# Making it mandatory to say the Pledge of Allegiance **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 30, 2002, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/making-it-mandatory-to-say-the-pledge-of-allegiance/111466 "2002-05-30T00:04:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![WSLer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/a6a055/32.png) [@WSLer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WSLer)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/making-it-mandatory-to-say-the-pledge-of-allegiance/111466/1 "2002-05-30T00:04:57Z")
I cruised by The O’Reilly Factor the other night and Bill was outraged, **OUTRAGED** to hear that Jesse Ventura had vetoed a bill that would have made the Pledge of Allegiance mandatory in Minnesota schools. O’Reily’s “arguement” was that ok, people who didn’t agree with saying certain phrases (Mainly the ‘under God bit’) didn’t have to say the Pledge, but they would have to stand to show "respect for the Flag and what the pledge represents. Ok, the year after I graduated high school, they madated that the pledge be said in all schools in Montgomery County, MD. A year later I asked my friend who taught English at my old high school what he thought of it, and he said it was the biggest “mandatory waste of time” that he knew of. The majority of the kids in high school could give a rats ass, they’re all too busy thinking about who they’re gonna be banging at the keg party on Friday night etc. But US citizens aside, what if you are a foreign exchange student or the children of diplomats? I doubt their parents would think really highly of their kids “swearing allegiance” to another countries flag. Opinions, quarrels, just plain bored to tears, now that rerun season is here? ---
**Author:** ![Calliope](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Calliope](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Calliope)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/making-it-mandatory-to-say-the-pledge-of-allegiance/111466/2 "2002-05-30T00:23:47Z")
**Making** someone pledge allegiance to a flag has about as much meaning as making someone hear a generic school prayer. It is only meaningful if it _means_ something to the person involved. I applaud Governor Ventura for his veto. I am not anti-flag. I am a proud U.S. citizen. But why would forcing school children to pledge allegiance be meaningful in any way? ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/making-it-mandatory-to-say-the-pledge-of-allegiance/111466/3 "2002-05-30T00:25:49Z")
As a foreigner (and erstwhile foreign student), I would not object to this – as long as it was made clear that we were not expected to utter the pledge itself. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 12:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/making-it-mandatory-to-say-the-pledge-of-allegiance/111466/4 "2002-05-30T00:46:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Calliope \* > \*\ ***Making** someone pledge allegiance to a flag has about as much meaning as making someone hear a generic school prayer. It is only meaningful if it _means_ something to the person involved. I applaud Governor Ventura for his veto. I am not anti-flag. I am a proud U.S. citizen. But why would forcing school children to pledge allegiance be meaningful in any way? \*\* To be fair though, the students aren’t being forced to utter the pledge. The pledge ceremony is mandatory, but apparently, the students can decline if they so wish. Having said that, I think that the students should be made aware that uttering the pledge is indeed optional. ---
**Author:** ![Triskadecamus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b19c9b/32.png) [@Triskadecamus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Triskadecamus)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/making-it-mandatory-to-say-the-pledge-of-allegiance/111466/5 "2002-05-30T00:50:56Z")
Compelled allegiance to the symbol, as opposed to the substance of a nation. Yeah, we want to build that kind of jingoist crap into our children’s understanding of what our nation is. I would have refused, as a child. I would refuse today. I have a complete contempt for the moron willing to spit on the concept of freedom to bolster his narrow minded me and mine view of patriotism by foisting this violation of free speech on children. Anyone happen to know which national political party was willing to support this crap? Anyone? ## Tris “Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it.” ~ Thomas Jefferson ~ ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 1:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/making-it-mandatory-to-say-the-pledge-of-allegiance/111466/6 "2002-05-30T01:08:18Z")
WSLer wrote: > [@](#): > > The majority of the kids in high school could give a rats ass, they’re all too busy thinking about who they’re gonna be banging at the keg party on Friday night etc. Are you insinuating that some of our nation’s High School students engage in underage drinking? :eek: I’m **shocked!** ---
**Author:** ![Edlyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8797f3/32.png) [@Edlyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Edlyn)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/making-it-mandatory-to-say-the-pledge-of-allegiance/111466/7 "2002-05-30T01:12:03Z")
I, too, applaud Jesse Ventura for his veto on this MN Bill. Though it is often brought up that some object to the “under God” wording, there are those of us (Quakers) who object to such a pledge for other reasons. Here is a Quaker view of this matter [(Link)](http://www.quaker.org/chestnuthill/hb592.htm) . > [@](#): > > Friends have always sought to give testimony to the presence of the spirit of God in every person. That presence, Friends believe, can be experienced directly without resort to symbols. The use of symbols of God’s presence or of earthly authority, whether such symbols are physical of verbal, is seen as redundant and unnecessary. Further, symbols may change their meaning over time, implying support for different ideas than was originally intended. For these reasons, Quakers do not take oaths, do not display crosses in their Meeting Houses, and have often declined to fly flags, participate in the Pledge of Allegiance, or remove their hats in a public building. It could be said that these Friends have sought to honor God before honoring human institutions. They do these things, not because they are disloyal Americans, nor out of any disrespect for the values that are embodied in our Constitution. On the contrary, they do so as a matter of religious principle in the exercise of those individual rights that are secured by the Constitution. For a libertarian (of which I am also) view, mandatory compliance without given consent is an act of coercion. Usually I chose to stand to show respect for another, but often thoughts of those who trample and disregard our Constitution run through my mind and fill my heart with sadness. ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/making-it-mandatory-to-say-the-pledge-of-allegiance/111466/8 "2002-05-30T01:12:40Z")
My problem with it… Have a first grader say the pledge. Its filled with big words. Allegience, Indivisable. Even the little words have abstract meanings. Liberty, Justice. Its pretty meaningless until sometime in high school, when you can begin to understand the concepts it stands for. Of course, by that time, you are sure we are “one nation, under God, invisable.” If you and your friends haven’t done even worse things to the pledge. And if given the opportunity to opt out, you might, not for the right reasons, but just to yank the chain of authority. And tell a first grader he or she can “opt out?” Nope. Two theories. Either my first grader is well behaved, and even if I, the parent, want him to opt out, he follows the lead of the authority figure, or my first grader is leading a sit in of 20 “conciencious objectors” and the law isn’t doing any good whatsoever (since, with six year olds, one person not going along can easily start a mutiny). There are so many better ways to teach our children patriotism. Teaching them history. Teaching them about the concepts of democracy, liberty, freedom and justice. Teach them about other parts of the world - both good systems, and the bad ones. A blind recessatation of the pledge is a feel good law that doesn’t accomplish much. I don’t think it hurts (much), but I want laws that DO something. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/making-it-mandatory-to-say-the-pledge-of-allegiance/111466/9 "2002-05-30T01:17:10Z")
My problem with it is that even requiring the child to stand is a denial of the child’s constitutional rights. I would think that a governmental entity would be more interested in not disobeying the governmental charter. ---
**Author:** ![Edlyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8797f3/32.png) [@Edlyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Edlyn)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/making-it-mandatory-to-say-the-pledge-of-allegiance/111466/10 "2002-05-30T01:32:21Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Monty \* > [snip] I would think that a governmental entity would be more interested in not disobeying the governmental charter. I think the typical governmental response is 😛 ---
**Author:** ![David\_B](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/51bf81/32.png) [@David\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_B)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/making-it-mandatory-to-say-the-pledge-of-allegiance/111466/11 "2002-05-30T01:34:50Z")
I read a _Chicago Tribune_ editorial on this a few days ago (they acknowledged that they don’t applaud Ventura for much, but they did for this). They mentioned that the Supreme Court had, a number of years back, invalidated a mandatory pledge law after a suit brought by (I think) a Jehovah’s Witness. So there should be little question about the Constitutionality of laws like this. Then again, the courts have ruled again and again against school prayer and the like and those keep coming back, so I guess this shouldn’t be any different… Sigh. ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/making-it-mandatory-to-say-the-pledge-of-allegiance/111466/12 "2002-05-30T04:34:04Z")
> [@](#): > > They mentioned that the Supreme Court had, a number of years back, invalidated a mandatory pledge law after a suit brought by (I think) a Jehovah’s Witness. [_West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette_](http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=319&invol=624) (1943), one of the great Supreme Court decisions. (Yes, the case was brought on behalf of a Jehovah’s Witness.) Note that it was decided while the country was waging a total war on multiple fronts. There are differences, of course; the West Virginia Board of Education actually sought to compel students to “participate in the salute honoring the Nation represented by the Flag; provided, however, that refusal to salute the Flag be regarded as an Act of insubordination, and shall be dealt with accordingly”. Presumably supporters of the proposed Minnesota law would argue this is not the case with what they were proposing. From _West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette_: > [@](#): > > Government of limited power need not be anemic government. Assurance that rights are secure tends to diminish fear and jealousy of strong government, and by making us feel safe to live under it makes for its better support. Without promise of a limiting Bill of Rights it is doubtful if our Constitution could have mustered enough strength to enable its ratification. To enforce those rights today is not to choose weak government over strong government. It is only to adhere as a means of strength to individual freedom of mind in preference to officially disciplined uniformity for which history indicates a disappointing and disastrous end… > > The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One’s right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections… > > Struggles to coerce uniformity of sentiment in support of some end thought essential to their time and country have been waged by many good as well as by evil men. Nationalism is a relatively recent phenomenon but at other times and places the ends have been racial or territorial security, support of a dynasty or regime, and particular plans for saving souls. As first and moderate methods to attain unity have failed, those bent on its accomplishment must resort to an ever-increasing severity. As governmental pressure toward unity becomes greater, so strife becomes more bitter as to whose unity it shall be. Probably no deeper division of our people could proceed from any provocation than from finding it necessary to choose what doctrine and whose program public educational officials shall compel youth to unite in embracing. Ultimate futility of such attempts to compel coherence is the lesson of every such effort from the Roman drive to stamp out Christianity as a disturber of its pagan unity, the Inquisition, as a means to religious and dynastic unity, the Siberian exiles as a means to Russian unity, down to the fast failing efforts of our present totalitarian enemies. Those who begin coercive elimination of dissent soon find themselves exterminating dissenters. Compulsory unification of opinion achieves only the unanimity of the graveyard. > > It seems trite but necessary to say that the First Amendment to our Constitution was designed to avoid these ends by avoiding these beginnings. There is no mysticism in the American concept of the State or of the nature or origin of its authority. We set up government by consent of the governed, and the Bill of Rights denies those in power any legal opportunity to coerce that consent. Authority here is to be controlled by public opinion, not public opinion by authority. > > The case is made difficult not because the principles of its decision are obscure but because the flag involved is our own. Nevertheless, we apply the limitations of the Constitution with no fear that freedom to be intellectually and spiritually diverse or even contrary will disintegrate the social organization. To believe that patriotism will not flourish if patriotic ceremonies are voluntary and spontaneous instead of a compulsory routine is to make an unflattering estimate of the appeal of our institutions to free minds. We can have intellectual individualism and the rich cultural diversities that we owe to exceptional minds only at the price of occasional eccentricity and abnormal attitudes. When they are so harmless to others or to the State as those we deal with here, the price is not too great. But freedom to differ is not limited to things that do not matter much. That would be a mere shadow of freedom. The test of its substance is the right to differ as to things that touch the heart of the existing order. > > If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein. If there are any circumstances which permit an exception, they do not now occur to us… ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 5:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/making-it-mandatory-to-say-the-pledge-of-allegiance/111466/13 "2002-05-30T05:01:44Z")
You wouldn’t happen to have a point there, would you, Edlyn? ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/making-it-mandatory-to-say-the-pledge-of-allegiance/111466/14 "2002-05-30T05:27:33Z")
I believe Edlyn was expressing cynicism about politicians. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 5:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/making-it-mandatory-to-say-the-pledge-of-allegiance/111466/15 "2002-05-30T05:44:49Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by MEBuckner \* > \*\*I believe Edlyn was expressing cynicism about politicians. \*\* _I_ believe **Edlyn** was expressing skepticism about government, _per se_. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 6:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/making-it-mandatory-to-say-the-pledge-of-allegiance/111466/16 "2002-05-30T06:15:53Z")
Well, that may be as may be; however, here in the United States, we have this nifty little thing called participatory government. Try it out sometimes–it’s quite interesting. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 6:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/making-it-mandatory-to-say-the-pledge-of-allegiance/111466/17 "2002-05-30T06:53:18Z")
Compulsory patriotism isn’t. (Thumbs up for Jesse) ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 6:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/making-it-mandatory-to-say-the-pledge-of-allegiance/111466/18 "2002-05-30T06:54:04Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by MEBuckner \* > > From _West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette_: > [snip] Excellent. They just don’t write opinions like that anymore. The pledge of allegiance is a load of crap. Just a poor excuse to get kids to calm down for 30 seconds. We didn’t even understand what we were saying. The kids in my class used to think it was "One nation, under God, **invisible** … ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 6:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/making-it-mandatory-to-say-the-pledge-of-allegiance/111466/19 "2002-05-30T06:57:53Z")
Incidentally, _West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette_ was handed down _before_ they stuck God into the pledge, so even eliminating “under God” would not remove all the constitutional issues from compulsory pledge laws. ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 1:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/making-it-mandatory-to-say-the-pledge-of-allegiance/111466/20 "2002-05-30T13:35:27Z")
Dangerosa wrote: > [@](#): > > Of course, by that time, you are sure we are “one nation, under God, invisable.” If you and your friends haven’t done even worse things to the pledge. I led the pigeons to the flag … [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/making-it-mandatory-to-say-the-pledge-of-allegiance/111466.md?page=2)