The Kid Who Doesn’t Pledge Our Flag
Posted on February 1, 2006
Hat tip: Florida Masochist
From the comments:
What the left is basically saying is that there should be no rules in school, because technically they violate the student’s civil liberties. Free speech could mean the teachers couldn’t tell their kids to shut up while they’re teaching. Free expression means they can give the principle the finger. How far are we going to take these things?
Via the Palm Beach Post
A student is ending his fight with the Palm Beach County School Board over being told he must stand during the Pledge of Allegiance, but the battle isn’t over for Cameron Frazier.
Frazier is aiming instead at eliminating the state law that requires local school officials to make students stand.
The school board is scheduled to vote Wednesday on settling the part of the lawsuit Frazier filed against board members, his teacher and assistant principal for $32,500. But Frazier, a Boynton Beach High junior who said he was berated in class when he refused to stand during the pledge, wants more than that.
Yes, $32,500 could never cover the mental damage and anguish this poor victim child has had to bear. Besides, this won’t be enough to buy that new car he was wanting. It is absolutely terrible that this kid was made to actually get his lazy butt out of his chair and stand up during the pledge.
Earlier this month, he named the state Board of Education and state Education Commissioner John Winn as defendants in his lawsuit, too.
That’s because winning a lawsuit against the school district won’t change the law.
“We’re working to attempt to limit the Palm Beach County School Board’s exposure and that of the assistant principal and the school teacher,” said James Green, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney representing Frazier.
But the state Board of Education is charged with making sure school districts follow state law, and Winn’s job is to help the state board with their job, the suit says. State law says students must stand during the Pledge of Allegiance, even if they don’t recite the pledge. The school district’s student handbook cites that law, and requires students to have written permission not to say the pledge.
The suit contends that the state law that requires Frazier and other students to stand is unconstitutional because it conflicts with the First and 14th amendments to the Constitution, which provide for the rights of freedom of speech and due process. Frazier should be able to sit quietly during the pledge.
In the suit, Frazier says that on Dec. 8, his math teacher, Cynthia Alexandre, scolded him in front of his classmates when he refused to stand for the pledge. Frazier said he told her he hadn’t stood for the pledge since he was a sixth-grader.
In our parent’s generation this would have been unheard of. The mentality of our Nation has went sour. The left will hold this kid as a hero, and defend his actions as the epitomy of patriotism. They are absolutely backwards. It is the epitomy of shame. The sad fact is that the ACLU will probably win in this one. It is a free Country, and no one should be forced to love it. However, I highly suggest to those who don’t respect it to go live in some other Country.
Scolded in front of his classmates??? Heaven forbid! If I had been one of his classmates, I would have made him see some stars he would respect. If I were his parents, he wouldn’t want to sit down after I showed him after the kind of red stripes I showed him. Dissent is one thing, disrespect for the very freedom that gives you that right is another. Just because you have the right to do something doesn’t mean it is the right thing to do.
» Filed Under 1st Amendment, ACLU, News
Trackback URL
Comments
61 Responses to “The Kid Who Doesn’t Pledge Our Flag”
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Advertise
Donate
Steal Me
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
More blogs about the ACLU
Perhaps this is a future democrat candidate for congress.
I’d have a hard time punishing my kid for beating the ever living snot of such a disprectful lefty.
The number of people in my generation who have died for his freedom, not to mention all the people since 1492 who have died for our nation. The disprectful attitude not to stand and pledge allegence to the country that gave him his freedom to dissent.
Go ahead son, kick him again.
Another goof-ball growing up moony! LOL. I like your stars and stripes analogy at the end. I’m on board with that sentiment.
I don’t know what to think. First, I am just as sick that people don’t respect the flag. But, on the other hand, men died so he could have the right to say no. As for making a big lawsuit out of it, maybe he shouldn’t. However, we cannot win against Newdow’s bullying remarks if we force people to respect the flag and pledge to it. It’s important that we never force anyone to pledge the flag so that when morons like Newdow come along, we can remind them that nobody is being forced to participate. I definitely am not liberal. I have a deep respect for this country and her symbols. But, I want to be fair and not appear hypocritical as well.
I agree James, but no one was forcing him to pledge, only to stand out of respect. There is a difference between dissent and disrespect.
Haldol, shut up. I’m saying this kid has no respect for the very freedom that gives him the right to dissent. I think he does have the right to sit, dissent, and disrespect. I think the ACLU are legally correct here.
Just because you have a right doesn’t mean its the right thing to do. And if this kid was mine, I’d have a good long talk with him.
It’s ironic that he won’t pledge the U.S. flag but wants protection to not do so under the U.S. Constitution. I guess he has that right but lol!
James…I disagree with some of what you say. Men didn’t die so that someone can urinate on the flag or commit some other sort of desecration. Men died that we might be able to dissent about things political…I don’t believe that men like Jefferson and Washington, among others, envisioned such blatant as a form of political discourse. That’s one of the phony lies peddled by the smutmongers in the ACLU. The other is that you can’t force someone to respect the flag and the pledge. The fact is that you can legislate those things and the voters of Florida did. If this latter Thoreau thinks he can get away with it, he can, BUT only to the degree that we allow him. If he doesn’t want to stand up, prosecute him, fine him and let his little high school candy ass sit in jail and think about what he did. If he wants to dissent politically, let him pay the price.
I’m telling you. The American public school system is going to hell in a hand basket. This is just another example of that.
Watch the teacher get sued for “scolding” him. The kid’ll claim mental anguish for being “scolded” in front of his class-mates. I smell a made-for-TV movie…
-OC
What the left is basically saying is that there should be no rules in school, because technically they violate the student’s civil liberties. Free speech could mean the teachers couldn’t tell their kids to shut up while they’re teaching. Free expression means they can give the principle the finger. How far are we going to take these things? If a teacher has the class stand for the pledge, you stand. Period. You don’t have to pledge, but you do have to submit to authority.
If wanting to have a child, yes a child, who basically thumbs his nose in face of a patriotic symbol in a time of war makes me a stormtrooper for the right… then sign me up. I’ll be happy to follow “Darth W.” on the path to the Dark Side.
Hating America is not an American value.
If wanting to have a child, yes a child, who basically thumbs his nose in face of a patriotic symbol in a time of war, punished makes me a stormtrooper for the right… then sign me up. I’ll be happy to follow “Darth W.” on the path to the Dark Side.
Hating America is not an American value.
It is hard to have a child who has respect for anything if he or she is never taught it. Any parents who’s first reaction to this is to sue the school instead of following the scholls rules to begin with (by sending in a note as required)no wonder they have a child like that.
Ah, Jay’s into deleting now! Let’s see, no profanity, blog, staying on topic…looks like there was no real reason to erse my stuff, so the bottom line as that Jay is a clueless hypocrite who can’t take the heat of having his crippled opinions torn up and shoved down his throat. One more time for old times’ sake…
——————–
Jay didn’t delete you…I did!
As I told you in another thread, I’m done with you. You are not here to dissent or debate but to disrupt.
We have given you the benefit of the doubt and allowed you a forum to spew your obnoxious, arrogant, disrespectful garbage. You abused it so that privilage has been revoked.
ANY post from you will be deleted in its entirety.
Lobo
This post is primarily as responce to the post made by #13.
While your post bounces around like an errant tennis ball, agreeing with everything and saying nothing, well that too is your “right.” Inspite of all that you have ignored the “problem!” This “STUDENT” has NO respect for the RIGHTS HE CLAIMS! Many of the posters are CORRECT! BUT unfortunately the liberal and anti American ACLU will probably win this case. This student, just as many others have NOT been taught the basic civic responsibilties of the American Citizen.The fact that our tax dollars support the ACLU is one of the failures of this Nations Leaders as it is determined to undermines any and all types of responsibily which requires individual accountability!The Student should be disiplined by the school AND his parents!
Swede1
If the ACLU presses the case it will be a slam-dunk. It has already been ruled by the Supreme Court (in the 1930s or 40s) that nobody can be compelled to recite the pledge of allegiance.
If you can’t forgo it, it’s meaningless anyway.
Yeah, yeah…you all miss the point.
I agree that legally the ACLU are in the right on this one. He has the right…doesn’t mean its the right thing to do.
Now, are you guys saying that if I were a seventeen year old classmate that I wouldn’t have the right to ridicule, and knock the living snot out of him? Every action has consequences. Are you saying that as a parent that I wouldn’t have the right to discipline him the way I saw fit? If it is anti-American you guys love it.
Who was harmed when he didn’t recite the pledge. And I don’t mean some abstraction like your sensibilities were injured. I mean bruises.
“Now, are you guys saying that if I were a seventeen year old classmate that I wouldn’t have the right to ridicule, and knock the living snot out of him? ”
You would not. That would be not only unlawful but morally reprehensible.
“Are you saying that as a parent that I wouldn’t have the right to discipline him the way I saw fit?”
No, you can’t beat him into insensibility. That would be unlawful. And what on earth does that have to do with the issue at hand?
Thank you for agreeing that he was well within his rights.
Sorry, no. He has the right not to say the pledge. He does not have the right not to stand out of respect for the authority over him. I say again, free speech does not extend to the classroom. If you doubt me, try attending class with a pot-leaf on your shirt. Its simple respect. If freedom of religion is to be controlled and regulated in school, (like a student giving an altar call) than so is free expression.
“What could be more totalitatian than a state forcing its citizens to partake of a token ritual?”
Forcing him to stand is not forcing him to say the pledge. You people are unbelievable. How about defending his rights not to show up at school if he didn’t want to? Wouldn’t harm anyone or violate someone else’s liberties would it? How about defending his right to call his teacher a lard-[edited]? Its his opinion and he has the right to express it after all. Both examples I just gave would fall under free speech and free expression. Or are you going to pick and choose how far civil liberties can be taken? If so, welcome to the right wing of the world. All he was asked to do was stand. He has NO right not to do as he’s told as he was not forced to say anything, merely stand.
“What could be more totalitatian than a state forcing its citizens to partake of a token ritual?”
How about not letting them publicly pray or express their faith in the public school or at a graduation ceremony? That would be more totalitarion.
Jay says:
“How about not letting them publicy pray or express their faith in the public school or at a graduation ceremony? That would be more totalitatian.”
At a graduation ceremony people of all faiths who wish to attend are compelled to listen. Compelling religious observance should be repugnant to you.
It is perfectly legal for children to pray or read their Bibles at school. Prayer and Bible study classes are in thousands of school in the nation.
What is illegal is compulsory prayer. But, again, that should be repugnant to any person of faith.
This all could have been advoided if his parents did what is required of them and send in a note that their son does not wish to participate in the Pledge. That is school policy that Parental Consent be given. Now isn’t that a novel idea in making him follow the rules. All the Liberals defend his right to do as he pleases but why are they not standing of for the boy who refused to stand while the National Athem of another country (Mexico) was played in his school.He was disiplined by the school and suspended where is the ACLU and all the other Liberals defending that kid. Oh that is right they only support being disrepectful to anything American as long as you worship other countrries and the UN.
“I would have made him see some stars he would respect.”
So you agree with the thug like behavior being played out by Muslims who are angry over people disrespecting their precious symbol?
“It is perfectly legal for children to pray or read their Bibles at school. Prayer and Bible study classes are in thousands of school in the nation.”
“It is perfectly legal for children to pray or read their Bibles at school. Prayer and Bible study classes are in thousands of school in the nation.”
You guys tell that to the students at Wisconsin University, where RA’s are not allowed to hold Bible studies in their own dorm on their own time. The ACLU will NOT defend them by the way. Quite the opposite.
“The ACLU has never done this. Check the link above. They’ve been pretty strident for student’s rights in this matter.”
You better check this out then and get back to me.
apostle wrote:
“Wisconsin University, where RA’s are not allowed to hold Bible studies in their own dorm on their own time.”
This one is a little trickier because RAs are university employees. Frankly I agree with FIRE, etc. They should be allowed to do it as long as they do keep it private and don’t try to coerce the students in their care.
“don’t try to coerce the students in their care.”
If by “coerce” you mean “persuade”, then that is still violating their religious expression.
From thehomeofheroes.com:
It still was an “unofficial” pledge until June 22, 1942 when the United States Congress included the Pledge to the Flag in the United States Flag Code (Title 36). This was the first Official sanction given to the words that had been recited each day by children for almost fifty years. *** One year after receiving this official sanction, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that school children could not be forced to recite the Pledge as part of their daily routine. *** In 1945 the Pledge to the Flag received its official title as:
The Pledge of Allegiance
*** Emphasis added.
Two points to consider:
(1) The Pledge is not part of federal law, nor was it developed by the Founding Fathers. The recitation is a new development in our history; my mother-in-law, aged 74, never had to said it as a child.
(2) SCOTUS has ruled that a child is within his legal rights as a citizen of the USA to refuse to say the pledge. Something called the First Amendment … Jehovah Witnesses, for example, are forbidden by their religion to recite the Pledge, as they consider the action idolatry.
Some people may just answer to a higher law.
A bunch of comments this afternoon and evening. I’m very happy to see the participation. As retired 9.5 yrs. mil and 35+ years Const. Industry I always relied upon my subordinates for advice and consent. BUT, I never forgot nor “gave” away the fact that I was the “Boss.” I included as possible ALL ideas, any and ALL suggestions which made an operation, or job WORK! This is exactly what GWB is doing, and he is doing it WELL! Now!
What does This have to do with a teenaged kid’s inability to conform to the “rules?”
Well, I believe it starts at HOME and really ends at HOME! So to make this short, lol, We can NOT expect the teachers to be “baby” setters! Some where this young MAN, that’s right, I did NOT say child! Lost it, NO values, NO respect for his peers, and as far as I am concerned….NO selfrespect! TOO BAD Perhaps a Good young man GONE!
Swede1
Jay, do you actually bother to engage your brain before writing your blog, or is that not a prerequisite? Is it possible that you see nothing wrong with threatening physical abuse for someone who does not want to stand for the pledge? What’s next? Beating up a black for not going to the back of the bus? Oh, I’m sorry, that was the 1950s. Surely things have changed since then.
Sergio:
You MUST have entered into the WRONG web site!
Get Real….Against the ACLU? Damn RIGHT! I am. BUT I never figured that I’d NEED an attorney to tell me that I did NOT bring my two wonderful DAUGHTERS up RIGHT. BUT……I’ll damn well tell YOU and anyone else, Pledge of Allegiance, God Bless America, or any other Patriot symbol which respects OUR country, WE STAND! and we do STAND TALL! Myself 9 1/2 yrs AF, Both my Daughters, college graduates, military! But I’d have Kicked their little BUTTS for pulling the garbage this spoiled pampered WIMP did!
Have a Great Evening, after finding a wimpy liberal stand for NOTHING web site.
Swede1
“(2) SCOTUS has ruled that a child is within his legal rights as a citizen of the USA to refuse to say the pledge.”
Once again since no one got it the first time: He was not being forced to recite anything. He was told to stand. This is just like public prayer.
” Compelling religious observance should be repugnant to you.”
It would be, except no one is forced to observe religion at a graduation altar call. They are asked to shut up and TOLERATE it while others do. (I thought tolerance was the main point of liberalism?)
“What is illegal is compulsory prayer.”
Right again, and since no one is forced to pray, only TOLERATE it while others do so, it wouldn’t be illegal. What is illegal is preventing teachers from praying with there class voluntarily. What is illegal is preventing campus RA’s from holding Bible studies in their own dorm on their own time, and even outside the dorm. Any prevention is violating their civil liberties, which the ACLU is fighting to revoke.
What’s more is that if a student has the right to tell his teacher “no” when it comes to standing for the pledge, than it stands to reason that we are violating his civil liberties just by making him go to school. I love this debate because since we”re bringing up the Constitution, let us follow it and abolish public school, as it has no place in our society. It is an un-Constitutionl policy.
Speaking of engaging a brain… any deep thoughts on Trolling a blog you clearing disagree with? You do know that your only making a fool of yourself by giving us the time of day.
Please move along, here 35 cents go call someone who cares.
“Mix fiery passion with bone-jarring ignorance and watch what happens!”
Result: Haldol.
I’d tell you to post your garbage on your own blog, but I see no one cares to visit it.
“You do know that your only making a fool of yourself by giving us the time of day”
Yes, you’d think someone with is his obvious “expertise” in science should have something more important to do than repeatedly try to post on a blog that continues to delete him. This is evidence of a childish mentality that throws a fit when no one pays attention to him. A real adult would be able to argue and debate without insulting Jesus, so the only possible answers to the mysterious mud puddle that is Haldol:
a.)a teenager with no friends, no girl, looking for an outlet to vent his sexual, social, and mental frustrations.
b.)an adult with no job and all the time in the world.
apostle:
“Right again, and since no one is forced to pray, only TOLERATE it while others do so,”
There is no reason to tolerate a destruction of ones rights. You–and I–have a right to not be compelled to attent a religious observance. It does you no good whatso ever. It doesn’t do ANYBODY any good, not even the dominionist doing the compelling. (Only a dominionist thinks compelling prayer or religious observance has anything to do with worshiping God.)
“What is illegal is preventing teachers from praying with there class voluntarily. ”
teachers may not “voluntarily” force other people’s children to pray.
“What is illegal is preventing campus RA’s from holding Bible studies in their own dorm on their own time, ”
I’m with you on this one
“and even outside the dorm.”
this is a fabrication
Swede:
“Get Real….Against the ACLU? Damn RIGHT! I am.”
I know civil liberties are out of fashion with the right wing. OTHER PEOPLE’s civil liberties, of course. Ghandi once said that tyrants who don’t believe in freedom, always believe in it for themselves.
“You–and I–have a right to not be compelled to attent a religious observance”
You’re not. Don’t go to a graduation if they are giving altar calls.
“teachers may not “voluntarily” force other people’s children to pray”
They don’t have to pray. They can wait patiently until those that choose to are done. If it offends you tough crap. The Constitution does not protect you from being offended. It does however offend the civil liberties of Americans, which includes the right to express that religion freely. This right is not revoked once someone walks through school doors.
“I know civil liberties are out of fashion with the right wing.”
No, its just that the civil liberties we want protected are actually in the Constitution, while the liberties the left protect do not. Key example: abortion.
“it does however offend the civil liberties of Americans…”
Cross out “offend.” Replace with “protect.”
I don’t see that anyone needs to be “protected” from standing and showing proper (edited) respect to the (edited) American Flag.
If your going to live here and enjoy the freedoms that are provided for you by the deaths of so many, the very least you can do is stand and show the proper (edited) respect!
It’s not a matter of not having civil liberties. It’s a matter of respect and commonly accepted “civil” behavior. If you can’t stand and show respect to your the nation your in, why are you here?
Your chosing to remain here, so show the proper respect to the country.
There are people who are coming to the US illegally because the countries they live in are so (edited) up. If you can’t show the basic respect to country, then by all means, someone else will be happy to take your spot.
apostle:
“They can wait patiently until those that choose to are done. If it offends you tough crap. The Constitution does not protect you from being offended. It does however offend the civil liberties of Americans, which includes the right to express that religion freely.”
So somehow you have managed to kid yourself into believing that a prayer written by politicians, recited by a government employee to children who have no choice but to be present is not somehow establishment of religion.
So which constitution are you reading? The one from Saudi Arabia?
So what about a Muslim teacher making all the little Christian children “listen politely” to her prayers?
Do you know the largest single denomination of Christians is Catholic? How about making everybody’s children “listen politely” to a Catholic mass?
Praise Jesus and pass the communion wafers!
E L Frederick:
“There are people who are coming to the US illegally because the countries they live in are so (edited) up. If you can’t show the basic respect to country, then by all means, someone else will be happy to take your spot.”
Going along with vicious and immoral government policies is not respect for America. Quite the opposite. If you can’t “disrespect” the flag, then it doesn’t stand for anything. It’s just a rag.
How is standing and showing respect for a flag going along with a “vicious and immoral” goverment policy?
The men and women who died in service to the country for that “rag” deserve your respect enough to show respect to the “rag” they defended.
“Vicious and Immoral” like killing innocents in the name of religion? Like homicide bombers? You mean like the terrorists the ACLU is doing it’s best to hide and defend? You need to lay off the Kool-Aid.
E L Frederick:
“The men and women who died in service to the country for that “rag” deserve your respect enough to show respect to the “rag” they defended.”
I have never been disrespectful to our troops. They are the victims of vicious and immoral government policies. Why make it worse?
If we aren’t free to say anything we want no matter how distasteful, then it’s not a free country and the sacrifice of the men and women who fight for that freedom is in vain.
And don’t get me started on killing innocents in the name of religion or I will start posting links to Christian fundamentalits who murdered their children by praying over them instead of taking them to the doctor.
The ACLU defending terrorists is a fabrication.
And I am opposed to abortion.
I’m going to reword a quote, here. “I love how [you] ‘patriotic freedom lovers’ hate the Amer. CIVIL LIBERTIES Union and want to violently suppress dissenters. Where were [you] when the Soviet Union needed [you]?”
I’d guess that most of us were over seas doing our patriot duty for our Country, fighting the good fight, up holding your rights. Where you were? Other than whining like a whipped puppy?
I’d guess that most of us were over seas doing our patriot duty for our Country, fighting the good fight, up holding your rights. Where were you? Other than whining like a whipped puppy?
“So somehow you have managed to kid yourself into believing that a prayer written by politicians, recited by a government employee to children who have no choice but to be present is not somehow establishment of religion.”
I’m not kidding myself, its fact. The child has no choice but to be present, sure. Tell me how LISTENING to a prayer is forcing religion. Also, tell me how having a teacher recite a prayer establishes that prayer as religion. It doesn’t.
“Going along with vicious and immoral government policies is not respect for America.”
Yes making students stand for the pledge is such an immoral policy.
“Do you know the largest single denomination of Christians is Catholic? How about making everybody’s children “listen politely” to a Catholic mass?”
How about not violating the Constitution and privatize the school system? Then everyone can go where they want, and these debates would be moot. Its not the goverment’s job anyway.
“They are the victims of vicious and immoral government policies.”
Wrong. They are victim of anti-war protestors who have no idea what they are talking about. They VOLUNTEERED by the way. As did some of US.
“And don’t get me started on killing innocents in the name of religion or I will start posting links to Christian fundamentalits who murdered their children by praying over them instead of taking them to the doctor.”
Go ahead, name them. For every Christian pulling the crap your accusing them of (try naming 5)there are hundreds of thousands of men, women, and children, whose lives were claimed my Islamics through torture, gas, and starvation. Take the tin foil hat off and stop comparing Christianity to terrorism.
“The ACLU defending terrorists is a fabrication.”
Once again you’re wrong. Read and enjoy.
Apostle:
“I’m not kidding myself, its fact. The child has no choice but to be present, sure. Tell me how LISTENING to a prayer is forcing religion.”
If you have no choice, it’s forcing. Also it is the job of the parents to teach teach their children about religion, not some government employee.
“Also, tell me how having a teacher recite a prayer establishes that prayer as religion. It doesn’t.”
If it’s not religion, what’s the point? Who do you think they’d be praying to, H.L. Mencken?
The anti-war protesters are trying to keep the soldiers from getting their butts shot off in a pointless war based on lies.
Re Guantanamo: It’s called the American CIVIL LIBERTIES Union. You bet they are going to jump on prisoners held and tortured for years without even charges.
“Go ahead, name them. For every Christian pulling the crap your accusing them of (try naming 5)”
read and enjoy:
http://www.masskids.org/dbre/dbre_2.html
E L Frederick - First, a response to your immaturity. Your writing sounds like it came from someone who couldn’t possibly have more than a seventh grade education or so. Please learn grammar, spelling, and proper use of punctuation. Also, when you’re picking classes for next year, please try some *world* history, not just the pathetically bad “United States History” classes most schools have.
Now if you’re ready to converse like an adult, feel free to read on. If you aren’t, then please say so, and I’ll stop wasting my time on someone unwilling to learn.
I somehow think you don’t understand the question “Where were you when $name needed you?”
Largely, my issue is with the attitude contained in the sentences “If I had been one of his classmates, I would have made him see some stars he would respect. If I were his parents, he wouldn’t want to sit down after I showed him after the kind of red stripes I showed him.”. If you do not take issue with my statements as they apply to this, then please move on, as my previous comment was not directed towards you.
Ideas such as this were very much in favor with the Soviets. And any other oppressive regime, for that matter. By asking you where you were when the Soviet Union needed you, I am implying (and now, outright stating) that this type of attitude betrays not a love of freedom, but instead the same level of desire for power and control that ultimately led to the downfall of the USSR.
For that matter, this kind of thinking belies any and every extremist government, such as the one that was formerly in control of Iraq. It is a very short and slippery slope from telling someone to “sit down and shut up” during a graduation ceremony to the school sanctioning a particular religion. How would you justify that? And what would you tell to all of the people at that school who are not members of the official school religion?
And don’t try to answer this as though we’re discussing private schools. We clearly are not.
“If you have no choice, it’s forcing. Also it is the job of the parents to teach teach their children about religion, not some government employee.”
No its not. Forcing religion on someone is forcing them to believe what you believe, or practice what you practice. Praying before class is not TEACHING the Gospel by the way.
“The anti-war protesters are trying to keep the soldiers from getting their butts shot off in a pointless war based on lies.”
You can now give me a source proving that Saddam did not violate 14 Gulf War ceasefire treaties. If you can’t, than it wasn’t a lie. (WMD was one of 16 counts for going to war. Nice try)
As for your link: You pull a handful of cases spanning from almost 30 years, and you somehow equate that with the intentional bombing, gassing, torturing, and butchering of thousands of men, women, and children. I don’t get it.
“to the school sanctioning a particular religion. How would you justify that? And what would you tell to all of the people at that school who are not members of the official school religion?”
Which is why public education doesn’t work.
“And don’t try to answer this as though we’re discussing private schools. We clearly are not.”
We should be, because in the case of student-sponsored altar calls and prayer, it is not the school sanctioning of a religion. Unless the school makes it some kind of policy, it is not sanctioning of religion. The school has no right whatsoever to deny students their right to exercise their religion simply because its government property. So is Capital Hill and Congress prays before every session, and every President in our nation’s history swear on the Holy Bible. Call it symbolic, but if its not relgion, what’s the point?
Teachers freedom to express religion also does not go away because they teach on public property. As long as they are not TEACHING a religion, they can pray all they want, publicly. Unless they force students to pray with them, there is no law broken. You guys are saying that because students have to hear it oh well. There is nothing in the Constitution that defends your right not to be offended. This is why public education does not work. Privatize the system, and kids won’t need the ACLU anymore, they can go to the school whose policies they agree with. Saying that making someone stand for the pledge violates their civil liberties is like saying that forcing a student to write a letter to the president that they didn’t want to write is too. Where was the ACLU on that one? Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.
Read for yourself.
“Re Guantanamo: It’s called the American CIVIL LIBERTIES Union. You bet they are going to jump on prisoners held and tortured for years without even charges.”
No, they are going to defend the rights on un-American terrorists, which is what they did.
apostle:
“No its not. Forcing religion on someone is forcing them to believe what you believe, or practice what you practice. Praying before class is not TEACHING the Gospel by the way.”
You just contradicted yourself. Praying before the class is forcing them to practice what you practice. It is force because they have no choice but to listen.
If you enjoy having government employees forcing your children to listen to their prayers, well, that’s nice for you. I don’t. It’s not just rude and arrogant and in violation of several Christian principles, it’s unconstitutional.
Zimmie - Asking a child to show basic respect to country by standing (but not reciting) the Pledge is hardly oppressive!
Any country, Mexico, France, Germany, Iraq, Saudi, China, should be able to expect a basic level of civil behavior from it’s citizens. (As a parent)I feel that standing for the flag of one’s homeland is showing the proper respect and it NOT out of the realm of acceptable behavior.
There is a huge difference between expecting basic civil behavor and sponsoring a state religion. For one thing, even I would be up in arms if the President or Congress attempted to pass a law or ammendment that sponsored a single relgion as a “Country Wide Religion”, as it’s un-Consitutional.
I’m sorry that you feel that disrespecting the Flag, and thereby all the men and women who have died for your freedom is acceptable behavior.
EL Frederick:
“I’m sorry that you feel that disrespecting the Flag, and thereby all the men and women who have died for your freedom is acceptable behavior.”
this is a straw man. It doesn’t really matter if it’s acceptable or not. The 1st amendment was not designed to protect speech everybody likes. That doesn’t need protection. It was designed to protect “unacceptable” speech.
All those men and women died for our FREEDOM. If we are only free to express “acceptable” ideas, they died in vain.
There are way to dissent, way to properly vent your anguish and pain at the goverment.
Dispecting the Flag isn’t one of them.
I am not saying you can’t dissent. I am not saying that you don’t have the right to protest. I AM saying that this is not one of them.
You want to march on the lawn of congress with a banner. Knock yourself out. You want write your congressmen, go for it. You want to stand nekkid at your State Capitol… have fun.
However, don’t disrespect the Flag.
“However, don’t disrespect the Flag.”
If you can’t disrespect the flag it is a meaningless symbol. It might as well have a hammer and sickle on it or a star and crescent.
I don’t want to live in the countries represented by those symbols and I won’t live under their rules in this one.
E L Frederick - The asking isn’t what bugs me. My problem lies with Jay’s apparent desire to do violence to people who decline.
If the result of not showing respect for the flag is violence, how is that freedom? Isn’t that type of violence normally defined as assault in our legal system? Isn’t that sort of reaction a hallmark of oppressive governments?
Admittedly, the ability to not stand for the pledge isn’t nearly as significant as, say, “free speech zones” in terms of actual rights. Still, it’s absurd to require it (especially if the child isn’t going to actually pledge his allegiance to the nation), and even more so to threaten those who don’t.
As for how the religion thing got in there, that’s mostly a result apostle’s posts. Sorry, that was a very much misdirected question on my part.
To apostle, now. It seems a bit off to allow, say, the valedictorian to pray at graduation. What if this valedictorian was Islamic? Would you still have no problem with it? How about if the valedictorian belonged to the Church of Satan? Those are both legitimate religions (and the second isn’t much like people seem to think it is). If you would take issue with either of those, then why don’t you have a problem with another religion doing the same?
“Re Guantanamo: It’s called the American CIVIL LIBERTIES Union. You bet they are going to jump on prisoners held and tortured for years without even charges.”
So you want Terrorists to have the same rights under OUR Constitution that we do? They defend terrorists plain and simple.
The people at Gitmo have no rights what so ever under our Constitution they are Enemy combantants they are NOT American Citizens. They are not charged because we are at WAR they are not under arrest they are illegal enemy combantants.Maybe you would perfere that they are released to live in your Neighborhood or sent back over seas to kill more inocent people in their own countries?
“It is force because they have no choice but to listen.”
They are forced to listen, not practice religion. Therefore it does not violate the establishment clause. Also, if we go by that standard, students don’t have to listen to anything a teacher says, and forcing them to violates their civil liberties.
“It’s not just rude and arrogant and in violation of several Christian principles, it’s unconstitutional.”
It wasn’t un-Constitutional before and it isn’t now, unless you are now going to advocate that the founding fathers violated their own Constitution.
apostle:
“They are forced to listen, not practice religion. Therefore it does not violate the establishment clause.”
Garbage. Fully in line with the dominionist, Christian Reconstructionist party line. Go ahead and help them achieve their goals. I have a feeling you won’t like their totlitarian rule as much as you think you will.
As they strip you of all your civil liberties, you can take comfort in one thing, though. If they ever achieve power, members of the ACLU will all be dead or in prison.
Forced religion violates both Christianity and freedom of conscience. If you love either Christianity or freedom, you will oppose any mixing of government and religion.
“Also, if we go by that standard, students don’t have to listen to anything a teacher says, and forcing them to violates their civil liberties.”
cheesy straw man argument noted
RedSonja: Forced religion and forced tolerance are not the same thing. Unless someone is forcing you to practice Christianity, your rights are not being violated. The only civil liberties being stripped away are the freedom of speech and freedom to exercise religion freely.
“cheesy straw man argument noted”
Any comparison that makes the Left’s stance look upsurd is a strawman.
I’ll just say this: I refused to stand for the pledge when I was a senior in high school. That was me daring the administration to challenge my right to do so.
Then I served 8 years in the Marine Corps.
What does that make me, a commie pinko leftist, or a patriot? I’d say I know more about being patriotic than most.
GOSH!
I just can NOT believe some of the postings of this forum!
JUST EXACTLY DO you believe it?
Do you believe that YOUR country COUNTS for anything? Do YOU believe that it was all FREE? Do you believe that NOT teaching values to our YOUNGSTERS is NOT important? Do you NOT think that disipline is NOT necessary? Do you not think teaching “self” disipline is necessary? HELL! Maybe I should as many on this board ask just WHAT do you believe in? Could we offend you and ASK, politely of course, WHAT have YOU contributed, or better yet, what do YOU expect your CHILDREN to contribute. I am SO eagerly awaiting your answers that I give you with out any reservation my personal E-mail! Challenge? HELL YES!
eagleswede1@cableone.net!
I doubt that I get any takers!
Swede1