• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Pledge of Allegiance

Should kids be required to recite The Pledge of Allegiance?

  • Yes

    Votes: 12 27.3%

  • No

    Votes: 32 72.7%
  • Total voters
    44
Absolutely not. What's the point of forcing children to declare their allegiance to a nation they had no choice but to be a part of?
 
Fiddytree said:
Many do explain what it means-it just doesn't mean all do or really that the student may necessarily remember. If a student doesn't remember much of the outer context, that is okay as well. It still serves a unification purpose even if much of it is not given to the students. They gain the sense that we are in the US, we are believe in a unified set of principles, even if I do not know what those quite are and how they work yet. It also serves a useful pedagogical tool to unify the class, break them out of their chatter or morning sleepiness.

I know indoctrination is a naughty word, but it isn't all bad. We do it all the time through social custom. In political terms, we currently beat people senseless with the notion that democracy, almost wherever and whenever it can be employed, is a virtue. This is just another benevolent form of it such indoctrination.
Click to expand...

The pledge of allegiance is hardly a unifying statement of values. Jehova's witnesses consider pledging allegiance to a flag idolatry and atheists reject the "under god" line. It was created by a Christian Socialist who didn't believe in universal suffrage was modified in 1954 expressly to marginalize atheism and communism.

If you want to promote democratic principles to school children, recite the bill of rights. Its far more inclusive and actually teaches the kids something useful.
 
Superfly said:
Should kids be required to recite The Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?
Click to expand...

Your answer depends on your opinion on the state of nationalism. The flag stands for something, they should. 'Under GOD' is for nitpickers to booger over. It;s irrelevant, really.
 
rathi said:
The pledge of allegiance is hardly a unifying statement of values. Jehova's witnesses consider pledging allegiance to a flag idolatry and atheists reject the "under god" line. It was created by a Christian Socialist who didn't believe in universal suffrage was modified in 1954 expressly to marginalize atheism and communism.

If you want to promote democratic principles to school children, recite the bill of rights. Its far more inclusive and actually teaches the kids something useful.
Click to expand...

I don't understand why you picked a group which considers itself separate from the Nation-State as a reason not to use the pledge. In addition, they refrain from public politics and military service. You essentially picked the least likely group to feel any semblance of National identity (with any Nation) in order to somehow suggest the pledge isn't a unification device. This does not really explain how the pledge doesn't work so much as explain that with certain groups, they will feel no identity or loyalty to the State, ever.

Yes, a socialist created the pledge. Many times socialists have good ideas, however frequently I think they live on a different ideological universe. The words "under God" can be argued against, though I am not passionate either way.

I would rather teach them republican virtues, but teaching them the Bill of Rights is certainly admirable. One need not remove the pledge in order to accomplish that.
 
Last edited:
Fiddytree said:
I don't understand why you picked a group which considers itself separate from the State as a reason not to use the pledge. In addition, they refrain from public politics and military service. You essentially picked the least likely group to feel any semblance of National identity (with any Nation) in order to somehow suggest the pledge isn't a unification device. This does not really explain how the pledge doesn't work so much as explain that with certain groups, they will feel no identity or loyalty to the State, ever.

Yes, a socialist created the pledge. Many times socialists have good ideas, however frequently I think we live on different ideological universes. The words "under God" can be argued against, though I am not passionate either way.

I would rather teach them republican virtues, but teaching them the Bill of Rights is certainly admirable. One need not remove the pledge in order to accomplish that.
Click to expand...

Come on, we atheists aren't that bad.
 
Fiddytree said:
I don't understand why you picked a group which considers itself separate from the State as a reason not to use the pledge. In addition, they refrain from public politics and military service. You essentially picked the least likely group to feel any semblance of National identity (with any Nation) in order to somehow suggest the pledge isn't a unification device.

Yes, a socialist created the pledge. Many times socialists have good ideas. The words "under God" can be argued against, though I am not passionate either way.

I would rather teach them republican virtues, but teaching them the Bill of Rights is certainly admirable. One need not remove the pledge in order to accomplish that.
Click to expand...

Considering that the pledge violates the 1st amendment from numerous angles, continuing the practice would be sending mixed messages regarding the bills of rights. "With liberty and justice for all except for minority religious groups and non-believers".
 
Superfly said:
Well at least, shouldn't the teachers explain what we are saying? I mean, it seems to be a common thread here that many of us said it, but had no idea what we are saying. Honestly, when I was a child, I just said it. Didn't have a clue what I was saying, but I said it all the same. As we got older, we didn't have to say it anymore. I still remember it, and one day the kids were mentioning it, and I recited it for them, and it hit me what I was actually saying. It kind of hit me, "Holy smokes, this is kind of like indoctrination, and we had no idea."
Click to expand...

They explained it but you probably were not listening.
 
If our nation is so divided and some think the Pledge is a unifier then by all means let's use it!

But let's use the 'conservative' system for fixing things. Lets trickle this one down.

Every morning a different 6th grader from around our Grand Republic brings the flag infront of the House and Senate so our 'national' leaders can recite the Pledge. The entire White House takes a moment to recite the Pledge and every corporation with overseas or DoD connection is lead, via video screen, by their CEO or his stand in if on vacation.

A kinder, gentler reminder to those who help guide the nation.

I don't think the Pledge changes a child's mind much. Many of the kids I said the Pledge with didn't see Service as part of a Citizen's duty. Many who claim it gave them a sense of patriotism are now a days very partisan in their idea of what our Republic should be, and highly resentful so many others don't agree.

It is at best a feel good nod to the Republic that is seen as an affront to some, with indifference by many.
 
if our nation has the means and resources to provide for the betterment of life on earth then we should say the pledge if it is our goal as a political unit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom