The Instigator
BlueEyed_Masterpiece
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points
The Contender
Mr.sarcastic
Pro (for)
Losing
6 Points

Should students be forced to stand for the pledge of allegiance?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
BlueEyed_Masterpiece
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/14/2014 Category: Education
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,326 times Debate No: 49145
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (13)
Votes (4)

 

BlueEyed_Masterpiece

Con

I stand in negation for, resolved: Students should be forced to stand for the pledge of allegiance.
I am quite new at this; First time I ever posted a debate. So, if I mess up, just bare with me. :)

First round: Stating claim.
Second round: Stating reasons why.
Third round: attack opponent and explain why you are right.
Mr.sarcastic

Pro

I accept this debate.

I believe that students in the United States of America should stand up in respect during the Pledge of Allegiance in school, public or private.

I look forward to this debate and wish my opponent the best of luck. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 1
BlueEyed_Masterpiece

Con

First off, I would like to state definitions.

Allegiance: loyalty to a person, country, group, etc.
As defined by Merriam Webster. http://www.merriam-webster.com...
Pledge: a serious promise or agreement
http://www.merriam-webster.com...

When you Pledge to the flag, you are stating your commitment, and making a promise. Students who do not believe in the ways of the government should not be forced to stand for the pledge, yet should stay silent for respect of other beliefs.

The third line states: One nation, under GOD.
Not all students are religious, and therefore should not need to pledge to something they do not believe in.

Last line: with liberty and justice for all.
Liberty:the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views.
Justice: just behavior or treatment.
America discriminates against religion, race, ethnic values, gender, beliefs, and so on.

This goes against our First Amendment, which states we have freedom of religion.
http://www.law.cornell.edu...

We also have Separation of Church and State, and forcing students to stand up for something they do not believe in (religiously) goes against this as well.

And finally, we don't need a simple gesture to define our respect to soldiers. We don't need to live up to society's rules.
We may still respect the soldiers that fought for freedom, but we don't need to stand up for something we have no belief in to show it. Bravery stands when a person fights for what they believe in.

Like Rosa Parks, who refused to stand up on a bus during a civil rights movement, she fought for her beliefs by not standing up, and this is the same situation.

I wish my opponent good luck.
Mr.sarcastic

Pro

I am not saying that students should have to say the pledge, just stand up for it. The way you are talking, it sounds like if that's how a student feels, he or she should simply move to a foreign country. If you are going to live in the United States of America, you should at least have to stand up, that is not asking much. It is simply a sign of respect. It's the same as if you went to church with a friend, and you're not religious, you still wouldn't be talking during the sermon. You would show respect to their religion and be quiet. Now THAT is no different from standing up for the pledge in a sign of respect.
Debate Round No. 2
BlueEyed_Masterpiece

Con

We have rights, and we shouldn't be forced to stand up for the pledge. We show respect by not talking. The way you say it sounds as if students should live under society's rules, that we should not stand up for what we believe in (In this case, sit down for what we believe in).
Students should not be forced to stand, but stayed silent.
And in a church, its their choice to be there or not. In a school, they have to.

This violates the first amendment. You do not need to stand up to show respect. You can sit silently and let others do as they wish, that is called Acceptance. Our society doesn't seem to have much of that anymore.

Schools are only teaching that we should not be ourselves, and that we should not stand up for what we believe in.

For voters, I urge your negation that students shouldn't be forced to stand up for the pledge. We have rights, and this violates them. The United States is clearly the country of the free, in other words, forcing someone to do something goes against our rights.
Students should still be respectful - by sitting down and being quiet as other students can stand and say the pledge.

A simple gesture does not define respect.

My opponent is stating that in our society, we should not stand up for who we are, but instead do what everyone else does and believes because it shows 'respect'.

I would like to wish luck to my opponent for round 3, and apologize for the long wait for the site was not working for my computer.
Mr.sarcastic

Pro

You make it sound as if standing up for the flag is an act of peer pressure. That since everybody else is doing we should, or we have to do it too. If a student does not want to stand up for the pledge, he should go to the principal and justify his case. However, if this is not done then the student should stand up for the pledge. It truly is an absurd thing to think that someone would not stand up for the pledge. For any reason! I simply am not going to say anymore due to the fact that the voters can judge on what they believe. There needs to be more "con" then "pro" in this type of debate. I'm glad to have had this debate and wish happy voting for all. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Jackthemarine86 3 years ago
Jackthemarine86
As far as Separation of Church and State go, I ask the following: Do you vote? When you vote for someone, are expecting your candidate to pass laws reflecting your point of view? Wouldn't that essentially be forcing your views on others? How is that any different from what you despise? Is your view only nonreligious poeple should be allowed to vote or participate in politics, law-making, or education? Furthermore, where in the Constitution are religious people excluded from the political process? Lastly, I'd be very interested to be provided an example of legislation that does not have a moral element to it - be it from a Theist point of view or Atheist point of view. Point being, legislation comes about from beliefs on how things should be run for society as a whole. Those beliefs stem from a world view that either encompasses morality as defined by God or not defined by God - Either way, someone is forcing their views on someone else - it's a no-win situation.
Posted by Mr.sarcastic 3 years ago
Mr.sarcastic
Shows your maturity.
Posted by BlueEyed_Masterpiece 3 years ago
BlueEyed_Masterpiece
wow. I don't care :P but okay, i don't believe in your beliefs, so -shrugs- bye
Posted by Mr.sarcastic 3 years ago
Mr.sarcastic
By the way, I'm 14...
Posted by Jackthemarine86 3 years ago
Jackthemarine86
You're d*&n right I took this personal. My mentioning your age wasn't childish - it was recognition. You already know what I mean by that, because you took it to a further extent to clarify it was incorrect.

I understand rights very well. Where you and I differ, is that I understand they are granted and can be taken away. You're arguing under the pretense that they are owed to us, and are absolute. Sorry, but this is not the case. Rights of the individual always take second place to what is best for the sake of society as a whole or the country as a whole. If you want to enforce absolute rights, then you might as well do away with laws, as not everyone agrees with every law passed, and it infringes on their personal liberties.

I also understand, unlike you, that there is a cost associated with these rights you so cherish. That cost might be up and to your life - and the country to whom you belong has every right to require that of you to maintain those same rights for future generations. As of right now, you can be grateful that there are those who are happy to voluntarily do that in your stead. The Pledge is about the principles of the country - not its government. If you don't like the current, government however, go to Afghanistan or Iraq or some other third world country, live under their government, and do a comparison to see if that's really a valid point.

Lastly, " ...it would be wise if you didn't get emotional and force your opinion down people's throat." *Ahem* Then why are you pushing YOUR opinion down my throat?
Posted by BlueEyed_Masterpiece 3 years ago
BlueEyed_Masterpiece
For Jackthemarine86: First, you took this debate way too personally, for it wasn't meant to target you, and was meant in a serious matter. For you to comment on my age was unnecessary for you acted childish yourself.
Also, I'm stating how in our society, we SHOULDN'T let something so small define who we are.

And yes, those people were forced to go to war, which is not only sexist, but selfish. Those who want to go to war, can, but we have rights, and clearly you do not understand this.

And I am not sixteen years old, that was messed up in my personal profile. I only recently realized that everything (birthday, gender, and etc) were not properly saved correctly.

And those who dislike the way the country is run do not need to stand up for the pledge, it is that simple.

Like I said, the debate is not meant to be taken personally, and it would be wise if you didn't get emotional and force your opinion down people's throat.
Posted by Jackthemarine86 3 years ago
Jackthemarine86
For Masterpiece: What I find mildly amusing about this debate is the premise of 'rights' behind the argument. When born in the United States, citizenship is automatic. Based upon those conditions, citizens are granted certain rights. GRANTED, NOT OWED.

Every male in the United States is required to register for selective service. This is not an option, whether you agree with it or not. As an illustration, the draft was utilized in Vietnam by means of selective service. Men were forced into military service to fight for a government they may have despised, and a war they did not agree with.

In other words, rights are not free. As a matter of fact, even U.S. Born citizens accused of terrorism (i.e., treason), lose all rights granted as a Citizen and receive either 1) Confinement, 2) Death, or 3) Dismissal from the Country.

I could say more about Separation of Church and State but I have 951 characters left, and frankly can't write much more. Suffice to say, a simple gesture can define respect. You have obviously never worn this Country's service uniform, more specifically the uniform of a U.S. Marine. Your lack of comprehending exactly what the pledge means, the importance of it, the importance the U.S. Flag, is frankly, disheartening. Your age, brain-washed philosophy, and politically-correct stance are clearly noted.

You are 16 years old. You know nothing of sacrifice, pride in a country, pride in its history, or exactly what that Pledge means. You gripe about the word 'God', and completely dismiss the rest as a result. Any person who resides in a country, but has no loyalty to it, even refusing to do something as small as say the Pledge of Allegiance - yet reaps the benefits provided by said country, has some serious philosophical and moral issues they need to hash out.

Frankly, I'm worried about this generation coming up if you all have this same mentality. I'm glad I've got kids to teach differently, who will hopefully buck your flawed ideolog
Posted by Mr.sarcastic 3 years ago
Mr.sarcastic
It's the way he worded it
Posted by MassiveDump 3 years ago
MassiveDump
Lol if they're in a wheelchair and forced to stand up.

#Beiden
Posted by Mr.sarcastic 3 years ago
Mr.sarcastic
Negation is against something, so I assume he is indeed against it, that he believes students should not have to stand up fr the pledge of allegiance. If he is indeed con, I would be glad to debate him.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by jamccartney 3 years ago
jamccartney
BlueEyed_MasterpieceMr.sarcasticTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Con is correct, for students should definitely not be forced to say the pledge. Con cited sources, while Pro did not. Con made long arguments, while Pro made short, uneducated arguments. They are tied for spelling and grammar. They also tie for conduct.
Vote Placed by Jackthemarine86 3 years ago
Jackthemarine86
BlueEyed_MasterpieceMr.sarcasticTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Reasons for voting decision: Con had more reliable sources. Arguments were seriously and logically flawed based upon what citizenship entails - and expectations thereof. Furthermore what is defined as "Rights". Spelling and grammar were tied. Pro gets points for more convincing arguments, as some of what was said is what I remarked in the comment section after reading the debate. Conduct is also a tie. Pro failed to use any sources for his argument, however.
Vote Placed by Hematite12 3 years ago
Hematite12
BlueEyed_MasterpieceMr.sarcasticTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro never addressed the central issue of separation of church and state.
Vote Placed by saxman 3 years ago
saxman
BlueEyed_MasterpieceMr.sarcasticTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Reasons for voting decision: Standing up is a sign of respect. Even if you are not religious, then you must respect the country. As a citizen of America, then you at least that much.