Total Posts:23|Showing Posts:1-23
Jump to topic:

The Pledge of Allegiance

DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 1:49:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The Pledge of Allegiance is a nationalistic pledge, and should be changed.
The pledge is as followed'
"I pledge allegiance to the Flag
of the United States of America,
and to the Republic for which it stands:
one Nation under God, indivisible,
With Liberty and Justice for all."

The pledge originated from the Civil War. During the civil war Lincoln was a Nationalist who ran under the National Union Party. Supporters of Lincoln were Nationalists, while his opposition was Northern Democrats. The purpose is to pledge your allegiance to the Federal government over that of the states. In other words, you pledge to be faithful to the Federation, even if the Federation is against the interests of your state. If the Federal government and your state goes to war, you pledge to side with the union over your neighbors.
The word "indivisible" implies that secession is impossible, and therefore you are pledging to that credo.

The pledge is a nationalistic pledge, that aims to centralize the American government. We are not one Republic, we are a federation of Republics. We are not one nation, we are a nation of nations. The pledge goes against the very principles of the constitution, and so I propose the following changes.

"I pledge allegiance to the Flag
of the United States of America,
and to the Republics for which it stands:
one federation under God, United
With Liberty and Justice for all."
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
MrBrooks
Posts: 831
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 2:27:49 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 2:25:11 PM, Aaronroy wrote:
Leave out the God part, and I would say the revision is appropriate.

Leave the God part in; the God part is optional even in the current form of the pledge, which means you do not need to say it.
Aaronroy
Posts: 749
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 2:28:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 2:27:49 PM, MrBrooks wrote:
At 8/18/2012 2:25:11 PM, Aaronroy wrote:
Leave out the God part, and I would say the revision is appropriate.

Leave the God part in; the God part is optional even in the current form of the pledge, which means you do not need to say it.

Why have God in it in the first place?
It wasn't originally in the pledge.
turn down for h'what
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 2:28:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I can understand the support of a state. But I simply find it disturbing to pledge allegiance to one. Get rid of it all together.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Aaronroy
Posts: 749
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 2:31:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 2:28:41 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I can understand the support of a state. But I simply find it disturbing to pledge allegiance to one. Get rid of it all together.
+1

The existence of a pledge I find no problem with. Urging students and others to make the pledge each and every morning or when in asked to is ridiculous however.

I personally haven't said the pledge in years. I refuse to pledge to a nation with legislation allowing the central government to actively spy on its citizens.
turn down for h'what
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 2:31:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 2:28:41 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I can understand the support of a state. But I simply find it disturbing to pledge allegiance to one. Get rid of it all together.

It's a means of cohesion. Without a federal government, each state essentially becomes a country. That may sound socially ideal, but it's catastrophic in just about every other way.
Aaronroy
Posts: 749
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 2:33:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I'm actually getting confused; is this a transition to individual Republics within one Federation, or just an emphasis of how it already is?

I fear the second coming of a Confederacy.
turn down for h'what
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 3:26:36 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 2:25:11 PM, Aaronroy wrote:
Leave out the God part, and I would say the revision is appropriate.

^

The United States is a secular nation as envisioned by the Founding Fathers, not a crazy Bible Belt Christian Fascist stronghold.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 3:30:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 3:26:36 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 8/18/2012 2:25:11 PM, Aaronroy wrote:
Leave out the God part, and I would say the revision is appropriate.

^

The United States is a secular nation as envisioned by the Founding Fathers, not a crazy Bible Belt Christian Fascist stronghold.

You're going to hell. George Washington said so.

Look, I'll prove it:

"Lordknukle is going to hell for thinking this nation is a secular nation" - George Washington
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
imabench
Posts: 21,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 3:55:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
youre pledging allegiance to the government which rules over all the states who are all united under One presidency, One Congress, and One federal supreme court.

This pledge may have been more applicable to the US under the articles of federation, where all the states were REALLY independent and Congress was inferior to state legislatures.
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 3:55:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 2:31:47 PM, Ren wrote:
At 8/18/2012 2:28:41 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I can understand the support of a state. But I simply find it disturbing to pledge allegiance to one. Get rid of it all together.

It's a means of cohesion. Without a federal government, each state essentially becomes a country. That may sound socially ideal, but it's catastrophic in just about every other way.

1) Removing the infringement upon liberty by forcing ideology and support of government onto the population is not going to lead to societal destruction
2) Granting more freedom is a good thing all else equal, and in this case, all is. There is no substantial negative in theory to removing it (though in practice it would remove the government in charge and reverse law due to a pervasive nationalist hegemony).
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
imabench
Posts: 21,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 4:05:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 3:58:07 PM, Apollo.11 wrote:
Fvck nationalism. I never understood the point of it.

Fire a few rounds of an M-16 at a gun shop, then youll get it
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
UnStupendousMan
Posts: 3,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 4:30:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I personally think that the pledge is nothing but an annoyance nowadays. Standing up to say the pledge every morning (especially when one hasn't done it for more than a year) is tiresome, and it just becomes a jumble of meaningless words, anyway. Besides, I don't do it outside of school, and the only places where I *would* do it would be in places where I would be concerned with the nation, like in a politics club.

Besides Lincoln was a Republican ( http://en.wikipedia.org... ) and Virginia's a commonwealth ( http://en.wikipedia.org... ). And if you want to return to the Articles of Confederation, beat your drum (alone).
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 4:38:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 1:49:34 PM, DanT wrote:
The Pledge of Allegiance is a nationalistic pledge, and should be changed.
The pledge is as followed'
"I pledge allegiance to the Flag
of the United States of America,
and to the Republic for which it stands:
one Nation under God, indivisible,
With Liberty and Justice for all."

The pledge originated from the Civil War. During the civil war Lincoln was a Nationalist who ran under the National Union Party. Supporters of Lincoln were Nationalists, while his opposition was Northern Democrats. The purpose is to pledge your allegiance to the Federal government over that of the states. In other words, you pledge to be faithful to the Federation, even if the Federation is against the interests of your state. If the Federal government and your state goes to war, you pledge to side with the union over your neighbors.
The word "indivisible" implies that secession is impossible, and therefore you are pledging to that credo.

The pledge is a nationalistic pledge, that aims to centralize the American government. We are not one Republic, we are a federation of Republics. We are not one nation, we are a nation of nations. The pledge goes against the very principles of the constitution, and so I propose the following changes.

"I pledge allegiance to the Flag
of the United States of America,
and to the Republics for which it stands:
one federation under God, United
With Liberty and Justice for all."

Confederate traitor.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
NixonianVolkswagen
Posts: 481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 4:57:23 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 4:38:04 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 8/18/2012 1:49:34 PM, DanT wrote:
The Pledge of Allegiance is a nationalistic pledge, and should be changed.
The pledge is as followed'
"I pledge allegiance to the Flag
of the United States of America,
and to the Republic for which it stands:
one Nation under God, indivisible,
With Liberty and Justice for all."

The pledge originated from the Civil War. During the civil war Lincoln was a Nationalist who ran under the National Union Party. Supporters of Lincoln were Nationalists, while his opposition was Northern Democrats. The purpose is to pledge your allegiance to the Federal government over that of the states. In other words, you pledge to be faithful to the Federation, even if the Federation is against the interests of your state. If the Federal government and your state goes to war, you pledge to side with the union over your neighbors.
The word "indivisible" implies that secession is impossible, and therefore you are pledging to that credo.

The pledge is a nationalistic pledge, that aims to centralize the American government. We are not one Republic, we are a federation of Republics. We are not one nation, we are a nation of nations. The pledge goes against the very principles of the constitution, and so I propose the following changes.

"I pledge allegiance to the Flag
of the United States of America,
and to the Republics for which it stands:
one federation under God, United
With Liberty and Justice for all."

Confederate traitor.

I would rather be a traitor to my country, sah, than a traitor to my plantation.
"There is an almost universal tendency, perhaps an inborn tendency, to suspect the good faith of a man who holds opinions that differ from our own opinions."

- Karl "Spartacus" Popper
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 5:03:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 1:49:34 PM, DanT wrote:
The Pledge of Allegiance is a nationalistic pledge, and should be changed.
The pledge is as followed'
"I pledge allegiance to the Flag
of the United States of America,
and to the Republic for which it stands:
one Nation under God, indivisible,
With Liberty and Justice for all."

The pledge originated from the Civil War. During the civil war Lincoln was a Nationalist who ran under the National Union Party. Supporters of Lincoln were Nationalists, while his opposition was Northern Democrats. The purpose is to pledge your allegiance to the Federal government over that of the states. In other words, you pledge to be faithful to the Federation, even if the Federation is against the interests of your state. If the Federal government and your state goes to war, you pledge to side with the union over your neighbors.
The word "indivisible" implies that secession is impossible, and therefore you are pledging to that credo.

The pledge is a nationalistic pledge, that aims to centralize the American government. We are not one Republic, we are a federation of Republics. We are not one nation, we are a nation of nations. The pledge goes against the very principles of the constitution, and so I propose the following changes.

"I pledge allegiance to the Flag
of the United States of America,
and to the Republics for which it stands:
one federation under God, United
With Liberty and Justice for all."

The only people that say this on a regular basis are kids in school who don't know what they're saying because they're kids in school.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 7:46:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 3:55:12 PM, imabench wrote:
youre pledging allegiance to the government which rules over all the states who are all united under One presidency, One Congress, and One federal supreme court.

This pledge may have been more applicable to the US under the articles of federation, where all the states were REALLY independent and Congress was inferior to state legislatures.

a.) It was the articles of confederation, not the articles of federation
b.) The states still hold more sovereignty than the federal government; at least constitutionally.
c.) The articles of confederation was a confederation because the they lacked an executive branch, not because the states were more powerful than the central government. There is no central state in a confederation, even if there is a central government; that is to say the central government of a confederation lacks executive authority.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 7:51:54 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Let's pledge ourselves to either the federal government or state governments, but God forbid we say anything about God in there.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 7:58:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 4:38:04 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 8/18/2012 1:49:34 PM, DanT wrote:
The Pledge of Allegiance is a nationalistic pledge, and should be changed.
The pledge is as followed'
"I pledge allegiance to the Flag
of the United States of America,
and to the Republic for which it stands:
one Nation under God, indivisible,
With Liberty and Justice for all."

The pledge originated from the Civil War. During the civil war Lincoln was a Nationalist who ran under the National Union Party. Supporters of Lincoln were Nationalists, while his opposition was Northern Democrats. The purpose is to pledge your allegiance to the Federal government over that of the states. In other words, you pledge to be faithful to the Federation, even if the Federation is against the interests of your state. If the Federal government and your state goes to war, you pledge to side with the union over your neighbors.
The word "indivisible" implies that secession is impossible, and therefore you are pledging to that credo.

The pledge is a nationalistic pledge, that aims to centralize the American government. We are not one Republic, we are a federation of Republics. We are not one nation, we are a nation of nations. The pledge goes against the very principles of the constitution, and so I propose the following changes.

"I pledge allegiance to the Flag
of the United States of America,
and to the Republics for which it stands:
one federation under God, United
With Liberty and Justice for all."

Confederate traitor.

I'm not a confederate I'm a federalist. I believe we need a central state, but I don't believe in a unitary state. I believe the federal government should be severely limited. Like with any organization, the more diverse the population the more localized it needs to be, and the larger the organization the more it requires a central authority.

If it is large and diverse, it needs to be a federation.
If it is large but not diverse, it needs to be a unitary state.
If it is small but diverse, it needs to be a confederation.
If it is small but not diverse, it needs to be a confederation.

We are large and diverse, so we need a federation.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Aaronroy
Posts: 749
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 8:12:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 7:51:54 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Let's pledge ourselves to either the federal government or state governments, but God forbid we say anything about God in there.

Pledging to a nation, government or entity is abhorrent.
Acknowledging a sadistic deity within the pledge is that much worse.
turn down for h'what
Frederick53
Posts: 1,037
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 8:16:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 7:51:54 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Let's pledge ourselves to either the federal government or state governments, but God forbid we say anything about God in there.

Well for one thing, at least everybody acknowledges that the federal and state governments EXIST. Whether or not we should have to pledge allegiance to any of them is a whole other matter.
In 1975, the Second Vietnam War began -1Historygenius

Like no wonder that indian dude rejected you.- Darkkermit to royalpaladin

Social Darwinism is a justification- 1Historygenius

Equal opportunity exists, so there is no problem- EvanK