NBC and the "Pledge of Allegiance"

[Father Heathen]

Was it the US military that saved the freedoms of the people of Tulia, Texas?
No.

Was it the US military standing up for blacks in the Civil Rights era?
No.

Was it the US military that recognized women's rights?
No.

Is it the US military protecting the thousands of Americans raided by law enforcement every year based on the spurious notion of protecting society?
No.

Has any nation we have gone to war with since WWII actually threatened our freedoms?
No!

The only threat to our rights and freedoms doesn't come from cavemen abroad, but rather our very own political leaders, usually the exact same ones that christian conservatives rally behind.

 

[esmith]

As to this...bullcrap. I'm a US Navy veteran, so is my father, my father's father, my mother's father and many cousins and other relatives. My husband is an Air Force vet as well. This is a military family and we take pride in that. The symbols you find at Arlington and other Veteran cemeteries are NOT all crosses you know. They are various symbols representing the various religions of those who served. Not all those religions hold to a patriarchal monotheistic version of deity. Some have many gods and goddesses, some have a matriarchal deity, some have no deity at all. This is a country of diversity. Diversity of race, ethnicity, sexuality, religion and much more. The Pledge of Allegiance may be a sign of devotion to this country, but as this country is about diversity, then the "Under God" part which should never have been added, SHOULD be left out. To have it in there flies in the face of what this country is supposed to be about, what it actually stands for...Freedom. That includes the freedom from theocratic ideals that do not fit with a person's individual beliefs. I did not serve in the military to protect all rights but one. Maybe you did, but I sure didn't.

I was not referring to the religious symbols or lack of on the grave markers I was referring to the American Flags that are placed at each site on Memorial Day. At the present time the words "under God" are in there. Whether they belong there or not is not my objection. My objection is to the obvious editing. I would have been just as pis*ed if they had intentional edited any part of it out. This was an obvious attempt to put forth their agenda. If they or anyone else disagrees with the present wording, start a petition to have the words removed. Do not alter what is presently the accepted wording.

 

[Draka]

I was not referring to the religious symbols or lack of on the grave markers I was referring to the American Flags that are placed at each site on Memorial Day. At the present time the words "under God" are in there. Whether they belong there or not is not my objection. My objection is to the obvious editing. I would have been just as pis*ed if they had intentional edited any part of it out. This was an obvious attempt to put forth their agenda. If they or anyone else disagrees with the present wording, start a petition to have the words removed. Do not alter what is presently the accepted wording.

That's just it. It isn't accepted. It hasn't been for a very long time. I didn't accept it in school growing up and many others didn't either. It doesn't belong in there period. Any editing out of the words is only holding true to the original Pledge. So why not edit it? The Pledge was still said, the wrong words were just taken out as they should be.

 

[T-Dawg]

Well by now I am sure that most people have heard of NBC's blatant disregard of the Pledge Of Allegiance during the US Open Golf programing by purposely editing out "under God" not once but twice. NBC says that they apologize for the "regrettable" editing. Yeah right. As far as I am concerned it is time for heads to roll at NBC.

They were doing great until the point where they apologized for their good deed.

 

[Adramelek]

Well by now I am sure that most people have heard of NBC's blatant disregard of the Pledge Of Allegiance during the US Open Golf programing by purposely editing out "under God" not once but twice. NBC says that they apologize for the "regrettable" editing. Yeah right. As far as I am concerned it is time for heads to roll at NBC.

The so called "regrettable" editing was deliberate and conscious on NBC's part, it is obvious. For me personally as a proud American citizen, I really don't like it when the words of this great nations' Pledge of Allegiance are tampered with by whom ever on public airways. To me it is almost in the same league as blasphemy, and yes this is both a legitimate and an emotional responce.

Look, if you don't like those words in this nation's oath of allegiance then do what I do, simply change the wording in your own mind like I do. I, instead of saying "one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." I say "One nation under Set, indestructible, with Liberty and Justice for All." Don't try to enforce your personal beliefs upon others, it simply does not work. If the majority of the people of this nation, which btw was never meant to be a democracy= (mob rule) but was originally disigned to be a representative republic, want the wording of the Pledge changed then let them petition congress.

Xeper.
/Adramelek\

 

[T-Dawg]

The so called "regrettable" editing was deliberate and conscious on NBC's part, it is obvious. For me personally as a proud American citizen, I really don't like it when the words of this great nations' Pledge of Allegiance are tampered with by whom ever on public airways. To me it is almost in the same league as blasphemy, and yes this is both a legitimate and an emotional responce.

Look, if you don't those words in this nation's oath of allegiance then do what I do, simply change the wording in your own mind like I do. I, instead of saying "one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." I say "One nation under Set, indestructible, with Liberty and Justice for All." Don't try to enforce your personal beliefs upon others, it simply does not work. If the majority of the people of this nation, which btw was never meant to be a democracy= (mob rule) but was originally disigned to be a representative republic, want the wording of the Pledge changed then let them petition congress.

Xeper.
/Adramelek\

I may have missed a detail somewhere, but I don't recall them ever trying to "enforce" their personal beliefs on others. They simply recited the pledge without the offensive words. As you said, those who worship God are free to change the wording in their own minds if they don't like it. The only ones trying to enforce their personal beliefs on others are the ones who got the words "under God" put into the pledge in the first place, and those who insist that people recite it in that fashion.

 

[Adramelek]

Dear T-Dawg,

I did not intend to say that NBC or for that matter anybody else was trying to enforce a certain belief upon anyone. All I meant was a warning that we should never lower ourselves to that level of the lowest common denominator as a society.

 

[gnomon]

So the obvious answer is so that one doesn't lower themselves to the lowest common denominator.......you never willingly recite the pledge.

edit: And before anyone hauls off on me too much for this.......I just could not withstand the opportunity to light a little flame. For the record, I really don't care if people want to say the pledge.

 

[tumbleweed41]

For me personally as a proud American citizen, I really don't like it when the words of this great nations' Pledge of Allegiance are tampered with by whom ever on public airways. To me it is almost in the same league as blasphemy,..

No offense, but if find your comparison of what you may find as unpatriotic to blasphemy as a very telling dogmatic trend of what the neo-cons term "patriotism".

 

[ninerbuff]

Who we kidding here? Though we live in America, the real only pledge we have is to ourselves, family and our own interests. If god is part of your interest, you're offended. If god isn't part of your interest, then your not offended.
It so silly that this is an issue when we have real issues like people losing jobs, homes and education because ********* in Congress might be upset about words that may not hold true for the opposing view.
We should take "in god we trust" off money since all this trusting has forced the people of the US to accept the BS of bailouts and Wall Street ripoffs.

 

[Adramelek]

Ritualistic indoctrination is not just limited to religion. :cover:

I agree with what you said- mostly.
My children are a "group"
who have my full allegiance,
(ie. loyalty and comittment)
as children.
They have "earned" it in no way
other than simply being my children.

As adults though,
they could destroy my allegiance to them.

Thus I would not pledge allegiance even to my children.
It sounds silly to even suggest.
Why would a person even do such a thing?

Yet they will do this with a partner.

People seem to like pledges and vows.
Maybe it creates some illusion of security?

I do see traditional marriage as a pledge of allegiance, to a person.
(the whole "till (literal) death do you part" thing)
But sometimes people change...
and they are not really that person you once pledged yourSelf to,
or you are not really that same person who once made that pledge,
so....
the ritual of marriage, becomes the rite of divorce.


I see the pledge of allegiance to the flag.. etc etc
as little more than a coersive emotional appeal, to an indoctrination.
And then beyond that,
people try to drag 'god' into the red, white, and blue,
just like they do
into the wedding white.
How many non-religious "get married" in a church
just for the sake of the "all necesssary" ritualistic atmosphere and pomp.
(especially the women)
And perhaps more often so, for the rest of the family.
(who NEED it to be that way so badly,
they will ruin future relations over it.)

We are indoctrinated with SO many rituals.

The lack of impression mass ritual/s have on me
clearly puts me in the minority.
I definately feel like an outsider
to a great deal of what goes on around me.

Somehow the idea of editing out "under god"
effects me as non emotionally
as the idea of editing out the entire pledge.

Truthfully,
I see these things
as the "sideshows" of life.
I prefer being a spectator.

Oh my gawd, where have you been all my life?

 

[Kathryn]

Commenting on an earlier post:

The Constitution does not mention God. But the Constitution's main purpose was to lay out the specifics of our system of government. It's not a philosophical document.

It's also not the only document which lays out the basic principles of our government and the vision that our founding fathers had. Here are some excerpts from another very important document in American history:

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation...


We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness...

 

[gnomon]

Commenting on an earlier post:

The Constitution does not mention God. But the Constitution's main purpose was to lay out the specifics of our system of government. It's not a philosophical document.

It's also not the only document which lays out the basic principles of our government and the vision that our founding fathers had. Here are some excerpts from another very important document in American history:

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation...


We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness...

Might I direct you to my Historical Debate topic on James Monroe's Memorial and Remonstranance against Religious Assessment?

Only because nobody else is reading it.

 

[Adramelek]

As a point of fact, the original pledge did not contain the words "under God". So in rethinking the matter perhaps the real blasphemy was putting those words in it in the first place. :foot: !

Xeper.
/Adramelek\

 

[Kathryn]

Might I direct you to my Historical Debate topic on James Monroe's Memorial and Remonstranance against Religious Assessment?

Only because nobody else is reading it.

Sure, why not?

I want to point out that I am not claiming that this country was founded as a Christian country, or even a religious country. However, atheism was a truly rare mindset during the time our country was being settled and our government was being formed. Freedom of religion did NOT mean freedom FROM religion. The vast majority of citizens, and political leaders, considered religious freedom - in other words, our right to practice any religion we choose freely and openly - to be a very important component to our existence, and our future, as a nation.

 

[gnomon]

Sure, why not?

I want to point out that I am not claiming that this country was founded as a Christian country, or even a religious country. However, atheism was a truly rare mindset during the time our country was being settled and our government was being formed. Freedom of religion did NOT mean freedom FROM religion. The vast majority of citizens, and political leaders, considered religious freedom - in other words, our right to practice any religion we choose freely and openly - to be a very important component to our existence, and our future, as a nation.

I would argue the semantics of freedom of with freedom from but I think you would probably agree with me.

Namely in that freedom of religion, the notion that the individual is free to choose how to worship God as the Founders interpreted, was synonymous with freedom from religion in that the government shall not respect any single religious establishment's view upon God. I think the fact that the Founders dealt with wholly a Christian culture tends to confuse the concept. But if essentially if I am free to worship God, even if the culture at the time was wholly considered with the Christian God, than I was also free from the government telling me how to worship or, more specifically, the economics involved with worship in that I should not have to offer up my income to any specific Christian establishment such as the Anglicans, the Episcopalians, the Quakers or any of the others known at that time.

That's kind of the purpose of me posting Monroe's statement.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Commenting on an earlier post:

The Constitution does not mention God. But the Constitution's main purpose was to lay out the specifics of our system of government. It's not a philosophical document.

It's also not the only document which lays out the basic principles of our government and the vision that our founding fathers had. Here are some excerpts from another very important document in American history:

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation...


We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness...

It should be noted that "Laws of Nature" and "Natures God" point to Jefferson's deistic beliefs.
Does that make this a "Deistic Nation".
Of course not. That is as ridiculous as those claiming the US as a "Christian Nation"

 

[tumbleweed41]

I want to point out that I am not claiming that this country was founded as a Christian country, or even a religious country. However, atheism was a truly rare mindset during the time our country was being settled and our government was being formed. Freedom of religion did NOT mean freedom FROM religion. The vast majority of citizens, and political leaders, considered religious freedom - in other words, our right to practice any religion we choose freely and openly - to be a very important component to our existence, and our future, as a nation.

There is, however, a prohibition of the establishment of a national religion by Congress, or the preference by the U.S. government of one religion over another.

Thus the inclusion of "under God" seems to be a preference or establishment, by the U.S. Government of, at the very least, monotheistic religions over any other religion.

 

[blackout]

As a point of fact, the original pledge did not contain the words "under God". So in rethinking the matter perhaps the real blasphemy was putting those words in it in the first place. :foot: !

Xeper.
/Adramelek\

The Pledge of Allegiance was written in 1892 by Francis Bellamy (1855–1931), who was a Baptist minister, a Christian socialist, and the cousin of socialist utopian novelist Edward Bellamy (1850–1898). Bellamy "viewed his Pledge as an 'inoculation' that would protect immigrants and native-born but insufficiently patriotic Americans from the 'virus' of radicalism and subversion."[2] The original "Pledge of Allegiance" was published in the September 8 issue of the popular children's magazine The Youth's Companion as part of the National Public-School Celebration of Columbus Day, a celebration of the 400th anniversary of Christopher Columbus's arrival in the Americas. The event was conceived and promoted by James B. Upham, a marketer for the magazine, as a campaign to instill the idea of American nationalism by selling flags to public schools and magazines to students.[3][4] [5][6]
Bellamy's original Pledge read as follows:[7]
I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

In 1923, the National Flag Conference called for the words "my Flag" to be changed to "the Flag of the United States", so that new immigrants would not confuse loyalties between their birth countries and the United States. The words "of America" were added a year later. The United States Congress officially recognized the Pledge as the official national pledge on June 22, 1942.
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.In 1940 the Supreme Court, in Minersville School District v. Gobitis, ruled that students in public schools, including the respondents in that case, Jehovah's Witnesses who considered the flag salute to be idolatry, could be compelled to swear the Pledge. A rash of mob violence and intimidation against Jehovah's Witnesses followed the ruling. In 1943 the Supreme Court reversed its decision, ruling in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette that public school students are not required to say the Pledge, concluding that "compulsory unification of opinion" violates the First Amendment.[10] In a later opinion, the Court held that students are also not required to stand for the Pledge.[11]

To be contd. in the next post....

 

[blackout]

Addition of the words "under God"

Louis A. Bowman (1872–1959) was the first to initiate the addition of "under God" to the Pledge. The National Society of the Daughters of the American Revolution gave him an Award of Merit as the originator of this idea.[13][14] He spent his adult life in the Chicago area and was Chaplain of the Illinois Society of the Sons of the American Revolution. At a meeting on February 12, 1948,[citation needed] Lincoln's Birthday, he led the Society in swearing the Pledge with two words added, "under God." He stated that the words came from Lincoln's Gettysburg Address. Though not all manuscript versions of the Gettysburg Address contain the words "under God", all the reporters' transcripts of the speech as delivered do, as perhaps Lincoln may have deviated from his prepared text and inserted the phrase when he said "that the nation shall, under God, have a new birth of freedom." Bowman repeated his revised version of the Pledge at other meetings.[13]
In 1951, the Knights of Columbus, the world's largest Catholic fraternal service organization, also began including the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance.[15] In New York City, on April 30, 1951, the Board of Directors of the Knights of Columbus adopted a resolution to amend the text of their Pledge of Allegiance at the opening of each of the meetings of the 800 Fourth Degree Assemblies of the Knights of Columbus by addition of the words "under God" after the words "one nation." Over the next two years, the idea spread throughout Knights of Columbus organizations nationwide. On August 21, 1952, the Supreme Council of the Knights of Columbus at its annual meeting adopted a resolution urging that the change be made universal and copies of this resolution were sent to the President, the Vice President (as Presiding Officer of the Senate) and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. The National Fraternal Congress meeting in Boston on September 24, 1952, adopted a similar resolution upon the recommendation of its president, Supreme Knight Luke E. Hart. Several State Fraternal Congresses acted likewise almost immediately thereafter. This campaign led to several official attempts to prompt Congress to adopt the Knights of Columbus’ policy for the entire nation. These attempts failed.
In 1952, Holger Christian Langmack wrote a letter to President Truman suggesting the inclusion of “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance. Mr. Langmack was a Danish philosopher and educator who came to America in 1911. He was one of the originators of the Prayer Breakfast and a religious leader in Washington, D.C. President Truman met with him along with several others to discuss the inclusion of “under God” and also “love” just before “liberty and justice”.[citation needed]
At the suggestion of a correspondent, Representative Louis C. Rabaut of Michigan sponsored a resolution to add the words "under God" to the Pledge in 1953.

Prior to February 1954, no attempt to get the Pledge officially amended succeeded. The final successful push came from George MacPherson Docherty. Some American presidents honored Lincoln's birthday by attending services at the church Lincoln attended, New York Avenue Presbyterian Church by sitting in Lincoln's pew on the Sunday nearest February 12. On February 7, 1954, with President Eisenhower sitting in Lincoln's pew, the church's pastor, George MacPherson Docherty, delivered a sermon based on the Gettysburg Address titled "A New Birth of Freedom." He argued that the nation's might lay not in arms but its spirit and higher purpose. He noted that the Pledge's sentiments could be those of any nation, that "there was something missing in the pledge, and that which was missing was the characteristic and definitive factor in the American way of life." He cited Lincoln's words "under God" as defining words that set the United States apart from other nations.
President Eisenhower, though raised as one of Jehovah's Witnesses, had been baptized a Presbyterian just a year before. He responded enthusiastically to Docherty in a conversation following the service. Eisenhower acted on his suggestion the next day and on February 8, 1954, Rep. Charles Oakman (R-Mich.), introduced a bill to that effect. Congress passed the necessary legislation and Eisenhower signed the bill into law on Flag Day, June 14, 1954.[16]
The phrase "under God" was incorporated into the Pledge of Allegiance June 14, 1954, by a Joint Resolution of Congress amending §7 of the Flag Code enacted in 1942.[16]

and yet....

The Establishment Clause is the first of several pronouncements in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, stating, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion".

People make "pushes" and "pulls" for things.
From the NOC* to NBC.
(knights of columbus)

Some pushes, however, are less constitutional than others "pulls".

Funny all the things about the Pledge that they DO NOT teach,
or even mention in the schools.

I always tell my children to at least just stand quietly
if they choose not to join in,
but I've learned in this article,
they are not obligated even to stand.*
More important than saying the pledge... perhaps...
is knowing your RIGHTS as an American.

*EDIT:

Requiring or promoting of the Pledge on the part of the government has drawn criticism and legal challenges on several grounds.
One objection[18] states that a democratic republic built on freedom of dissent should not require its citizens to pledge allegiance to it, and that the First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects one's right to refrain from speaking or standing (also a form of speech).[11] Another objection lies in the fact that the people who are most likely to recite the Pledge every day, small children in schools, cannot really give their consent or even completely understand the Pledge they are taking.[citation needed]

The "standing" thing, is just a criticism and a challange.

I guess it's still just better to "stand up" and "shut up",
than stay seated and "stand out". *sigh*