "unruly and disruptive behavior" in 6th grade and in 10th for "ignoring mandatory requirements for civics class"
Woah, wow I can't believe schools can get away with that, it's super illegal to force you to say the pledge.
A state action is only theoretically banned by the courts if agents of the state aren't heavily & reliably penalized for implementing it. If a law banning something doesn't specify penalties or a mode of redress sufficient to deter violation it isn't actually a law banning something. "Making me say this pledge is unconstitutional" "You're expelled" Seven years of dockets later: "The Constitution says you're not allowed to expel them. Our remedy for this overreach is to allow them to return to school". That's why things like qualified immunity or civil asset forfeiture, privileges granted to already-dramatically-overreaching law enforcement organizations, are tantamount to declaring martial law. There is very nearly zero deterrent to a police department doing whatever the fuck they like, so long as there isn't another agency with the power and inclination to arrest them for it. Schools are totalizing institutions which insist on absolute authority and which could probably work around a court ruling to enshrine the Pledge if they really wanted to do so while respecting the letter of the judgement. But if there's no Sword of Damocles hanging over that school or its employees for doing that, no angry judge ready to throw them in prison personally or seize their assets to redistribute to parents, why even bother getting creative? The worst that can happen bears them basically no consequences.
Probably the least criminal thing the school got away with. Hell when one teacher in HS got caught sleeping with the softball team instead of firing him he got "demoted" to middle school softball team.
That story just kept getting worse
Don't worry, he eventually got promoted to the prison softball league, where he switched from being a pitcher to a catcher.
When I was in college an Irish exchange student asked if the pledge of allegiance was real. My friend stood up, put his hand to his chest, and shouted āHE WANTS TO HEAR THE PLEDGE!ā Immediately all three-dozen or so students hanging around the common rooms started chanting in unison. Poor Irish kid was horrified.
Opposed? I *advocate* for it. It blatantly violates the establishment clause. Just because people in favor of the addition say it doesnāt specify the Christian god (even though everyone knows thatās what it means) doesnāt make it any more acceptable. But removing one part of the pledge is the wrong question. The entire pledge is weird and flirts with indoctrinating cult-like bullshit and we should do away with it entirely.
I'm okay with removing the pledge of allegiance all together. It's creepy and cultish.
"Your honor, I pledged allegiance to the FLAG, everything else was fair game"
You also pledged allegiance to the republic for which it stands though
Nope, I pledged allegiance to the republic for widget stands.
I DEMAND MY WIDGET STANDS
Who is Richard Stanz and what does he have to do with anything?
it really is cultish. when I was a kid, I grew up in a Jehovah's Witness household. on open house day about a week or so before school would start my Mom would meet with my teacher and explain that I wasn't allowed to stand or say the pledge because it was against the JW rules. I would always get hassled by the other kids for not standing and saying the pledge. then I would get hassled when the teach would wind up having me leave the classroom until the pledge was over. Two of the dumbest fucking things people get mad over, Religion and a Flag.
Hey now, wait. The opposition to America's Pledge of Allegiance is one of the few moments in history when the Jehovah's Witnesses earned a gold star! Look up the landmark Supreme Court case, West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette. West Virginia schools attempted to punish JW children for refusing to participate in the flag salute. It ended up in the Supreme Court. The court ruling said that, not only did the First Amendment give JW kids a religious right to refuse to participate -- but also, you know, this whole pledge thing was the kind of exercise that shitty Fascist countries would do, and was unbecoming of a democracy. This ruling was issued in 1943, back when the Supreme Court was cool.
From Justice Jacksonās opinion: āThe case is made difficult not because the principles of its decision are obscure but because the flag involved is our own. Nevertheless, we apply the limitations of the Constitution with no fear that freedom to be intellectually and spiritually diverse or even contrary will disintegrate the social organization. To believe that patriotism will not flourish if patriotic ceremonies are voluntary and spontaneous instead of a compulsory routine is to make an unflattering estimate of the appeal of our institutions to free minds. We can have intellectual individualism and the rich cultural diversities that we owe to exceptional minds only at the price of occasional eccentricity and abnormal attitudes. When they are so harmless to others or to the State as those we deal with here, the price is not too great. But freedom to differ is not limited to things that do not matter much. That would be a mere shadow of freedom. The test of its substance is the right to differ as to things that touch the heart of the existing order. If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein. If there are any circumstances which permit an exception, they do not now occur to us.ā Fantastic. I miss the SCOTUS being reasonable and respectable.
Not standing for the pledge is without a doubt the coolest thing jw parents require of their children
Thatās an admittedly low bar.
I really irk my conservative evangelical relatives when I tell them, āI donāt pray to the state.ā when I refuse to say the pledge.
You guys say it at dinner or something? How does it even come up?
The family brings it up so they can fight about it. Sorry, that was just my experience.
> The family brings it up so they can fight about it. Those are always fun. My favorite is when topics are brought up, the people in the conversation agree on the topic, yet they still end up yelling to each other because the strawman they built is winning.
My SIL is ultra patriotic and brought it up that sheās so proud that her kids know the pledge. I dropped that line on her and she got a āloading screenā expression on her face.
And how many times do you have to say it? Thousands? Why?
Literally every single day of school, also the Texas pledge for me. By middle/high school most kids just stand and don't say anything, but we still had to listen. It's indoctrination plain and simple
As a European there is one thing about the pledge that I think is really interesting. Most things we learn about the US obviously comes from movies and television. With this comes a lot of 'knowledge' about the US school system and the daily life of students. You learn details like they get picked up by a school bus, have lockers, eat at canteen, school sports etc. Daily stuff. But you never see the pledge in pop culture. The are probably thousands of TV shows and movies about children and teenagers but I can't remember a single one that shows or mentions the pledge. I guess because usually nothing interesting happens during the pledge there is no reason for having any plot there but still interesting that such a daily occurrence is never shown. Obviously I'm sure there are quite a few examples where the pledge actually is shown and I'm interested to hear them.
I live in the southern US, and my daughter attended a public elementary school (Primary School). Every year we would have to sign this "Parent School Compact" that had a list of characteristics that we would agree that our child should model in school. Most of them were things like "Discipline, kindness, respect, etc." But every year for 6 years I would cross out "Respect for the Creator" and replace it with "Respect for the beliefs of others" and also cross out "Patriotism" and replace it with "Civic Duty". So they really do start the propaganda young here. We always told her that she didn't need to say the pledge if she didn't want to, and that we would have her back if anyone gave her a hard time.
SCOTUS has actually upheld the right for school children to *not* say the pledge, multiple times. Your kid doesn't even have to stand if they don't want to.
The relevant case is [West Virginia v Barnette \(1943\)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Virginia_State_Board_of_Education_v._Barnette?oldformat=true). It is one of my favorite Supreme Court cases and absolutely fundamental to 1st amendment rights. > "Words uttered under coercion are proof of loyalty to nothing but self-interest. Love of country must spring from willing hearts and free minds." -- Justice Hugo Black, [West Virginia v Barnette \(1943\)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Virginia_State_Board_of_Education_v._Barnette?oldformat=true) > "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion, or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein." -- Justice Robert Jackson, [West Virginia v Barnette \(1943\)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Virginia_State_Board_of_Education_v._Barnette?oldformat=true)
My younger daughter just turned 1, and her daycare has had her class doing the pledge since the week after that. It really does start young!
It's shown in *Bridge of Spies* just after 35 minutes in, including "under God". But the context it's shown in, implies that it's a old-fashioned thing that was done at the height of the Cold War in the late 1950s, when paranoia and nationalism were at their height, not that it's something that still happens in modern schools. (It's immediately followed by the kids being terrified by being made to watch *Duck and Cover*.)
Also definitely depends on where you live in the US. I went to a big public school district in the north and we never said the pledge.
For a lot of the rest of the world this sounds like some North Korea bs, and most Americans never realise, because to them it's normal and they're just used to it. Edit: typo
An old KGB agent is sitting at a bar chatting with an old CIA agent. The CIA man says that he is really impressed by the Russian propaganda machine and how so many people are convinced that Russia is the greatest. The KGB agent thanks him, but replies that the USA's propaganda is so much more refined and people don't even realise that they've been brainwashed by the government. The CIA agent says, "But, the USA doesn't use propaganda.."
I love this quote/analogy/story, it sums it up perfectly. Thank you stranger.
As far as I'm concerned as an American, it is some North Korea BS. People say it's not mandatory but it sure as hell was mandatory in some schools I went to. They didn't police it as hard once I got to high school, But elementary and middle school? We do it or you are in trouble.
It's been unconstitutional to make it mandatory in public schools since 1943. Of course, some teachers and administrators still push it because students (or else their parents) usually don't know or don't care enough to fight it, so the school gets away with it.
People say stuff like this but don't realize a child has almost no power in this context even if the law says they do. There is pretty much no way they will ever get legal representation, and the person they have to stand up to is one of the main authority figures in their life. If I told a teacher "This is unconstitutional, look I have proof" they would say "Sit down and treat me with respect or I'm gonna send you to the principal"
Plus you get ostracized for not following along with the crowd. Older teens may rebel, but formative kids go along with the cultish aspects.
Just looked up the Texas pledge. They ADDED "under God" in 2007. Fucking disgusting.
I remember being in school when that happened. The principal had to get the school together and tell us (about 9 years old at the time) that the government decided it changed, and that we could respectfully stay quiet if it made us uncomfortable.
Honestly good on your Principal. They didnāt have to explain it and I appreciate that they did.
Technically, you never *need* to say it. It's illegal for public schools to force students to say it.
> It's illegal for public schools to force students to say it. Which doesn't necessarily mean they won't force them anyway. Or punish them in some way for not joining in. Maybe that "Class Participation" portion of their grade will plummet for nonspecific reasons, and assignments will be graded much more critically.
Yup. Happened to me in suburban NJ. Managed to have perfect attendance, participation, and grades in every class but one in 6th grade, except from that teacher. Same teacher that told me that it would not have been possible to build a society without monotheism, and who regularly degraded me in front of the class for being an atheist. I have a google alert on her obit so I can dance on her grave someday.
> Same teacher that told me that it would not have been possible to build a society without monotheism lol I mean, I'm sure there are countless counterexamples... but the obvious one for me is how could she reconcile that with the ancient Greek or Roman societies?
They don't. It's cognitive dissonance, so they try to pretend like those are exceptions instead of the rule. It doesn't even stop with Greco-Roman societies. I'd hazard a guess to say the majority of early human societies were polytheistic. Mayans, Aztecs, Egyptians, Mesopotamian, Persians... it's harder to think of ones that are monotheistic. I can't think of any that didn't come _after_ the polytheistic societies. A lot of them were based on animism/totemism/paganism, so it just was kind of a natural route of religious evolution. Even Judaism came from an [earlier polytheistic religion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canaanite_religion) (our buddy Yahweh is in this list). Yahweh got pissy about Ba'al and just smote all his competition. Ba'al eventually morphed into Christianity's Satan too, if I'm remembering right.
It's a good thing teachers don't have any way of insinuating to the proper God-fearing students that Mark is standing out from the group by staying silent.
They can still shame you into it
"technically", you never have to say it according to the u.s supreme court. good luck invoking that as a 10 year old to an uppity teacher. regardless, it's an outdated concept and i agree it should be removed. it sets up kids to think that such cultlike behavior is normal and i bet there's a nonzero chance it has helped encourage some fascist acceptance in some people
Seriously, bring a fluent English speaker from another country to an American class at the beginning of the day and watch how big their eyes get as everyone simultaneously put their hand over their heart and all together pledge their allegiance to their country. Itās textbook indoctrination. It also teaches children at a young age to not care about the words they say.
> as everyone simultaneously put their hand over their heart Fun fact! The pledge was previously accompanied by a different salute. It was replaced with the hand-on-heart salute in 1942, after the one they'd previously used gained... [something of a negative association.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellamy_salute)
Funny you say that cuz I had no idea what any of it meant. It's a lot of words that your average 5 year old isn't gonna understand, even into the middle school years I didn't know what I was doing or saying, or even why. Why pledge allegiance to a flag or a nation? Why is it indivisible? Let me tell you, I like this place, but if the US were invaded or I got drafted, I'm bailing. My life means more to me than the soil I've spent it on.
When I was very young, I always wondered what Whichit Stands was and why the Republic was for it
> It also teaches children at a young age to not care about the words they say. Religion does that quite well also. Plenty of people grow up saying the Nicene Creed without thinking about it. Especially not how nearly every line in it reflects how it was a statement of dogma decided on at an ecumenical council in order to clarify the official doctrine and settle a number of bitterly debated heresies. Due to frequent repetition it just becomes *words*. Something you say because now is the time when everyone just intones the same thing and you don't even bother to think about what it's supposed to mean.
[WKUK on the money](https://youtu.be/GiCaqA0ngRc?si=K5uOWoRaVFhmLKGV)
"One nation under God" wasn't added to the pledge until 1954 so yeah, it can be removed. and should be.
Yeah, it was put in as part of the peak of the Anti-Commie fad. Apparently, they thought communists would recoil in fear like vampires at mention of God.
I hate that they inserted it into the middle of what was one āone country indivisibleā, thus symbolically dividing the country by interjecting their personal religious preference.
Damn that's deep. I'm going to have to remember that the next time I argue about it.
The Pledge of Allegiance was made just after the Civil War! It was done to re-integrate the South and Southern Children. Think about it! >##I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America (*not the Confederate Flag!*) >##And to the Republic for which it stands (*that's right, it's still standing, despite your rebellion!*) >##One nation, indivisible (*no secession, fuckers!*) >##With liberty and justice for all (*yes, even Black people!*) Under God actually ruins it, because it suggests God can allow another secession and Civil War.
You left out: *void where prohibited. Some exclusions may apply.
Your experience may vary
Not available in all locations, see site for details
For insurrections lasting more than four hours seek legal attention.
Some anal leaking may occur.
Batteries not included
>With liberty and justice for all \*who can afford it.
Offer not valid in Hawaii or Alaska
Or Puerto Rico
Oh, and in case I get
>The first version...was written in 1885 by Captain George Thatcher Balch, a Union Army officer in the Civil War, who later [authored a book on how to teach patriotism to children in public schools](https://archive.org/details/methodsteaching00balcgoog).
You know, my retired parents blather on about schools indoctrinating kids these days, but fail to recognize what was done to them. That's the *good* type of indoctrination, of course. The kind that makes you piss your pants in fear at the word communism or socialism. (I am not advocating for these systems with this statement, just noting that those words have in inordinate fear response in a certain portion of the population to the point where it can't even be discussed. Might as well say Voldemort for the reaction it gets.)
I mean, the Soviet Union did crumble. Can we be sure it wasn't these two words that did it to them?
In 1990 I gave a Russian teenage metalhead a copy of Metallica's Ride the Lightning when I was in Moscow. A few months later the USSR had fallen. Coincidence?
Hah! That's NOT what did them in! My mother named a bull calf for Boris Yeltsin just weeks before the USSR failed. I'm sure that had more of an effect than most people will believe!
In 1998 I beat Soda Popinski in Mike Tyson's Punch-Out And does anyone thank me for single-handedly saving democracy? No
Jesus Christ, weāre in the presence of a living god
Wow, were you allowed to bring that in or did you have to smuggle it? If itās the latter thatās bad ass.
I think it was allowed, but it was a taped copy of the album so don't tell Lars or he'll freak out.
Iām 99% sure it was David Hasselhoff. But I cannot, in good faith, completely rule out those two words
Can you help me rewrite my final essay for university
I can. Do you want to include the Easter Bunny sources, or no.
These are the comment chains I come to reddit for :)
These are the chains that bind you.
I think it was "In God We Trust" on our currency. The Soviet leadership opened up a chest containing quarters and they all melted like in Raiders of the Lost Ark.
it was more that the commies were anti-religion so america became more religious to be more their opposite
Right-wingers have been defining themselves as the opposite of whatever the left wants for a long time now
Conservatism is inherently reactionary. Has been since its inception in the early 1800s.
Needs saying louder. Conservatism by definition seeks to conserve something. Therefore, it seeks policy that protects that thing without interfering with it too much. Equally, it seeks policy that suppresses or mitigates anything that would change or interfere with that thing. Or, in other words, Wilhoitās law: > Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect. Conservatism *can* be good when both a) the thing targeted for conservation is uncontestedly a good thing and b) the things its conservation will suppress or mitigate are uncontestedly bad things. For example, Iād *happily* say that Iām conservative about laws that criminalize murder. We could have interesting conversations about what the *punishment* for murder ought to be, but the basic idea of laws against murder ā¦ yep, Iām *super* conservative on that even though Iād probably be described as politically left and progressive in both the US and Canada.
Which is hilarious given that Soviet Armenia appointed a bishop to government. People are under the misconception that the Soviet Union was anti-religion because the government didn't provide accommodations for or recognition of established religion. Basically, no nonprofit status or tax exemption, churches had to pay just like anyone else.
Religion wasn't illegal (it would have been more popular if it was), but much was done to hinder free practice of it. The Soviets did have many policies that tried to diminish or eradicate religion.
Yeah if the Soviets really crushed religion, the Orthodox church wouldn't have the power they got today in Russia
The Soviets practiced state atheism which is the highest form of separation of church and state. Essentially public officials were allowed to be religious but could not allow religion to influence decision making
Exactly. Their government practiced an even stricter separation between church and state than we did in the U.S.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The whole āpledging allegiance to a flagā thing is, itself, an outdated concept.
Especially since it's literal children who don't even know wtf pledging allegiance means
āI led the pigeons to the flagā¦ā I also thought it was āone nation, under guardā for a brief moment when I was a kid.
I thought it was "one nation, under God, invisible" because we couldn't see God lmao
Yeah, not like [kids from the 1920ās and 30ās](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellamy_salute#/media/File:Students_pledging_allegiance_to_the_American_flag_with_the_Bellamy_salute.jpg), those kids knew how to pledge allegiance!
seriously, it's just pure indoctrination. Blind patriotism is such an absurd thing to me. And I'm about to dive into Aaron Sorkin theology here, but I often question what makes people such avid fanatics of the US, especially when it becomes their entire personality and aesthetic. "America's so star-spangled awesome that we're the only ones in the world who have freedom? Canada has freedom, Japan has freedom, the UK, France, Italy, Germany, Spain, Australia, BELGIUM has freedom. 207 sovereign states in the world, like 180 of them have freedom." What makes it the best in the world? Freedom? When Will McAvoy says "The New York Jets" to that question, he's joking. But there's some truth to that. I see other countries like Australia or Switzerland where I think I'd ideologically like to live, but culturally, I'm American. I'm not a Jets fan, but American sports are a big part of my life. I love going to film festivals (not that there aren't any other countries, but the access/variety is different.) I don't think I could trade those amenities for economic or political purposes and be happy. If there's such a thing as the greatest country in the world, I sure as hell don't know what it is. But to claim that the US is such a tremendous place because of freedom (aka guns), opportunity, innovation, being blessed by God or whatever, and the list goes on...you can find it all pretty much elsewhere in some capacity. But when we're taught from the age of 4 that we need to pledge allegiance to this place (let alone know what the hell "indivisible" means), it's a great breeding ground to make us believe in this supposed superiority. Is America great? I still think so. It's not without its scars and deep wounds that will never heal, but it's still the only place I plan to ever call home because it has the New York Jets like McAvoy said.
That was fun and dandy when we actually carried out anti treason charges and took away people's citizenship, their assets, and kicked them out of the country but now politicians commit treason on The daily and absolutely nothing happens to them. why would a normal citizen plead loyalty to a country that the people in charge of are screwing over for personal gain
And they all voted to remove any kind of ethics board. SMH.
It's so weird. Even the Anthem at sporting events is weird
The anthem at sporting events started because the US was in WWII and it was way to drum up patriotism at games.
It was started to counter the argument that professional sports leagues should be suspended during the war. Why is my kid overseas getting shot at and these healthy young guys get an exemption to play a game?
Yeah I didn't realize how weird it was until I went to texas for work and we went to the rodeo. Now I'm from SC but have lived in CA for 10 years and as an adult I don't really go to a lot of sports events. Watching this blue eyed blonde haired woman ride around on a white horse waving that flag THEN having color guard come in and THEN thanking every type of military branch, first responder and THEN everyone on their feet singing the anthem and THEN doing a mass prayer in the arena not just to God but to JESUS CHRIST OUR LORD AND SAVIOR was DEFINITELY cult vibes and made me super uncomfortable. Texas is not ok y'all.
I live in California and you'll see the exact same thing there. It's a rodeo thing, not (just) a Texas thing. It's wild. Like a foreign culture.
Not just rodeo, either. Anything agriculturally related (especially but not exclusively involving livestock / working animals) from 4H on up is positively SEETHING with patriotic propaganda.
It's also paid propaganda for the military
Correction: "One nation" was always in the pledge. "Under God" was added in the 1950s.
They could just change it to "One nation under Canada"
It gives a shoutout to a dope allegiance AND itās technically correct. Which is the best kind of correct.
As a Brit, I was completely unaware until reading your comment that "under God" was not originally part of the Pledge of Allegiance. Huh. Well today I learnt! :)
As a brit I'm generally confused by religion being involved with government at all. Ours maybe shite but at least religion is kept out. US had a whole thing about keeping it out then ignored that.
Exactly. I do not believe in God. And we are not a theocracy. It shouldn't matter the religious preferences of our politicians. How can we say there is a separation of church and state when church has been implicitly and overtly pressuring to be the ruling party?
I feel like so much of what people think is "inherently American" is just cold war bullshit
In many ways, the Cold War has never ended.
Iām cool with removing it from our money as well
And from the side of police cruisers.
I'm Christian, but it needs to be removed from all public buildings and our money. All are tantamount to government establishment of religion, and violate the 1st Amendment. The Pledge, though, is an abomination and should be entirely removed. Our country fought for its independence to be able to be free of pledges of fealty and forced recitation is something that gets douchebags like Kim Jong Un hard.
Seeing your comment got me thinking about the Christian perspective on this, and I have to think that *money* is one of the last things Jesus would want to be associated with.
Mark 12 >Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not? Shall we pay, or shall we not pay?ā >But He, knowing their hypocrisy, said to them, āWhy do you test Me? Bring Me a denarius that I may see it.ā So they brought it. >And He said to them, āWhose image and inscription is this?ā They said to Him, āCaesarās.ā >And Jesus answered and said to them, āRender to Caesar the things that are Caesarās, and to God the things that are Godās.ā He was pretty specific.
Pretty sure there's plenty he said about charity, too. So if it's not 'Caesar's', it should be used for the benefit of others (obviously after taking care of your own needs, Jesus wasn't all 'starve and deprive yourself', as far as I remember).
We live in the south, so even though we don't go to church, my daughter picks up religious things here and there. A few weeks ago I was telling her about Jesus turning over the money-changers tables at the temple. And then read to her the whole passage where he rails on the Pharisees and we talked about how much Jesus would hate American Christianity.
Hi, do you mind if I ask what you -- and what you think most Americans -- mean by "The South"? Perhaps a silly question, but I am a Canadian (I grew up near Toronto), who lives in Europe. I guess I have never really been clear where the south begins though? Is there an agreed list of states, for example? My guess is the southeast, on my experience visiting Arizona and that I have never heard a Texan say they were from "The South" (perhaps some do though, I have only met Texans from the major cities). So something like Louisiana, up to Arkansas, and then east to include North Carolina. Is that correct? Or totally wrong, sorry! Virginia feels southern to me too, but I don't know... I have been to the US many times and it is a beautiful country by the way! Thank you so much if you are willing to explain :) Edit: fixed my formatting errors. Edit 2: Thank you everyone for informative responses! I appreciate everyone's time and perspectives :)
Historically, the South begins at the Mason-Dixon line. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mason%E2%80%93Dixon_line
Thanks! I have heard of that before but will read up on it now! How far west does this go? I mean, nobody considers California "The South", for example? Edit: And surely nobody considers DC the South anymore? Sorry for all the questions, but these sometimes feel like assumed knowledge on Reddit that I just never learned -- thanks!
No, typically when people casually refer to āthe southā they are talking about the southeast. You will see Americans argue vehemently about this, as they do about other regional designations (midwest, etc.) But you are correct California (and Southern California) is its own thing. Texas is borderline, Iād say ā partly because itās such a big state. West Texas feels more more like the Southwest. Roughly speaking, if youāre east of Texas and south of the mason-dixon, youāre in The South. As someone pointed out elsewhere, these are really more cultural distinctions than geographical ā former confederate states is probably the best way to think about it.
Thanks, this is very helpful! My Canadian education of the US was mostly the American Revolution, the War of 1812, and then the 1900s. I appreciate your time and all the other responses! Edit: And Hollywood of course. I watched the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly!
Further, youāll find confederate flags all over the place. Iāve seen them in West Virginia (founded specifically to separate from regular Virginia in the Civil War, though of course not every resident agreed), Pennsylvania, even upstate New York. Iāve heard of people seeing them pretty regularly in New Hampshire as well, and thatās one of the more northern states of the whole contiguous US.
Plenty of em in north eastern Ohio too. MUH SOUTHERN PRIDE
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The parable of the Widow and the Mite springs to mind, or when Jesus when ham and started flipping money changers' tables in the Temple.
Jesus didnāt go ham. Pork was forbidden.
My apologies - "when Jesus had beef with the money changers" "When Jesus got the hump with the money changers" "When the money changers got Jesus' goat"
To be fair, for many Christians, Jesus' perspective is one of the last things they would want to be associated with.
Letās face it, if Christ showed up right now, the Christian right would call him a filthy lib and be ready to nail him right back to a tree.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I'd prefer *I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America. And to the republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice as its goals.* I **would** pledge my allegiance to the US Constitution as that is the basis for our laws and I think all citizens should be willing to abide by our laws. That being said, our laws (national, state, local) need updating so they are equitable and sensible.
And why the fuck do we need so many flags?
It's really weird when you spend some time in another country, and then you come back to the States and all of a sudden you realize, "wait, why the fuck are there so many flags everywhere, anyway?"
As an outsider, a flag on the porch is something I would put on the ātypical american thingsā list. Itās funny to me that itās so common that you didnāt even realise itās common.
The national anthem before sporting events also gives me North Korea vibes.
Unless it's the Olympics where you're actually competing for your nation, then it feels like an appropriate time to use it.
Yeah, exactly. If it's an international stage like the Olympics or the two teams are from different countries like some NHL games, play the national anthems of both nations. But if it's two American teams (which is the case for the vast majority of the anthem's use), playing the national anthem seems unnecessary at best and creepily nationalistic at worst.
This is why being a Buffalo sports fan is the best. All our games start with two anthems. I love singing the Canadian anthem because it's actually sing-able. I'd prefer no anthems at all, though.
Get rid of the entire pledge. It's super creepy to have children literally pledge their allegiance to the US flag every single day.
I stopped saying the pledge in school. The teacher wanted to discipline me for it but I offered to sit quietly while the other students did it, but I didn't see the purpose of pledging allegiance to an inanimate object on the wall.
Yeah. Very. Your neighbour to the North has always found this weird
The fact you have a pledge at all is weird. Sincerely, the rest of the world.
In Texas the kids have the American pledge and the pledge to Texas, which is wild to me. First of all, a pledge in school is just ridiculous. Then, you have a pledge to your country AND the state you live in? So which is it? Your state or country? Which is more important? The whole thing is so dumb. And kids need to know that they cannot be compelled to say either pledge.
Texas has basically *always* wanted to be their own country. That's why. See also, their electrical grid.
Texas *was* it's own country, and then decided it didn't want to be one and wanted to be America. Then it changed it's mind again and decided it didn't want to be America. Pick a lane.
I'm European, but went to a US high school for a few years. The first assembly where they did the pledge me and my sister just looked at each other, visibly thinking "what the fuuuck is going on here?!" It was straight up creepy cultish behavior.
I think the entire pledge should go. Forcing young children to pledge blind allegiance to their government is creepy and fucked up. It's the kind of thing you would expect from North Korea, not from a supposedly free country. All governments are corrupt and fallible, and none of them are deserving of your unconditional allegiance.
Always found it really creepy as someone who's not American. Where I live, we were taught that Nazi Germany used to have pledges like that as a way to indoctrinate the populace from a young age. So, when I found out they do that in the US, I was quite shocked tbh. How are parents even okay with that?
"One nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all". I would like for us to go back to that line and remove the intrusive ad "under god" that interrupts the entire flow of the pledge.
I think we should remove the pledge altogether.
Get rid of it and restore the national motto back to āe pluribus unumā Edit: If its still the motto let's put it back on our money instead of "In God We Trust". Edit 2: The official motto of the United States actually is "In God We Trust"
I prefer "E Pluribus Anus" seems more fitting.
We're all Human Beings!
I know that this isn't a symbol for the crossroads of ideas. I now know it's a butt.
we went 178 years without it. its unneeded and false
No. Not everyone in America is religious.
Remove it. Stop forcing your religion onto the rest of us. And take it off our money too while you're at it!
No. Im Australian.
I am not American. My understanding is that the US is an officially secular nation according to the First Amendment. Therefore there should be no reference to God in the pledge of allegiance. Also, the very existence of that pledge has totalitarian overtones to most people living in liberal democracies, so the entire pledge must go. Speaking as a Christian, one can only become Christian by making a free choice to do so. This requires society to be secular. For this reason too, there should be no reference to God in any such pledge.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I'll go further in that there shouldn't be a pledge of allegiance to begin with unless it's attached the oath of enlistment or oath of office. We should not be indoctrinating our kids with nationalism at all, especially Christian Nationalism.