Uh oh. Pledge of Allegiance declared unconstitutional

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed

this probably won't improve things...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050914/ap_on_re_us/pledge_of_allegiance

A federal judge declared the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools unconstitutional Wednesday in a case brought by the same atheist whose previous battle against the words "under God" was rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court on procedural grounds.

kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 18:18 (eighteen years ago) link

SAN FRANCISCO YOU LIBERAL BABYLON

Stuh-du-du-du-du-du-du-denka (jingleberries), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 18:19 (eighteen years ago) link

'under God' only dates from 1954.

M. White (Miguelito), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 18:20 (eighteen years ago) link

Yeah, but folks in this country kinda miss those nuances, don't they?

kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 18:24 (eighteen years ago) link

I think schoolchildren should only say "under God" during the precise seasons and times of day when the school in question is actually directly underneath God. Right now I think he's straight up from Kiev. Unless you're a pantheist, in which case you'll maybe have different issues with the "under" part.

nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 18:28 (eighteen years ago) link

This would excite me but it is sure to be overturned in about 34 seconds.

stewart downes (sdownes), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 18:36 (eighteen years ago) link

yeah, but if you have a section of the populace acutely starving for any means to attack the judiciary, this kinda gives them a bit of meat...

kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 18:40 (eighteen years ago) link

Can the polytheists say 'under Gods'?

M. White (Miguelito), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 18:40 (eighteen years ago) link

There really is no serious rationale for including that particular prepositional phrase, apart from "but that's just the way we've always said if (for a few decades, anyway)." It's kind of telling that in this particular linguistic-correctness war it's the people in favor of the religious wording who have to construct all sorts of complex addendums to keep it in line with our usual practice: they'll argue that it's non-denominational, that "god" could apply to non-Judeo-Christian deities, that schoolchildren can opt not to say that part, etc. But really it's that last argument that's most galling: it means that there is a half-second blip of public school class time during which students as young as six are essentially forced to make a public statement of religious faith or non-faith, something that -- if someone suggested it today, out of the blue, as a possible addition to the curriculum -- would be rejected out of hand by judges and citizens alike. Given current interpretations of the law surrounding this stuff, I can't see any possible way that the phrase could be considered constitutional, unless it's via the powerful legal doctrine of "whatever, who cares, I guess we've been doing it for a while and most people are kind of attached to it" (cf what, Dredd Scott?).

nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 18:50 (eighteen years ago) link

http://www.venganza.org/sightings/thumbnails/niklas_jansson.jpg

Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 19:02 (eighteen years ago) link

I'm in favor of leaving it in the pledge only if every public school is forced to prominently display the picture Spencer posted.

Rockist_Scientist (RSLaRue), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 19:11 (eighteen years ago) link

Actually: in the opt-out version of this, I wonder if you're allowed to say something different, as opposed to just being silent. I almost kinda like the idea of a class of snotty high school sophomores all throwing something else in -- "under Allah," "under whelmed," "fromunder cheese," "under FILTHY POLLUTED SKIES THANKS TO BUSH'S CRIMINAL WEAKENING OF THE EPA," etc.

nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 19:16 (eighteen years ago) link

Really this was done by a SF federal judge and the 9th circuit court of appeals already - the article mentions that 2002 case. I think they both really are bound by precedent, as the judge in the new case says, to agree with that decision, unless there are some details that aren't mentioned that are different from the previous case. Then when it gets to the Supreme Court, that's when it'll be overturned in 34 seconds.

wetmink2, Wednesday, 14 September 2005 19:21 (eighteen years ago) link

It's a great headline anyway.

Rockist_Scientist (RSLaRue), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 19:26 (eighteen years ago) link

Is this guy's daughter still even in school anymore?

I never found out the reason the Supreme Court wouldn't rule... does this mean they have to stop until the Supreme Court rules on it?

andy --, Wednesday, 14 September 2005 19:39 (eighteen years ago) link

they would not rule before because he had no standing before the court.

cutty (mcutt), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 19:42 (eighteen years ago) link

They should take out the word "indivisible" while they're at it.

Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 19:44 (eighteen years ago) link

Because it's redundant?

Huk-L (Huk-L), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 19:46 (eighteen years ago) link

Who fucking cares about those two words? The entire Pledge is ludicrous to me. I pledge allegiance to respecting our rights and liberties, but I make no promises about our flag/republic.

Curt1s St3ph3ns, Wednesday, 14 September 2005 19:53 (eighteen years ago) link

(though "under God" is def. the most offending phrase out of the whole thing)

Curt1s St3ph3ns, Wednesday, 14 September 2005 19:53 (eighteen years ago) link

the funny thing is, he still has no standing before the court.

cutty (mcutt), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 19:58 (eighteen years ago) link

God?

Huk-L (Huk-L), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 20:00 (eighteen years ago) link

I dunno about that, man -- the rest of it is pretty much a standard citizenship pledge, the same sort of thing you have to swear to in order to naturalize, and the same thing you're swearing to by proxy when you hold a U.S. passport. You pledge allegiance to the flag and the republic = you affirm citizenship in this nation. "Indivisible" = I disclaim any treasonous or secessionist or Aaron Burr-type plans. The only real non-standard bit is the end flourish "liberty and justice for all," which I suppose goes a little beyond, though not necessarily in a way that I mind: technically it means pledging to a certain ideal of how the nation should work, more so than claiming that such is actually the case. But I suppose if you strike "under God" you could strike that part, too, insofar as someone could maybe (super-maybe) be a non-treasonous U.S. citizen without actually believing in the principles of liberty and justice.

nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 20:02 (eighteen years ago) link

("liberty and justice" are genuinely interpretive, too, much more so than "god" is.)

nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 20:04 (eighteen years ago) link

the funny thing is, he still has no standing before the court.

but that's why he's doing it on behalf of the 3 anonymous parents this time, right - because they will have standing before the court?

wetmink2, Wednesday, 14 September 2005 20:07 (eighteen years ago) link

I make my mandatory show of allegiance once a year, sometime between January The First and April The Fifteenth, why you should ever be required to stand up and hold your right hand over your left lung and chant insipid muh muh muh with other people is completely beyond me to be quite frank. I'm not a customer, I'm not the flag's little BUDDY, I'm a STAKEHOLDER and this institution is in a handbasket headed round the bowl down the hole if you ask me.

TOMBOT, Wednesday, 14 September 2005 20:10 (eighteen years ago) link

Eh. I'm not saying there's much point in having people stand up and affirm that, you know, "I accept the basic terms of citizenship in this nation," but hey, if my dad had to do it then so can the native-born. Though there is something creepy and McCarthyite and unnecessary about making children say it Every Single Morning -- how about just once, on your 18th birthday, the same day you have to make decisions on dual citizenships and register for Selective Service?

The funny part is that "United States of America" and "under god" are possibly the only two parts of this thing that little kids actually understand and say properly: apart from that it's all "fun Asians, invisible, with Hilary and moustache for balls."

nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 20:19 (eighteen years ago) link

If you're not down with "ceremonial deism," what kind of commie are you?

Hunter (Hunter), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 20:24 (eighteen years ago) link

how come they stop making kids do the pledge in high school? what's the rationale?

cutty (mcutt), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 20:31 (eighteen years ago) link

Well, I don't think anyone actually has to say it by law, do they? Unless if they're being naturalized, they might have to say something like it. For example, the Virginia law says that kids have to be led in the Pledge, not that they have to say it.

Not that I don't think there's something problematic about making the kids hear "under God" in the pledge every day, and being virtually coerced to say it - I think there definitely is.

Just found this article - West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette

wetmink2, Wednesday, 14 September 2005 20:34 (eighteen years ago) link

Because kids in high school start being huge wiseasses about it and hold up class for 15 minutes arguing with the teacher and then have to be suspended and then there's a Supreme Court case about how they tried to make the skinny kid in the black t-shirt say "god"

TOMBOT, Wednesday, 14 September 2005 20:34 (eighteen years ago) link

I don't recall saying it beyond fifth grade at the absolute latest. It's like a cute kid-patriotism thing, from that stage where you're short and some people would happily line you up in little uniforms and toy rifles and march you around like Good Future Citizens of Our Fine Nation. Then you turn like nine and you're not cute or likeable anymore and it's kinda awkward to train you up like that.

nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 20:41 (eighteen years ago) link

omg nabisco, you were saying it so wrong!

carly (carly), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 20:42 (eighteen years ago) link

Suddenly they're all like "you'd best pledge allegiance to some Pro-Activ, you freak," and that's that.

nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 20:42 (eighteen years ago) link

if you were of a certain age, you got to say it along with President Reagan sometime during 1987/1988. They hooked the radio up to the PA system at my middle school. Some National Occurance, but i can't remember what.

kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 20:46 (eighteen years ago) link

"whatever, who cares, I guess we've been doing it for a while and most people are kind of attached to it"

this is actually a pretty important legal principle, at least according to the john roberts testimony excerpts i saw yesterday on The News Hour!

W i l l (common_person), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 20:48 (eighteen years ago) link

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/28/1892_Pledge_of_Allegiance2.jpg
"Because of its similarity to the Hitler salute, the Bellamy salute was replaced in 1942 with the modern gesture of placing the right hand over the heart."

wetmink2, Wednesday, 14 September 2005 20:48 (eighteen years ago) link

which you obv were saying, nabisco, but just pointing out it may be all that keeps roe from being overturned (or it may not)

W i l l (common_person), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 20:49 (eighteen years ago) link

(keep roe from being overturned, that is)

W i l l (common_person), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 20:50 (eighteen years ago) link

We did it in my high school, all the way through. One morning in about 10th grade I jokingly shoved a desk backward at a friend of mine when I stood up, trapping him between the desk and the wall so he couldn't stand. Our homeroom teacher, a dweeby math guy, came stalking over, all furious that my friend wasn't standing. I took the blame for pinning him there, and then got a little prickly, like, "You can't force us to stand. That's against the law." The teacher glared at me and said, "Some things are more important than the law." And this was in the mid-'80s in suburban upstate New York, not 1960 in Alabama or something. The whole "It's optional" argument is pretty weak.

That said, I'm not sure this is a great time for this particular cultural bloodbath. I respect Newdow's persistence and of course I think he's right, but given everything else on the Culture War agenda, this is a mostly symbolic fight that will mostly serve as a massive organizing and fundraising incentive for the Christian right.

gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 23:19 (eighteen years ago) link

unlike, say, gay marriage?

viborgu, Thursday, 15 September 2005 00:27 (eighteen years ago) link

No one should have to confirm their citizenship, and certainly not their "allegiance" to a piece of cloth representing their nation. It's childish and insulting, and maybe appropriate for Old Europe -- say, ca. 1019 -- but not anything now.

Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 15 September 2005 02:19 (eighteen years ago) link

unlike, say, gay marriage?

Yes, unlike gay marriage. Gay marriage is not a largely symbolic issue, there are real legal civil rights at stake that have significant effects on people's day to day lives. There are rights at stake the Pledge, I know, but the gains are a lot smaller for the amount of grief we're going to have to endure over all this. I mean, part of me is glad Newdow is pushing it, but part of me kind of wishes we could hold off on this battle until a slightly more sane time. But whatever. I guess we're gonna have to deal with these guys sooner or later, might as well do it all at once.

gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Thursday, 15 September 2005 02:35 (eighteen years ago) link

quit bogarting that dube, tracer bro.

oops (Oops), Thursday, 15 September 2005 06:07 (eighteen years ago) link

i would recite it if doing so got me, say, 10% off purchases at the cash register or a free oil change.

fortunate hazel (f. hazel), Thursday, 15 September 2005 07:02 (eighteen years ago) link

Why do Americans clutch their stomach and talk to their flag every morning?

This was the biggest mystery I ever faced upon emigration as a child.

The Brocade Fire (kate), Thursday, 15 September 2005 07:04 (eighteen years ago) link

it's because we're all obese and have god-given heartburn.

fortunate hazel (f. hazel), Thursday, 15 September 2005 07:06 (eighteen years ago) link

oops, what the fuck are you talking about?

Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 15 September 2005 07:12 (eighteen years ago) link

Tracer OTM - what sort of democracy enforces a pledge to nation?

plebian plebs (plebian), Thursday, 15 September 2005 08:35 (eighteen years ago) link

It's just weird that these are also the "anti-big-government" folks.??

Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 15 September 2005 14:50 (eighteen years ago) link

That said, I'm not sure this is a great time for this particular cultural bloodbath. I respect Newdow's persistence and of course I think he's right, but given everything else on the Culture War agenda, this is a mostly symbolic fight that will mostly serve as a massive organizing and fundraising incentive for the Christian right.

exactly. the blowback from this cause even greater problems.


It's just weird that these are also the "anti-big-government" folks.??

Yeah, but Tracer, these guys have never held a sincere, coherent drive for "less big govt". it's never been more than a rallying cry for conservatives to defund social programs that they don't like. None of these guys ever called for the shrinking of the army or the fbi to where it can be drowned in a bathtub. Once they finally got in charge, hey, this gubmint thing ain't too bad...

on a related note, Delay talking about the "ongoing victory" of fiscal conservatism.

kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 15 September 2005 15:54 (eighteen years ago) link

Why do Americans clutch their stomach and talk to their flag every morning?
This was the biggest mystery I ever faced upon emigration as a child.

It's just another small point of indoctrination. You're that much smaller because we made you say the pledge. This goes beyond the whole god thing, but it's just bullying. Plus, I'm not loyal to a friggin' flag. Maybe if kids were swearing to respect the constitution or something, I'd be okay with it, but they're not.

simian (dymaxia), Thursday, 15 September 2005 16:07 (eighteen years ago) link

Well, to be fair, many democracies make you do military service. I'd rather spend 15 seconds a day saying the pledge.

I think I may need a bathroom break? (wetmink2), Thursday, 15 September 2005 17:23 (eighteen years ago) link

http://pledgeqanda.com/

When Bellamy wrote his Pledge in August, 1892, he was well aware of the Balch Pledge. In 1892 George T. Balch was the most influential person in the development of a patriotic flag ritual for the classroom. He was a New York City auditor and had developed a patriotic verbal flag salute and ritual, the first verbal flag salute used in American public schools. The students in his New York Public Schools gave his "American Patriotic Salute" as follows: students touched first their foreheads, then their hearts, reciting, "We give our Heads - and our Hearts -to God and our Country." Then with a right arm outstretched and palms down in the direction of the flag, they competed the salute "One Country! One Language! One Flag!"


...ummm.

kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Friday, 16 September 2005 02:42 (eighteen years ago) link

I stopped cooperating with the Pledge of Allegiance when I was 12, haven't done it since. An Atheist from the cradle, the God part offended me hugely, as did the allegiance to the flag. Nixon was in office when I was 12.
But really, isn't it as much of a contradiction as renewing your wedding vows? Vows and pledges are forever, right? What's the point of renewing, if your fealty is like a funky old car battery that can't hold a charge?

Beth Parker (Beth Parker), Friday, 16 September 2005 12:00 (eighteen years ago) link

there's also the pledge developed by Bono, as a way of saluting the flag 'on the go' no matter where you are:

http://image.pathfinder.com/time/europe/photoessays/bono/images/flag.jpg

latebloomer (latebloomer), Friday, 16 September 2005 12:14 (eighteen years ago) link

http://www.friesmuseum.nl/upload/371.jpg

Gerard (Gerard), Friday, 16 September 2005 12:19 (eighteen years ago) link

as Jon Stewart pointed out, nothing will make you respect a phrase like having a bunch of 5th graders mumble thru it every morning...

kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Friday, 16 September 2005 12:49 (eighteen years ago) link

eight years pass...

Though Rees said he did not know Richardson by name, he recognized him from previous meetings as the man who sits in the front row and then leaves after the invocation and pledge.

...

The Wisconsin-based atheist group Freedom from Religion Foundation emailed the mayor and the police chief asking both to explain at the next meeting that citizens are within their rights to stay seated for the pledge.

The email said the man who was asked to leave the meeting is a member of that organization.

The group also promised to attend the commission's next meeting and vowed to stay seated during both the invocation and pledge to protest "these egregious violations of the Constitution," according to the email, sent by its staff attorney Andrew Seidel.

good lord

example (crüt), Monday, 1 September 2014 08:24 (nine years ago) link

four years pass...

the state with the prettiest name!

a Stalin Stale Ale for me, please (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 18 February 2019 15:27 (five years ago) link

am reluctant to spread that story, just because as the article alludes, there may very well be "more to it" (in the fashion perhaps of the texas clock kid).... but jeez. i made a point of not standing for or saying the pledge in my elementary school (they didn't bother w/ it in high school) and sometimes i'd get a little pushback from other students(!) but never, as i recall, from teachers.

affects breves telnet (Gummy Gummy), Monday, 18 February 2019 18:04 (five years ago) link

the thing that rings true in that article is that the substitute teacher seems like a dumbfuck. no offense to subs in general, many of whom are good people struggling in a shit job, but many of the subs in my (public) schools were obvious nepotism hires who probably could barely pass a background check these days. they were often total idiots who the students (esp. honors students) ran roughshod over.

affects breves telnet (Gummy Gummy), Monday, 18 February 2019 18:05 (five years ago) link

and i can totally imagine one having a #MAGA seizure in response to a mild provocation from a (black) student.

affects breves telnet (Gummy Gummy), Monday, 18 February 2019 18:06 (five years ago) link

teacher seems like a dumbfuck

A quick read of the article strongly suggests the teacher had no clue how to recognize a teachable moment and nothing of value to teach anyway.

By way of contrast, my mom was a first grade teacher in a school full of poor and minority kids and she handled the pledge with delicate aplomb, explaining to her six year olds that the words "with liberty and justice for all" described what we wanted the country to be like and what we hoped would be true, even if it was not always true.

A is for (Aimless), Monday, 18 February 2019 19:26 (five years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.