How I Convinced My Teacher To Let Me Sit During The Pledge: Now More Than Ever

Seems to me that availing oneself of the liberties protected by the nation’s governing document is a pretty good start at patriotism.

Neither Webster’s nor the Pledge of Allegiance appear in the Constitution.

[qutoe]Our country gives extra rights to the disagree-er,
[/quote]

Absolutely incorrect. This nation recognizes the rights of all people.

Oh, acting as an intelligent human being defending his rights instead of acting like the proverbial lemming certainly indicates a shade of patriotism not displayed by the lemming.

Correct. And the majority is wrong if it expects everyone to stand up and repeat an oath which is nothing more nor less than a religiously oriented (at present) litmus test to determine “good citizens” from “bad citizens.”

And you have read Merc’s mind exactly how? How do you know that the reasons he has actually posted here are not the reasons why he took the action he took?

Oh, that’s the biggest bunch of malarkey to hit this thread yet. Merc never said that he disagreed just to disagree–you postulated that with no evidence than your apparent preconceptions. That you don’t like his stance does not make the stance invalid. There are, after all, rights protected by the Constitution.

Incorrect on two counts: 1) The country recognizes the rights of all people. Criminals, being people, have rights. 2) Being a criminal does not necessarily mean one has no patriotism or a lesser degree of same than another person.

Then, kindly try to separate the reasons YOU refused to recite the thing from the reasons Merc provided for why he refuses.

Oh, piffle, Monty. The exercize of a right is not automatically a sign of honoring that right. I would think that is ultimately clear. When I take advantage of a free defense lawyer I am not paying homage to the United States. I find that claim ridiculous. I am certainly willing to accept that Merc feels he is honoring the United States when he refuses to say the Pledge. I do not understand why he thinks so, I think he is simply exercizing a right, but he is under no obligation to develop the point, either. But simply asserting that exercizing rights makes one not a lemming like the rest of us stupid patriots is intellectual dishonesty.

When I talk politics I am exercizing free speech, I am not honoring it. When I (used to) carry a gun I was exercizing my second amendment rights, I was not honoring them. Does that make any sense to you at all?

Oh, pshaw!

Then you would think wrong. It most certainly is honouring that right when someone, such as the teacher in question, is trying to take that right away.

Where the dickens did I say “pay homage?”

Irrelevant because I never said “pay homage.” However, when you “take advantage of a free defense lawyer,” that is because you could not afford a pay-for defense lawyer and you therefore are expecting the government (you know, the people who provide you with the free defense lawyer) to honour your rights.

More important: he is expecting the government to honor HIS rights.

Then you have a very limited imagination. Expecting the government to honour the rights the government says it recognizes is most certainly giving the government credit for honesty.

I am not “iintellecually dishonest.” Expecting someone to stand and recite a litmus test, even if it’s against that person’s belief, is the antithesis of patriotism. It is the antithesis of Liberty.

When I talk politics I am exercizing free speech, I am not honoring it. When I (used to) carry a gun I was exercizing my second amendment rights, I was not honoring them. Does that make any sense to you at all?
[/QUOTE]