Another Dishonest Worldnutdaily Headline

Here's another example of the Worldnutdaily's dishonest headlines: 17-year-old challenges Pledge of Allegiance. It's a link to an article in a Florida newspaper about a student who has filed suit, represented by the ACLU, against a school that punished him for not standing for the pledge of allegiance. He's not challenging the pledge, as Michael Newdow did, he's challenging the authority of the school to punish him for not participating. That issue, by the way, was decided more than half a century ago in the Barnette decision which ruled that schools could not force a student to recite the pledge. Isn't it interesting how the WND's headlines are always slanted toward the most inaccurate interpretation of the actual article?

Tags

More like this

Forcing someone to do the same actions as everyone else and browbeating them for doing what they want to do... that sound like un-American activity to me. I'm not familiar with the pledge. What does it say about freedom?

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the country for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

Did I get it right? It has been a while. 8^)

This was one of the "student management" issues i had to teach to new teachers on a regular basis. CA as a state has many Jehovah's Witnesses spread throughout, and they particularly are not allowed to participate in reciting the pledge and other such "patriotic" activities. Student teachers, especially those of the more vervant sort, always took notice of kids who didn't stand up during the "flag salute." I had to remind them of Barnette as well as of other CA Ed Code sections that protected students from "mandatory" participation.

Heard on NPR today:
It was today (Dec 28th) in 1945 that congress approved the pledge. Didn't they have anything better to do?

How did Barnette differ from Gobitis?