Pharyngula

It's the end times! Christians are being repressed everywhere!

In opposite land.

Posted by: H.H. | April 23, 2008 5:50 PM

I would much rather pledge to a concept or ideal rather than something physical. I've always wondered that too Atomicmutant.

As far as the reasoning goes for her expulsion and her return, there needs to be a way for AU to get involved. The student most assuredly will not want AU involved on her behalf, so I wonder if there is any means for recourse. This kind of behavior by the school is absolutely outrageous and anti-America. Sometimes these people really exercise my capacity for hate, I mean compassion.

Posted by: Alex | April 23, 2008 5:56 PM

As I understand it, though, public schools are not allowed to require students to recite the pledge.

In fact, that is one of the main defenses I have heard made for keeping "under god" in the pledge, that no one can be required by public schools to say it.

My guess is that any objecting atheist would be quickly excused, while the requirement itself exists only because the school doesn't understand that they actually have no legal grounds to have such a requirement.

Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7

Posted by: Glen Davidson | April 23, 2008 5:58 PM

T.C.A. 46-1-1001(c)(1), in relevant part, states that 'Each board of education shall determine the appropriate time during the school day for the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance...

However, that no student shall be compelled to recite the Pledge of allegiance if the student or the student's parent or legal guardian objects on religious, philosophical or other grounds to the student's participating in such exercise.

Students who are thus exempt from reciting the pledge shall remain quietly standing or sitting at their desk while others recite the pledge of allegiance, and shall make no display that disrupts or distracts others who are reciting the pledge of allegiance.'"

Posted by: TomDunlap | April 23, 2008 5:59 PM

Forcing someone to say the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional anyway. It got decided thanks to West Virginia over a half century ago.

Posted by: Reginald | April 23, 2008 6:00 PM

"a student was kicked out of school for refusing to recite the Pledge of Allegiance".... in the United States of America?

I hope those Irony Meters are still running.

Posted by: Geral | April 23, 2008 6:01 PM

The school administrators could (hypothetically speaking) point out that saying the pledge is offering a deference to god because of the McCarthy test "one nation under god". I wonder how the student would respond in that case.

I wonder if the student was turning this around on the administrators.

Posted by: Prof MTH | April 23, 2008 6:03 PM

Hype ledge a liege ants tooth of lag
of the you knight ids dates ovum erica
an tooth a reap hub lick four itch its tans
won Haitian, hun dirk odd
in divvy sable
withal lib arty
an just is
feral

Posted by: Mike P | April 23, 2008 6:06 PM

#5, Canadians have our own durn flag! I don't think there's a pledge for it, though.

We got a lot of diff'rnt things up nort.

It's almost . . . un-American.

But I'm a transplant, in Minnesota. Someone told me I was moving south, and I bought into it. Oooh, warmer! :)

Regarding that girl, I'm sure once the likes of Mike Huckabee got through with the constitution, she wouldn't
have a problem with it.

In the movie "Jesus Camp", didn't they pledge allegiance to George W.??

Blech.

Posted by: Atomicmutant | April 23, 2008 6:07 PM

I got threatened with physical violence by my homeroom teacher* in 9th grade** for refusing to recite the pledge one day.***

*Also the football coach. Go figure.
**In rural Kansas, where the constitution is considered a subversive document.
***I stood up and said the damn thing.

Posted by: CJO | April 23, 2008 6:09 PM

d'oh!
looks like i kinda missed the point of the good doctor's post.
(returns to lurking)

Posted by: lithopithecus | April 23, 2008 6:13 PM

So basically, he finds out that she isn't one of those goddamned free thinkers after all. She has good and proper philosophy of obedience and submissiveness, to the proper god --which makes everything all right. Just a big misunderstanding...

Posted by: RamblinDude | April 23, 2008 6:19 PM

The Pledge of Allegiance with the "under god" thing is equivalent to praying, so I'm surprised anyone is allowed to recite it in a public school. I suppose in a bible belt state like Tennessee nobody cares about the Establishment Clause.

Posted by: BobC | April 23, 2008 6:22 PM

#1: No, the pledge was written by Francis Bellamy, a Baptist minister and outspoken socialist. The pledge was a statement of American ideals of equality and liberty, probably designed in some ways to assuage American fears about socialism. It gained in popularity throughout the early 20th century, and was amended several times to broaden it out a bit. The "under g-d" line was added in during the height of the Red Scare.

Personally, I don't recite the pledge, and will not until the "under g-d" line is removed. However, as an educator, I do think that there is some value in the sentiment expressed in the pledge. The pledge is used most in public schools, and part of a public education is to prepare students for life in a democratic society. The pledge, in only a few lines, summarizes the goals of our democratic society -- "...one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." To me, this emphasizes the importance participation in democracy, and the values that the democracy should strive to uphold.

I agree that uncritical recitation of the pledge is bad. I agree that the line "under g-d" should be removed. However, I do not think that the pledge is fundamentally a bad thing.

Posted by: xander | April 23, 2008 6:23 PM

One of the problems with the pledge in schools is that in many schools a large percentage of the students are not American citizens. In some countries, like the US, pledging allegence to a foreign power is punishable by death.

Posted by: Greg Laden | April 23, 2008 6:28 PM

"In some countries, like the US, pledging allegence to a foreign power is punishable by death."

Say what?

When was the last American citizen put to death for pledging allegiance to another country?

There's quite a few American citizens out there right now with dual citizenship.

Are you suggesting they are vulnerable to arrest and execution?

Posted by: Senecasam | April 23, 2008 6:36 PM

I was an elementary school teacher for two years.

I never said the pledge once and neither did any student in my class.

It helped that our school was falling apart and didn't have a working PA system, so there were no morning announcements. I just never brought it up and no one ever complained. The only person who ever said anything about it was the Jehovah's Witness who thanked me for not humiliating her 7-year-old every morning.

Posted by: CGDH | April 23, 2008 6:48 PM

Great advice, BobC. One of the few actions I could have taken to make my public school experience any more hellish than it was.

I don't know where you live, but in most of the country, this would be an invitation to a beating, and most likely complete ostracism.

Be realistic, man.

Posted by: CJO | April 23, 2008 6:50 PM

Oh, so youre promoting profanity in the classroom? Yes, that certainly would make public school even more hellish...

Posted by: Intel | April 23, 2008 6:56 PM

"...they should say "fuck god" as loud as possible...."

Actually, I would have a hard time getting so riled up and fervent about telling something imaginary to fuck off. The xtian deity, along with every other deity, is a fabrication or irrelevant. It's meaningless. I can't get so worked up over something so meaningless. Now, forcing someone to associate their patriotic feelings with a belief they find inconsistent and foolish is wrong. To those who would force that onto anyone I would gladly tell to fuck off.

Posted by: Alex | April 23, 2008 6:57 PM

I too think that the forced recital of allegiance to the nation (and physical flag, apparently) by kids who are too young to make up their own minds about such things is more insulting than the under god line...though that one gets me too. Back in school, I think I just lip synced the whole damn thing.

Posted by: JakeS | April 23, 2008 7:00 PM

IOKIYAC: It's OK If You're A Christian.

Closely related to IOKIYAR, and with a strongly overlapping catchment.

Posted by: NC Paul | April 23, 2008 7:02 PM

I think we should keep this civil. How about everyone just toning down the language a bit? Say things like, I don't believe in god, I believe in gosh, and if you don't believe in gosh, then you'll be darned to heck. Ah fuck it. That shit was stupid. Fuckin' - what ever.

Posted by: Alex | April 23, 2008 7:05 PM

#32- The United States does not officially recognize dual citizenship. Under U.S. law if you are a U.S. citizen then you are only recognized as a U.S. citizen, end of discussion. It sounds weird, but for all practical purposes it's less "other countries bad!" and more "we really don't care who else calls you a citizen, just follow our laws."

I don't know enough to comment on the pledging to foreign powers thing though, but I guess you could (after very very much stretching) lump it with treason in some form.

Posted by: Bouncing Bosons | April 23, 2008 7:09 PM

You shouldnt go lumping Christians with Bush. Not everybody is as moronic as he is.

Posted by: Intel | April 23, 2008 7:15 PM

And I don't think xtians count as "everybody".

Posted by: Alex | April 23, 2008 7:18 PM

I didn't have to say the Pledge when I was in grade school (and that was 45 years ago!). I got a "philosophical" waver, and the Jehovah Witness in my class (who couldn't pledge allegiance to a country) gor a religious waiver. Of course, this was Northern California...

If a student stands and shows respect, if not to the flag, to the country, to the teacher or to the classroom, is anyone really going to know (or care) that they're not saying the Pledge?

In short, she didn't get a pass because she's a Christian, she got a pass because she objected.

Posted by: Jeff | April 23, 2008 7:21 PM

I wonder why people don't pledge allegiance to "the ideals of the constitution", would make more sense to me.

Sure, but what is the point for the vast majority of citizens to ever say it at all? The USA are the only non-dictature* that has a pledge of allegiance...

* Hmmm. MORONARCHY, oiligarchy... but I digress. (I hope.)

In some countries, like the US, pledging allegence to a foreign power is punishable by death.

How does that square with concepts like double citizenship?

In the movie "Jesus Camp", didn't they pledge allegiance to George W.??

Let me fulfill Godwin's Law, then.

However, as an educator, I do think that there is some value in the sentiment expressed in the pledge. The pledge is used most in public schools, and part of a public education is to prepare students for life in a democratic society.

This is precisely why the pledge is a bad thing. What is this talk about allegiance to a piece of cloth and a piece of soil? That sounds like "my country right or wrong", which is the very opposite of democracy. Why isn't it allegiance to the Constitution, if there's a pledge at all?

Also, how on the planet does learning something by rote at an age when children don't even understand it contribute to teaching democracy? Every time such a thread comes up, someone posts about how they used to say things like "and to the Republican, Richard Sands, one vegetable..." Typical 19th-century ideology. TSIB.

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | April 23, 2008 7:27 PM

I wonder how common saying the pledge daily in schools is in America? I would imagine that this kind of requirement would likely be hard to implement. I am sure the most of the students would find the change silly and teachers would likely be more interested in teaching the students than saying the pledge.

Posted by: Robert M. Bradford | April 23, 2008 7:37 PM

My mistake, upon further research it seems that it isn't that dual citizenship is not recognized, but that it is "problematic and strongly discouraged" or some such.

On another note, I give up: what tag do I use for quotes?

Posted by: Bouncing Bosons | April 23, 2008 7:38 PM

When the constitutionality of adding the words "under God" to the pledge -- or changing the official motto of the United States from "E Pluribus Unum" (From Many, One) to "In God We Trust" has been challenged in courts, the (successful) legal defense has been that this is nothing more than "Ceremonial Deism." In other words, it's a recognition of tradition only, and a ritual done for ceremony -- like saying "Oyez, oyez" when the judge enters the court, or "I swear by the God Apollo" in the Hypocratic oath.

It doesn't mean anything about God. It doesn't establish a religion. It's not supposed to be a religious statement. It's just for show, and historic.

Bullshit.

We know it's bullshit, and they know it's bullshit. When Michael Newdow was making a case for the unconstitutionality of reciting the pledge in public school -- because of the words "under God" -- the defense lawyers were arguing that the pledge wasn't saying anything about believing in God. It was just over-sensitivity that had this atheist thinking it did.

And while they were making their case for Ceremonial Deism the public was outside the courthouse having prayer meetings, screaming to Jesus, talking in tongues, and generally thrashing around like a lot of superstitious yahoos. Don't take God away!! Gee, they seemed to think it DID have something to do with believing in God.

"Ceremonial Deism" my ass. There's probably not an atheist in the US who hasn't been told, directly or indirectly, that they're not really a true citizen, because this is "one nation UNDER GOD" and "In God WE Trust." We who? We Real Americans. They take it as a kind of law, a litmus test. An American who rejects God is like an American who rejects the Constitution. Technically, they're allowed to vote ... sure. Technically, they're citizens.

But why would they want to be? They aren't really partaking of what this country means. They can't understand where the Constitution gets its authority. Not from "We The People." But from God.

I've met a lot of atheists who think that, for pragmatic and political purposes, we should just let the pledge and motto "slide." It only upsets people to try to change them, and they mean nothing. They cause no direct harm. I used to agree.

It's only symbolic.

Symbolic of how important our government thinks it is to believe in God. Everything else is commentary.

Posted by: Sastra | April 23, 2008 7:42 PM

How about replacing "under god" with "under Canada".

At least a little more factual. Well, unless you live in Hawaii or Alaska.

And I admit that I stole this from a Jon Carroll article in the SF Chronicle many many years ago. But I've liked it ever since I read it.

Posted by: JimB | April 23, 2008 7:49 PM

"I swear by the God Apollo" in the Hypocratic oath.

What? That really does make it a hypocritic oath then, I suppose.

(Sorry for exposing the inadvertent pun. Was it a Freudian slip? You meant Hippocratic. Hippokrates = horse-ruler.)

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | April 23, 2008 7:52 PM

"You overlook the fact that many, perhaps most, Americans are 50 years behind the rest of the 1st World* in one respect: they are still patriots, and thus consider the pledge a good and important thing (and automatically assume everyone in their right mind agrees)."

Well growing up in a small college town in Ohio may have warped my view, but I can't help thinking that the schools that require the pledge are part of a different America than the one I know.

Posted by: Robert M. Bradford | April 23, 2008 8:00 PM

Seriously, why do so many shitheads (creationist science teachers, pledge-pushing principals, etc.) go into [mis]education in the first place?

Posted by: Nemo | April 23, 2008 8:02 PM

Keep it quiet, I'm sick of having friends die in wars.

I agree that religion should play absolutely no part in a justification as to why this pledge is objected against - the reasons for that seem painfully obvious since such an objection involves the choice of choosing loyalty to the church over the state. Since the two are not mutual in their aims, this is a faulty reason for refusing to recite the pledge, in my opinion. What follows is my - probably a bit long winded, you guys know me by now - explanation of why this pledge is an intellectual insult to the individual minds of our citizens and their actual dedication to the ideals of America.

I love my country, but they (the administration that has led - of you can call it that - this country for the past seven years) have perverted the virtue of patriotism and redefined it in a way that prevents any criticism of their actions and labels such thoughts and expressions as somehow anti-American.

So, as much as I am endeared to this country, and as much as I have tried to contribute to it, I also am sickened by the fact that it mandates children to "pledge allegiance" to its symbol of cloth and thread. It seems creepily similar to totalitarian indoctrination to me, and if a child is intelligent enough to think for themselves and decide that they do not need to participate in a purely symbolic gesture, then I have no problem with such inclinations.

What should be occurring is that we should be teaching these children WHY this country needs to persevere, which involves teaching an accurate history of the principles on which it was founded. They need to learn the value of individual liberty, the principles of the democratic process, the value and importance of participating in that process, and the necessity of educating themselves adequately to ensure that they can be informed participants, rather than voters left malleable to the persuasions - and outright manipulations - that the political situation of today foists upon the electorate.

So, to close, I whole-heartedly agree with you Raven. The 'it' in your above statement though, in my mind, should refer to the Pledge itself. If we cannot objectively show our children why our country deserves their allegiance, then perhaps it doesn't deserve such allegiance until our leaders take a hard look at and change the way we conduct ourselves in today's global society. If we do not, I will continue to watch my friends and family have their sacrifice perverted by the greed and power-lust of those who use their positions in this country to further their own cliquish personal agendas, and I am utterly sick of seeing this happen, just as you are Raven.

If you think that by saying this I am somehow betraying America, then I'd like to less-than-politely say "fuck you." I don't resort to that kind of language much in my online posts, but this is an issue close to my heart. There are many aspects about me that are justifiably questionable, but my love of and sense of duty towards this country are NOT among them. Besides, the notion that criticizing this country's policies somehow displays an inherent hate for it in the speaker is utterly insidious, and maddeningly false. If I love someone or something, I will - and have a moral obligation to - do all that I can to keep it on the track dictated by its founding principles. It is the ones who demand dogmatic and blind allegiance that show their disregard for the tenets this country was founded upon, and such arrogance is not only intolerant, it is a very real threat to our stability and reputation as a leading nation in the global society.

Posted by: brokenSoldier | April 23, 2008 8:09 PM

I'm a bio teacher as my handle implies and in my public high school, the pledge is recited over the PA every day at the beginning of my bio class. And every day I just stand quietly and look around and don't say a bloody word of that ridiculous pledge. If my Bible-thumping baptist born again whatever principal has anything to say about, he can go you know what himself.

Posted by: bio teacher | April 23, 2008 8:30 PM

I read that it was Robin Williams who proposed, "One nation, under Canada, over Mexico."
At the public high school I'm teaching at, in blue, blue, Massachusetts, the Pledge is said every day. Many of the students are non-citizens, but everyone stands. I quietly say only, "I pledge allegiance to the Constitution."

Posted by: dkew | April 23, 2008 8:44 PM

You overlook the fact that many, perhaps most, Americans are 50 years behind the rest of the 1st World* in one respect: they are still patriots, and thus consider the pledge a good and important thing (and automatically assume everyone in their right mind agrees).

Well-put. The entire concept of the pledge is deeply disturbing and occasionally even terrifying to me, and watching it being recited by groups of people gives me the chills. I'm pretty certain most Europeans feel the same way; this is a loyalty-oath-patriotism-nationalism-indoctrination type of thing that we just don't expect to see anywhere other than in communist countries or bizarre dictatorships. Having children recite it is even more disturbing.

Don't argue about the "under God" insertion, just don't make people pledge anything. Surprisingly, if the experience of other countries is anything to go by, they will not immediately wander off to commit high treason or refuse to pay taxes.

Posted by: catta | April 23, 2008 8:53 PM

Back in the early 70s, when I was in what we so quaintly referred to as junior high school, I absolutely refused to stand for the pledge or salute the flag. It had a little to do with the "under God" thing, which drove my atheist mother crazy, but mostly it was in protest of the Vietnam War. No one tried to kick me out for it, in fact I felt my homeroom teacher was rather in agreement. (She was also my science teacher.) Admittedly, those were much different times. My mother told me they could not make me say the pledge, and that she would back me to the hilt if anyone tried to make me do it.

Jehovah's Witnesses have historically refused to say the pledge, for it violates the principle expressed by the young woman in your post. The Courts have fairly consistently decided in favor of the Witnesses on this position, I believe. Loyalty oaths are clearly unconstitutional.

This is a loser for the wingnuts in court, but the dumbasses just keep trying and trying to force kids to say it. They don't do it at my son's school at all, I don't believe. But it just so happens that my son's school is where the famous Tinker case happened. They learned their lesson. Also it's in a very liberal district.

Posted by: Candy | April 23, 2008 9:19 PM

I say the pledge EVERY day. Not because I'm necessarily patriotic, or because I like the "under God" part. I simply love it, absolutely love it, when everybody madly devolves into chaos when they hear "one nation under FSM".

Posted by: Elles | April 23, 2008 9:35 PM

My father (born in 1937) told me that the Pledge used to have an accompanying arm motion. It would start with the familiar hand-over-heart stance for the "I pledge allegiance" part, but at "to the flag" the reciter would extend his right arm to point at the flag.

He says that went out the window when the Nazis (with their similar salute) came to power. Urban legend? Or was that part of it way back when?

Note: Please don't say "Godwin"!

Posted by: Betz | April 23, 2008 9:49 PM