ForumGarden

I pledge allegiance to the flag, of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation INDIVISIBLE, with liberty and justice for all.

That's the way I learned it as a school boy in Kindergarten /1939. It was changed in 1954 to "one nation under GOD" instead of one nation indivisible.

Frankly, I always liked it the way it was because after the very bloody Civil War that the U.S. engaged in during the 1860's. it was important for the country to be united and to pledge to that affect.

The PLEDGE is once again in the news as a judge in the 9th Circuit Court has ruled that California school children not be allowed to recite the PLEDGE because of the use of GOD. The judge is sure to be over ruled as this has come up before and already been ruled on as legal. This is the same judge that has had some other off the wall rulings and been overturned.

We stopped saying the Pledge in my district in the 5th grade because some parent complained. One day everyone had to say it...the next day it was gone.

In America, arrogance is taking over. The word “submit” is seen as “enslave” and using it will send fearful people into moral outrage. The concern about “under God” hasn’t got anything to do with freedom of religion. It has everything to do with the word “under”. Americans refuse to be “under” anyone. It is an attitude that will ultimately destroy the fabric that holds us together.

Lon wrote: I pledge allegiance to the flag, of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation INDIVISIBLE, with liberty and justice for all.

That's the way I learned it as a school boy in Kindergarten /1939. It was changed in 1954 to "one nation under GOD" instead of one nation indivisible.

Frankly, I always liked it the way it was because after the very bloody Civil War that the U.S. engaged in during the 1860's. it was important for the country to be united and to pledge to that affect.

The PLEDGE is once again in the news as a judge in the 9th Circuit Court has ruled that California school children not be allowed to recite the PLEDGE because of the use of GOD. The judge is sure to be over ruled as this has come up before and already been ruled on as legal. This is the same judge that has had some other off the wall rulings and been overturned.


If the Judge's ruling were to be upheld, then it could become very expensive for the Government. Because then they would have to collect & burn every US bill note that has printed on them: "In God We Trust" (All others pay cash! OK this part's just for fun, couldn't resist)

And also all the coins have stamped on them: "In God We Trust", would also have to be collected melted down & reminted.

What ever happened to the "Majority Rules" aspect of our Nation. Should "a few" now dictate to "the masses"? :-5

actionfigurestepho wrote: We stopped saying the Pledge in my district in the 5th grade because some parent complained. One day everyone had to say it...the next day it was gone.


And with it went a simple tool for teaching our children to love and respect the country of their birth.

We The People....have lost perspective when something as simple as having children and adults pledge their support for their country becomes a controversy.

I agree with Cars, what happened to government by the majority?

By the way...this morning was Constitution Day. So I organized the students to stand around our flagpole, then I raised the flag, and as it unfurled in the morning sun, we all said the Pledge of Allegiance loudly and clearly.

So sue me.

(Jives holds out his wrists as if expecting to be arrested.)

Jives wrote: And with it went a simple tool for teaching our children to love and respect the country of their birth.

We The People....have lost perspective when something as simple as having children and adults pledge their support for their country becomes a controversy.

I agree with Cars, what happened to government by the majority?

By the way...this morning was Constitution Day. So I organized the students to stand around our flagpole, then I raised the flag, and as it unfurled in the morning sun, we all said the Pledge of Allegiance loudly and clearly.

So sue me.

(Jives holds out his wrists as if expecting to be arrested.)


Thank you Jives. I hope it doesn't come to the point that you could be arrested. I get the impression you would be willing to pay the price though.

Clint wrote: Thank you Jives. I hope it doesn't come to the point that you could be arrested. I get the impression you would be willing to pay the price though.


Yes...yes, I would Clint. I'm not in education because I need the money. It's something I believe in. I believe in my country the same way.

Besides.... educational legality and I are only in a casual relationship, with my thoughts always being on what is best for the students and not what is mandated by a far-away politician or lawyer.

We say the Pledge every day in our classrooms, all throughout the school. Even the tardy ones stop in the hallway, and wait politely until the Pledge is over. There has never been a complaint at any school I have worked at about the Pledge. If for religious reasons a child is requested not to stand and say the Pledge, they sit politely and then we begin our day. It starts our day out great!

chonsigirl wrote: We say the Pledge every day in our classrooms, all throughout the school. Even the tardy ones stop in the hallway, and wait politely until the Pledge is over. There has never been a complaint at any school I have worked at about the Pledge. If for religious reasons a child is requested not to stand and say the Pledge, they sit politely and then we begin our day. It starts our day out great!




That's great, as it should be!!! THIS IS AMERICA!!!! :-5

Lon wrote: I pledge allegiance to the flag, of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation INDIVISIBLE, with liberty and justice for all.

That's the way I learned it as a school boy in Kindergarten /1939. It was changed in 1954 to "one nation under GOD" instead of one nation indivisible.

Frankly, I always liked it the way it was because after the very bloody Civil War that the U.S. engaged in during the 1860's. it was important for the country to be united and to pledge to that affect.

The PLEDGE is once again in the news as a judge in the 9th Circuit Court has ruled that California school children not be allowed to recite the PLEDGE because of the use of GOD. The judge is sure to be over ruled as this has come up before and already been ruled on as legal. This is the same judge that has had some other off the wall rulings and been overturned.


I did not know "under God" was added. I like indivisible much better. I always feel great pride in saying the pledge and have had a problem with the God thing but it never stopped me from pledging my allegience to this country. JMO - they should change it back to indivisible.

I'm curious as to how many of the posters knew that the pledge was changed in 1954 to omit INDIVISIBLE & substitute UNDER GOD?

flopstock wrote: See, Ya had me until -the kid sits politely.



For the love of the word 'god' we are singling kids out as 'different'. 'Under god' has just divided what should be the indivisible in your classroom. 'Under god' has been allowed to trump 'one nation indivisible' and begin the divide, at school age. 'Under god' has more importance than pledging allegience.

I'm sorry, but I really think that at a minimum, that kid should be standing like everyone else and pledging allegience to one nation indivisible.
That depends...is the child not participating because of the word "God" or because it's the pledge of alegiance to America?

The implication is one has to do with religion, and one has to do with patriotism to America.

Lon wrote: I'm curious as to how many of the posters knew that the pledge was changed in 1954 to omit INDIVISIBLE & substitute UNDER GOD?
I knew it had been changed, but not when. My dad raised us to use "indivisible" and that is how I've always said it.

flopstock wrote: See, Ya had me until -the kid sits politely.



For the love of the word 'god' we are singling kids out as 'different'. 'Under god' has just divided what should be the indivisible in your classroom. 'Under god' has been allowed to trump 'one nation indivisible' and begin the divide, at school age. 'Under god' has more importance than pledging allegience.

I'm sorry, but I really think that at a minimum, that kid should be standing like everyone else and pledging allegience to one nation indivisible.
Well, Jehovah Witnesses have the legal right to not stand for the pledge, and we have to obey the law. There has been a Supreme Court decision about this point. In my classroom, I handle it as having a talk with parent, checking that this is their religion, and the allowance of the child sitting. Other teachers handle the situation differently, but it is open to a potential lawsuit for the school to force that particular child to stand.

http://http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/sc ... &invol=624

So, umm....Jehovah's Witlesses don't believe in God?

Not taking a shot at you Chonsi, obviously you are going to obey the law, I am confused as to why JW's would have a problem with this. Seems the more I find out about this so-called religion, the less sense it makes. Not that it ever made much sense to me.

Baby, I took this off the Watchtower site..................



Jehovah’s Witnesses are not allowed to salute the flag of any nation, recite the pledge of allegiance, stand for or sing the national anthem, run for public office, vote, or serve in the armed forces.

http://www.towerwatch.com/Witnesses/Bel ... fs_pfv.htm

As a teacher, I allow them their religious choice, as long as it is not disruptive in any manner. The few times I have had them as students, this has never happened.

Lon wrote: I'm curious as to how many of the posters knew that the pledge was changed in 1954 to omit INDIVISIBLE & substitute UNDER GOD?


I told you I didn't - I was born in 1955.

flopstock wrote: Doesn't matter to me either way. You should either have all the the kids doing it or none of the kids. We are either united as a nation or we are not. If you are a citizen of this country, and the countries children are required to pledge, it needs to be worded so that ALL the children can be united in it or it should be dropped. Or at least a religious neutral alternative offered to be recited at the same time. It sends the wrong message when one or two of twenty kids in a classroom are singled out as 'different' every morning.
I agree completely. I was curious as to the reasoning. I have a problem with it whichever it might have been.



This could get dragged way off topic here, so I'm leavin' the JW's discussion alone now.

*back on topic*

It was not a unanimous decision to stop the pledge,

Circuit Judge Ferdinand Fernandez, who agreed with some elements of the decision but disagreed with the overall opinion, said phrases such as "under God" or "In God We Trust" have "no tendency to establish religion in this country," except in the eyes of those who "most fervently would like to drive all tincture of religion out of the public life of our polity."

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/LAW/06/26/ ... llegiance/

BTS just found a great sight he can't copy - it truly speaks to the heart of America - God believed or not God believed. I hope he finds a way to put it on FG. I had tears in my eyes Go to - on Google - http://www.poofcat.comjuly.html Turn your audio up.

The words "Indivisable" was not removed from the pledge!!

http://www.conniescorner.net/memorials/ ... giance.htm

The importance of the word “God” is less of an issue than the word “under” as I said in an earlier post. The reference to God is important but loses it’s ability to offend without the word “under”.

I have observed three different City Councils operate up close and personal. I was Mayor Pro tem as an elected City Councilor on one of them. Two of the bodies were in constant turmoil with a lack of civility and decorum. One functioned relatively smoothly with a noticeable lack of rancor and grandstanding. You guessed it… two of them didn’t open with prayer and the one that did functioned the best.

The prayers were offered by guests from the various faiths in the community. Some of them prayed to gods that don’t exist in the Bible. Even with those who prayed to what I call strange gods, the meetings were remarkably more civil than what I experienced in the other two cities. I wondered why.

I believe it is because of the word “under”. When people will acknowledge that there is a god/God and will place themselves under that deity, they declare that they are not god/God themselves. They imply that they will answer to a power greater than themselves for their actions, with eternal consequences. They humble themselves at the beginning of a meeting that can be destroyed by a lack of humility.

A nation that doesn’t frequently acknowledge that it is not god/God corporately or individually is a nation that will soon be destroyed by its selfish pride and arrogance. The movement toward the removal of God’s name from the public’s consciousness is being driven by those who consider government itself to be equal to God. When we watch them carefully we see that they, themselves, operate with a lack of humility, an obvious arrogance and the lack of civility.

To my knowledge, we have no 'oath of alleigance' in the UK....when i went to school, we were taught the National Anthem, but i don't think this happens any more which i personally think is appalling.... having said that, there are other patriotic songs that I prefer...Jerusalem for instance. (NOTE: I do like the US national anthem...used to know it off by heart. I find it very poignant.) A ceremony has recently been introduced for people who are granted British Citizenship...they have to swear alleigance to the Queen. This 'swearing in ceremony', was previously done in front of a solicitor. I have searched the net for the 'Words' that are used at this ceremony to no avail. I would be very interested if anyone can find something. Arnold...you may be able to help out here ?

posted by Bez

To my knowledge, we have no 'oath of alleigance' in the UK....when i went to school, we were taught the National Anthem, but i don't think this happens any more which i personally think is appalling.... having said that, there are other patriotic songs that I prefer...Jerusalem for instance. (NOTE: I do like the US national anthem...used to know it off by heart. I find it very poignant.) A ceremony has recently been introduced for people who are granted British Citizenship...they have to swear alleigance to the Queen. This 'swearing in ceremony', was previously done in front of a solicitor. I have searched the net for the 'Words' that are used at this ceremony to no avail. I would be very interested if anyone can find something. Arnold...you may be able to help out here ?


Hopefully there never will be. We are a free people that elect our government and they serve us. The allegiance has to be earned. Most, IMO, would find being asked to swear an oath of allegiance insulting. Especially with a monarchy still in place-smacks too much of feudalism. If you want to go on bended knee to a monarch feel free don't expect everybody else to feel the same way. Blind patriotism is not part of the british psyche nor should it ever be.

I am ambivalent about the monarchy-president Blair is frightening prospect, it's bad enough that he rules by crony and the setee. To formalise that kind of power would be a big mistake. At least we can hope parliament will exert it's authority and put him in his place and restore parliamentary democracy with the house of commons calling the tune.

As to the national anthem-God save the queen is about the queen, leaving aside the racism of the third verse, the UK is a united kingdon not a monolithic state. You do need an english anthem, jerusalem is as good as any but from my point of view as a scot it's not exactly patriotic.

flopstock wrote: Ya know Clint, I debated whether to answer this one, 'cause I don't want to sound like i'm sucking up, but the fact of the matter is that I see you as an exception. You walk the walk and talk the talk .... most national politicians just don't. They are a bunch of hypocrites, that throw religious and family values around when it is convenient for them.



They are only interested in power. And folks with power that use religion as a weapon against opponents, is an ugly thing to watch. Because it works. And god help the politician that doesn't present themselves as deeply religious.



If the folks in power who claim 'belief' actually acted accordingly, i'd have no gripe with them. I'll buy the claim Clint, when Washington is filled with clones of you. Until then, all the hoopla over 'under god' is just good old fashioned politicing to me.
Now look what you've done. It's going to take a month for me to get my head shrunk back down so my favorite hat will fit.

Seriously... I'm humbled and honored. I don't deserve your kind words.

BTW. I'm not a national politician...I'm not even a local one anymore.:driving:

gmc wrote: posted by Bez





Hopefully there never will be. We are a free people that elect our government and they serve us. The allegiance has to be earned. Most, IMO, would find being asked to swear an oath of allegiance insulting. Especially with a monarchy still in place-smacks too much of feudalism. If you want to go on bended knee to a monarch feel free don't expect everybody else to feel the same way. Blind patriotism is not part of the british psyche nor should it ever be.



I am ambivalent about the monarchy-president Blair is frightening prospect, it's bad enough that he rules by crony and the setee. To formalise that kind of power would be a big mistake. At least we can hope parliament will exert it's authority and put him in his place and restore parliamentary democracy with the house of commons calling the tune.



As to the national anthem-God save the queen is about the queen, leaving aside the racism of the third verse, the UK is a united kingdon not a monolithic state. You do need an english anthem, jerusalem is as good as any but from my point of view as a scot it's not exactly patriotic.


I'm glad you got that off your chest...hope you feel better. ...

I am a patriot...a loyal UK citizen. I don't believe I posted an opinion about Royalty and I'm not about to do so.

Non UK citizens applying for citizen ship have to swear some kind of alleigance...I am curious to know the content that is all.

I believe that 'Scotland the Brave' is favoured as a Scottish anthem....I'm sure you'll correct me if I'm wrong.

What would you sugget as a United Kingdom anthem then ?

posted by bez

I'm glad you got that off your chest...hope you feel better. ...

I am a patriot...a loyal UK citizen. I don't believe I posted an opinion about Royalty and I'm not about to do so.

Non UK citizens applying for citizen ship have to swear some kind of alleigance...I am curious to know the content that is all.

I believe that 'Scotland the Brave' is favoured as a Scottish anthem....I'm sure you'll correct me if I'm wrong.

What would you sugget as a United Kingdom anthem then ?


Actually you did. God save the queen is about the monarchy, specifically a protestant monarchy at that. I too am a loyal UK citizen which is why i can exercise my right to say what I like. Not being a monarchist I can see them far enough. Blind patriotism is a recipe for disaster. The day you can't take the **** out of the monarchy or any other institution and criticise them will hopefully not happen in my lifetime.

On the other hand I would leave things pretty much as they are as I doubt the alternatives would improve things, if it aint broke don't fix it.

UK anthem? I wouldn't bother, god save the queen serves as well as any. leave it alone. As to a scots anthem most scots would say flower of scotland mainly cos it's a good tune but its also look at the past and move on. It's the different nationalities in the UK that make it special who wants one amorphous mass. I am pleased the english now use their own flag at football and cricket matches instead of the union one about time you were proud of being english instead of feeling sorry for yourselves:sneaky:

gmc wrote: UK anthem? I thought it was "Hail Britannia."

I'm with Floppy on this one. Clint you are a true Christian, someone dedicated to helping others and making their own lives better with religion. It's not a tool or crowbar for you, it's just plain faith.

Here's something to think about...who says it's the Christian "God" that's being referred to here? Why can't the God be "Bhudda" for some and "Krishna" for others? Even "Mohammad?"

One nation...under (fill in your own Creator) indivisable,....etc.:-2

posted by tepaquacky

I thought it was "Hail Britannia."


I assume you mean "Rule Britannia". Nope we're stuck with god save the queen/king based on a French tune written about a German king as a plea to god to save him when the scots were coming to get him led by a french midget named after three sheep dogs, bonnie, prince and charlie..

gmc wrote: posted by tepaquacky





I assume you mean "Rule Britannia". Nope we're stuck with god save the queen/king based on a French tune written about a German king as a plea to god to save him when the scots were coming to get him led by a french midget named after three sheep dogs, bonnie, prince and charlie..*screaming laughing* go GMC :wah:

GMC you little tinker, I am English and have never felt sorry for myself as I know I have won the lottery of life.

You can have Flower of Scotland which I believe was written as some mincey folk song in the sixties.

I think England should have Waterloo by Abba to remind us of hammering the French.

posted by bothwell

GMC you little tinker, I am English and have never felt sorry for myself as I know I have won the lottery of life.

You can have Flower of Scotland which I believe was written as some mincey folk song in the sixties.

I think England should have Waterloo by Abba to remind us of hammering the Frenc


Well Napoleon did call the British were a nation of shopkeepers and at Waterloo he was charged over and over agiain till the account was settled.

Came across this little gem. Seems nobody writes their own national anthem:sneaky:

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0194015.html



On Sept. 13, 1814, Francis Scott Key visited the British fleet in Chesapeake Bay to secure the release of Dr. William Beanes, who had been captured after the burning of Washington, DC. The release was secured, but Key was detained on ship overnight during the shelling of Fort McHenry, one of the forts defending Baltimore. In the morning, he was so delighted to see the American flag still flying over the fort that he began a poem to commemorate the occasion. First published under the title “Defense of Fort M'Henry,” the poem soon attained wide popularity as sung to the tune “To Anacreon in Heaven.” The origin of this tune is obscure, but it may have been written by John Stafford Smith, a British composer born in 1750. “The Star-Spangled Banner” was officially made the national anthem by Congress in 1931, although it already had been adopted as such by the army and the navy.

I'd always heard the tune was from an English drinking song. It made me wonder about English drinkers.

Or loved fireworks while they were writing it..........................

posted by chonsgirl

Or loved fireworks while they were writing it....


My understanding is that the "rockets red glare" was the congreave rockets fired by the British at Fort McHenry and the bomb blasts were the shrapnel shells. Apparently we even helped you choose the colour of the white house round about the same time.

Ft. McHenry................I live less than 10 miles from it.

gmc wrote: Apparently we even helped you choose the colour of the white house round about the same time.


Yes....then burned it down in the war of 1812.

:wah:

Jives wrote: Yes....then burned it down in the war of 1812.

:wah:


The moments that made us love our flag even more..........

The original one that flew over Fort McHenry, is at the American History Museum in Washington, D.C.

Dear GMC,



Thanks for the swell flag. The colors and design are awesome. It goes with everything.



Love,

USA



p.s. Tell everybody we said 'hi'

My SIL leaves Saturday morning for IRAQ...........I'm sad and so is my daughter who happwns to be his WIFE.

Far Rider wrote:

It always has been an option, Jehovahs wittnesses do not say the pledge as a rule. No one forces them to.


Good point Far. Boy... those JW's have it rough, don't they? No Christmas presents, no singing, no dancing. Church 5 times a week. Whew!:(