Page 13 of 30 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 292

Thread: Child escorted out of class by police for sitting during the pledge, mother outraged

  1. #121
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Child escorted out of class by police for sitting during the pledge, mother outra

    I still don't get why some of the biggest anti-socialists and anti-governemnt people are also the biggest supporters of the socialist propaganda that is the pledge of allegiance.

    I mean, even if one is not up to speed on the history of Francis Bellamy and his political persuasion, the socialist underpinnings of mindlessly reciting prayers to a government symbol should be obvious.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  2. #122
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    48,013

    Re: Child escorted out of class by police for sitting during the pledge, mother outra

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr_Patrick View Post
    Who knows what their reasons are?
    They do. Come on Dr P, this is low ball. We're talking hypotheticals here. You weren't asking if it was okay to tell someone they are less devout, you were asking were they. This is assuming that its just a hypothetical and thus whether they'd tell us the reasons or not doesn't matter.

    Some people don't like group participation
    And if they honestly believe their interpritation of the scripture means you should give a day for worship, not necessarily having to do it at a church, no problem. If they believe the dictates of their religion is they're supposed to go to church, but they just don't cause they don't like group participation, then its not.

    The first would be a choice based on their religious devotion. The second would be making a choice based on their personal comfort despite their political devotion. That by its very nature means youre being less devout.

    Some people don't feel that any particular church expresses their views accurately.
    Then again, this is an issue of religious devotion.

    Well, obviously God hates football.
    Obviously :P

    Some do find it boring. Then again, the church isn't God.
    No, but many interpritations of the scripture believe that attending church is part of what's required if possible. If you're not attending it for reasons that have only to do with your own personal comfort, and not due to a legitimate disagreement with that interpritation of the scripture, then you're less devout. You're CHOOSING to care more about your comfort than about what the religion you believes dictates are.

    While some do find it inconvenient, it doesn't necessarily mean that they love God less. Some don't feel the need to express out loud, their love for God. Some people are introverts.
    I guess you could say someone could ignore scripture and still love god just as much. I guess you could revel in the fact you have tons of premarital sex, say "god damnit" and "jesus christ" often, steal from people, murder people, actively worship Vishnu as well, be exceedingly greed and a huge glutton, and still say they love god just as much as someone who tries his best not to sin. I wouldn't really buy that though.

    I think its rather hollow if you say "I love god just as much as you, but I just think its okay to completely ignore tennets of the scripture that I believe are true because, frankly, its just more convient to me".

    To put it a different way.

    Would someone that willfully lies daily, knowing its a sin, but without any real care simply because it makes life easier for him "love god" in your mind as much as someone that does everything else exactly the same as that guy but doesn't lie on a daily basis?

  3. #123
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 06:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

    Re: Child escorted out of class by police for sitting during the pledge, mother outra

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    I still don't get why some of the biggest anti-socialists and anti-governemnt people are also the biggest supporters of the socialist propaganda that is the pledge of allegiance.

    I mean, even if one is not up to speed on the history of Francis Bellamy and his political persuasion, the socialist underpinnings of mindlessly reciting prayers to a government symbol should be obvious.
    "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which is stands. One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

    Ok - please point out what's socialist about it?

    It supports liberty and justice for everyone - suggests God means something to you (which is the only thing I consider to be remotely controversial about it at all). And says you'll be faithful to your country.

    Because that's what a pledge does - it's an affirmation of your loyalty and it briefly describes the basic core value of the country.

    It's not left or right - socialist or otherwise.
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

  4. #124
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    48,013

    Re: Child escorted out of class by police for sitting during the pledge, mother outra

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    I still don't get why some of the biggest anti-socialists and anti-governemnt people are also the biggest supporters of the socialist propaganda that is the pledge of allegiance.

    I mean, even if one is not up to speed on the history of Francis Bellamy and his political persuasion, the socialist underpinnings of mindlessly reciting prayers to a government symbol should be obvious.
    I don't really see how being "anti-socialist" or "anti-government" would disqualify support of people saying the pledge.

    Lets examine this....

    First, in regards to anti-government. It specifically is pledging it it seems to the United States of America, not necessarily the government. This is a nuanced difference but important to the conservative philosophy, since it seems aimed at them. The general conservative mindset is that government should be kept at arms length and given a skeptical eye, but the country should be respected and loved. The country, its culture foundation and principles, is different in essense than the government that represents it.

    In regards to the anti-socialist aspect, again aside from its roots of who made it, I'm not seeing the socialist propoganda here. I don't see a push for everyone to share the burden amongst each other. Or that government is some kind of over arching diety. Or anything that usually gets blasted as being an extreme idea of socialism.

    I'd be there with you in the hypocrisy of anti-government people if we were forcing people to have to say it. I'd feel the same way if it was illegal to not take of your hat during the national anthem. But that's not the case.

    I think you're stereotyping by trying to tie the belief that government in general should have a hands off approach on peoples dailies lives and should be limited with the belief that somehow respecting or loving ones country and expressing that/ingraining that is bad.

  5. #125
    Guru
    USA_1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    BANNED
    Last Seen
    04-16-11 @ 02:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,142

    Re: Child escorted out of class by police for sitting during the pledge, mother outra

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Actually, it isn't, but I know history isn't a strong point of the Left.
    Left? Because I believe a kid should not be beaten for not reciting an oath?

    In August 1934 Hitler named himself Chancellor and President of Germany and subsequently instituted a loyalty oath to be required of all civil servants and government officials, including pastors and university professors. The oath read as follows: "I swear: I will be true and obedient to the Fhrer of the German Reich and nation Adolf Hitler, observe the laws and conscientiously fulfill my official duties, so help me God."[18] Barth was confident that, because of his public criticism of the Nazi regime, the oath requirement would be put to him in pointed terms. He was soon proved right.

    On November 7 Barth was asked by the university's rector to take the oath. Barth had resolved that he would do so, but only if he could add a stipulation "to the effect that I could be loyal to the Fhrer only within my responsibilities as an Evangelical Christian."[19] He proposed his modified form of the oath to the Rector and was rejected. In his words, "My hour had come. I was suddenly suspended."[20]

    Because of his refusal to take the oath in the prescribed form, Barth was tried before a tribunal. The prosecution argued that Barth's proposed amendment was unacceptable because the oath was intended to have "unlimited content" and, besides, "it went without saying that the Fhrer did not require anything that was against God's commandments."[21] While the prosecution was presenting its case, Barth was apparently not overly concerned. He spent the time composing a rhyme about the event ("Karl, we know, is hardly vile / And yet he has to go on trial") and skimming Plato, portions of which he insisted on reading to the judges.[22] As expected, the tribunal found Barth guilty.

    The term Hitler oath refers to the oaths of allegiance sworn by German Wehrmacht officers and soldiers as well as civil servants during the Third Reich between the years 1934 and 1945. The oath pledged personal loyalty to the person of Adolf Hitler in place of loyalty to the constitution.

    The death of 86-year-old Reichspräsident Paul von Hindenburg on August 2, 1934 removed the final obstacle to Adolf Hitler obtaining absolute power over Germany. Even before Hindenburg's death, Hitler's cabinet had enacted a law combining the offices of Chancellor (the head of government) and President (the head of state); Adolf Hitler would henceforth be known as Führer und Reichskanzler (Leader and Chancellor) and was both head of state and commander in chief of the armed forces. The day of the President's death, the cabinet ordered a plebiscite for August 19 for the German people to approve the combination of the two offices.

    Germany's voters went to the polls and 89.9% voted their approval for Hitler to assume complete power over Germany. The following day, August 20, 1934, the cabinet decreed the "Law On The Allegiance of Civil Servants and Soldiers of the Armed Forces". (Gesetz über die Vereidigung der Beamten und der Soldaten der Wehrmacht), which superseded the original oaths. Prior to the decree, both members of the armed forces and civil servants had sworn loyalty to "the People and the Fatherland" (Volk und Vaterland); civil servants had additionally sworn to uphold the constitution and laws of Germany.

    The new law decreed that instead, both members of the armed forces and civil servants would swear loyalty to Adolf Hitler
    Last edited by USA_1; 02-25-10 at 03:47 PM.
    "This Administration will constantly strive to promote an ownership society in America. We want more people owning their own home. It is in our national interest that more people own their own home. After all, if you own your own home, you have a vital stake in the future of our country."" GWB

  6. #126
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Child escorted out of class by police for sitting during the pledge, mother outra

    Quote Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker View Post
    "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which is stands. One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

    Ok - please point out what's socialist about it?

    It supports liberty and justice for everyone - suggests God means something to you (which is the only thing I consider to be remotely controversial about it at all). And says you'll be faithful to your country.

    Because that's what a pledge does - it's an affirmation of your loyalty and it briefly describes the basic core value of the country.

    It's not left or right - socialist or otherwise.
    Exactly. Clearly it is socialist.

    And it is about giving one's self up to the greater society.

    And let's talk about left and right. A small governemnt mentality would not stand for such a statement as "indivisible". It removes state's rights right off the bat.

    A true small government conservative abhors the very concept of indivisible. This pledge is to unity of thought. Which is why the dream of it's creators was to hear many children recite this indoctrination prayer in unison, and in a uniform fashion.

    And let's go a little further, it is a pledge of fealty that is given by rote memory instead of by force of will. The goal was to train children to become patriots, not to make the children want to become patriots. It is brainwashing at it's finest. It places the state at a level that should only be occupied by family and God. The state works for it's people, not the other way around. If anything, the state should be pledging loyalty to us.

    All that doesn't even take into account who Bellamy was (a noted Christian socialist) or how the socialist public school system was the battleground they chose to wage their socialist indoctrination campaign.

    The reason it has been successful was that it struck at the hearts of those who would otherwise oppose it, who loved their country. It was one of the most subversive socialist propaganda pieces ever written. Even to the point that Bellamy was intelligent enough to exclude the terms "equality" and "fraternity" from his pledge, knowing that this socialist catch phrase of the era (taken form the French revolution and adopted by Christian socialists as the "dream") would not be realized for quite some time.

    But even without this knowledge of the pledges history, it should be clear that this prayer of indoctrination is nothing more than a reversal of where the loyalties should lay.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  7. #127
    Sage
    Khayembii Communique's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,899

    Re: Child escorted out of class by police for sitting during the pledge, mother outra

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case

    And it is about giving one's self up to the greater society.
    Actually, it is about giving one's self up to the nation. Which is why it is not "socialist".
    "I do not claim that every incident in the history of empire can be explained in directly economic terms. Economic interests are filtered through a political process, policies are implemented by a complex state apparatus, and the whole system generates its own momentum."

  8. #128
    Guru
    USA_1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    BANNED
    Last Seen
    04-16-11 @ 02:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,142

    Re: Child escorted out of class by police for sitting during the pledge, mother outra

    Quote Originally Posted by Khayembii Communique View Post
    Actually, it is about giving one's self up to the nation. Which is why it is not "socialist".
    Even if the nation becomes tyrannical? Then do we quit saying the Pledge?
    "This Administration will constantly strive to promote an ownership society in America. We want more people owning their own home. It is in our national interest that more people own their own home. After all, if you own your own home, you have a vital stake in the future of our country."" GWB

  9. #129
    Sage
    Khayembii Communique's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,899

    Re: Child escorted out of class by police for sitting during the pledge, mother outra

    Even if the nation becomes tyrannical? Then do we quit saying the Pledge?
    What?
    "I do not claim that every incident in the history of empire can be explained in directly economic terms. Economic interests are filtered through a political process, policies are implemented by a complex state apparatus, and the whole system generates its own momentum."

  10. #130
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Child escorted out of class by police for sitting during the pledge, mother outra

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I don't really see how being "anti-socialist" or "anti-government" would disqualify support of people saying the pledge.

    Lets examine this....

    First, in regards to anti-government. It specifically is pledging it it seems to the United States of America, not necessarily the government. This is a nuanced difference but important to the conservative philosophy, since it seems aimed at them. The general conservative mindset is that government should be kept at arms length and given a skeptical eye, but the country should be respected and loved. The country, its culture foundation and principles, is different in essense than the government that represents it.
    What, precisely, is a "republic" but a form of government? The addition of the United states of America was well after the pledge's creation. Originally, it simply said "I pledge allegiance to my flag, and to the republic for which it stands."



    In regards to the anti-socialist aspect, again aside from its roots of who made it, I'm not seeing the socialist propoganda here. I don't see a push for everyone to share the burden amongst each other. Or that government is some kind of over arching diety. Or anything that usually gets blasted as being an extreme idea of socialism.
    Reciting a prayer to your governemnt is exactly like the governemnt is some over-arching diety. That's precisely what it is.

    I'd be there with you in the hypocrisy of anti-government people if we were forcing people to have to say it. I'd feel the same way if it was illegal to not take of your hat during the national anthem. But that's not the case.
    Aren't we making children say it? Isn't that what this thread is about?

    I think you're stereotyping by trying to tie the belief that government in general should have a hands off approach on peoples dailies lives and should be limited with the belief that somehow respecting or loving ones country and expressing that/ingraining that is bad.
    I didn't say anything about respecting or loving one's country being bad. But I will say that indoctrinating/brainwashing children into that view by having them recite prayers to the governemnt while simultaneously decrying socialism and big government is downright retarded in my opinion.

    And as an anti-federalist, I abhor the pledge for it's indivisible line. It indoctrinates everyone into a big federal governemnt perspective.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

Page 13 of 30 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •