# "Pledge of Allegiance" Case Goes Before Supreme Court **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 14, 2003, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pledge-of-allegiance-case-goes-before-supreme-court/207375 "2003-10-14T14:29:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![presidebt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c37758/32.png) [@presidebt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/presidebt)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2003, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pledge-of-allegiance-case-goes-before-supreme-court/207375/21 "2003-10-14T17:09:32Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Orbifold \* > \*\*Scalia is not taking part in this case, actually: > > [http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Scotus-Pledge-of-Allegiance.html?hp](http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Scotus-Pledge-of-Allegiance.html?hp) \*\* Wow, I didn’t even know that could happen! Has it happened a lot, if ever, before? (Secretly I’m pretty thrilled that Scalia’s mouth finally got him in trouble, and hope that he keeps barking himself out of as many SCOTUS decisions as possible.) ---
**Author:** ![Dogface](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9d8465/32.png) [@Dogface](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dogface)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2003, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pledge-of-allegiance-case-goes-before-supreme-court/207375/22 "2003-10-14T17:14:35Z")
As for the alleged, so-called “enlightened” status of Europe, let us not forget the blatantly discriminatory religious laws of the UK, most specifically their laws of succession. No Brit has the least right AT ALL to lecture anybody in the USA on matters of religious tolerance so long as a specific religious group is explicitly excluded from the succession. ---
**Author:** ![SkipMagic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skipmagic/32/20706_2.png) [@SkipMagic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SkipMagic)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2003, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pledge-of-allegiance-case-goes-before-supreme-court/207375/23 "2003-10-14T17:16:36Z")
If the remaining justices of the Court are deadlocked on this and the lower court’s ruling stands, does that mean that only the states covered by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will be held responsible for disallowing a God-tinged pledge? Or will this apply to the rest of the country, too? ---
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2003, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pledge-of-allegiance-case-goes-before-supreme-court/207375/24 "2003-10-14T17:26:47Z")
> [@](#): > > \*originally posted by \ ***Monty** > > Mace: The military’s not required to say the pledge, merely to know it. Cite? I was never required to know it. Did you serve **Monty**? If so, when were you required to know it? ---
**Author:** ![PeeQueue](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8797f3/32.png) [@PeeQueue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PeeQueue)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2003, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pledge-of-allegiance-case-goes-before-supreme-court/207375/25 "2003-10-14T17:34:49Z")
I don’t think that this is necessarily a good issue to look to Europe for (I don’t think that we should look to them that much, they have their problems too, but that’s another issue), as some of those nations do not have separation of church and state. In fact, some of them have a state religion. ---
**Author:** ![Gorgon\_Heap](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f475e1/32.png) [@Gorgon\_Heap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorgon_Heap)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2003, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pledge-of-allegiance-case-goes-before-supreme-court/207375/26 "2003-10-14T17:53:35Z")
**x-ray** , there is probably some point when joining the military where someone asks you if you know it or you say it with others during a ceremony, but honestly, I don’t know anybody who _doesn’t_ know it to begin with, and I’ve been in the Army for 3 1/2 years and the one and only time I can recall saying it was recently during a town hall meeting at the post middle school. And I’m sorry to bring it up, but this also segues into the use of benedictions and prayers at just about every single ceremony that takes place. Chaplains have an important part in the military, don’t get me wrong. Its imperative to have folks in uniform, who know how to soldier, who can guide others and help them with their faith on an individual basis when times are tough and bullets are flying. I see no reason whatsoever for prayer to the Allmighty to bless every stinkin’ silly event we have to endure. **Monty** may very well get angry at me yet again for this, but it’s all an extension of the OP. ---
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2003, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pledge-of-allegiance-case-goes-before-supreme-court/207375/27 "2003-10-14T17:54:19Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Trinopus \* > I wish someone would introduce [_Marsh v. Chambers_] to the millions of teachers, principals, administrators, school-board members, and others. I know I’m not the only one here who was punished for my reluctance to recite the pledge. Uh, not to be too hard on you here or anything, but _Marsh_ has nothing to do with compelling anyone to recite the pledge. Rather, it is the obvious case for the Court to cite if it decides that the Pledge–as amended by Congress in the 1950s–does not violate the Establishment Clause. ---
**Author:** ![Eve](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Eve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eve)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2003, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pledge-of-allegiance-case-goes-before-supreme-court/207375/28 "2003-10-14T18:08:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by minty green \* > \*\*Allow me to introduce ya’ll laymen and -ladies to [_Marsh v. Chambers_](http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=463&invol=783), 463 U.S. 783 (1983). \*\* “Marsh?” I’d have thought that would have been Broslofski! ---
**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:** [October 14, 2003, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pledge-of-allegiance-case-goes-before-supreme-court/207375/29 "2003-10-14T18:15:02Z")
x-ray: As I’m a PN1, USN (Ret), yes, it’s obvious that I served. In my first enlistment, however, I was in the US Army & was required to know the Pledge of Allegiance in Basic Combat Training. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2003, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pledge-of-allegiance-case-goes-before-supreme-court/207375/30 "2003-10-14T18:35:32Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Revtim \* > I agree with your prediction that “under God” will stay. I have no idea exactly how they will justify it, but they will. After _Bush v. Gore,_ I’m sure the current Supremes could cook up a ruling to justify letting votes from registered Democrats only count as 3/5ths of a vote. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![BlackKnight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/eb8c5e/32.png) [@BlackKnight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlackKnight)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2003, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pledge-of-allegiance-case-goes-before-supreme-court/207375/31 "2003-10-14T18:40:04Z")
CNN’s article about this issue states that the suit is to _ban_ the Pledge of Allegience from schools. Is this actually the case, or is the suit merely to ban the forced recital of the pledge? ---
**Author:** ![Mehitabel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8797f3/32.png) [@Mehitabel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mehitabel)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2003, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pledge-of-allegiance-case-goes-before-supreme-court/207375/32 "2003-10-14T19:05:41Z")
Isn’t “forced recital” already banned? I would imagine that, if the basis of the suit is that it’s an unlawful establishment of religion to begin with, they’d want a cessation of the recital, which I guess is a ban too. With Scalia out, maybe they’ll deadlock. It also depends on what they think the ruling would do. It’d be really funny if athiest kids from Colorado on east still had to say it while Western kids were exempt. ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Dickerson](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f04885/32.png) [@Scott\_Dickerson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Dickerson)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2003, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pledge-of-allegiance-case-goes-before-supreme-court/207375/33 "2003-10-14T19:06:06Z")
The Pledge will probably remain, using some variation of the reasoning of the creche rulings–which I think amounts to, the court need not deal with trifles! In other words, it will be “read” as a tradition tinged with religious language, but not in and of itself a violation of the establishment clause. It is my impression that those who object to nonsectarian religiosity have a tough row to hoe: sort of a “hard cases make bad law” principle. I myself: –am not worried about traditional invocations of this sort, as long as a reasonably nonpenalizing “out” is allowed. –but I would rule that no entity established under color of Federal or State government (ie, public school teachers) can be required (or even directed) to lead or say a “loyalty oath” of any kind, as it is a violation of the free speech and free association clauses. And here the point is pretty pointed, innit?–we’re talking very specifically about quashing dissenting political discourse, the very core of free speech rights. In fact, I thought loyalty oaths were generally outlawed (outside the military) by some Vietnam-era decisions. And if a pledge of allegiance isn’t a loyalty oath–witnessed sworn oaths are, after all, meant to be binding–what is it? Performance art?? ---
**Author:** ![Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d07c76/32.png) [@Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Age_Quod_Agis)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2003, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pledge-of-allegiance-case-goes-before-supreme-court/207375/34 "2003-10-14T20:01:50Z")
> [@](#): > > _lissener:_ > As a gay kid, everytime a doctor or a teacher or a relative asked me if I had a girlfriend, it felt to a certain extent like a slap in the face. So noone should be able to ask a boy if he’s got a girlfriend, because there is a small chance that boy may not be interested in girls? Why should people censor otherwise appropriate behavior to match your special needs? If you were offended, then with all due respect, that’s your problem. Grow some calluses. You don’t see me flipping out if people think that I’m gay. Why do you act like you’ve been assaulted when people think you’re straight? > [@](#): > > _lissener:_ > And as an atheist from the age of probably 9 or 10, required chapel and grace-before-meals in boarding school, and yes the Pledge, though not as personally degrading, always left a sour taste in my mouth. And always felt coerced. Since most boarding schools are private, they are allowed to enforce mandatory chapel and pledges and stuff. If you felt coerced, then you were not coerced by the state, but by your parents, who forced you to go to that boarding school. That’s not a violation of the First Amendment. > [@](#): > > _rjung:_ > After Bush v. Gore, I’m sure the current Supremes could cook up a ruling to justify letting votes from registered Democrats only count as 3/5ths of a vote. Thanks so much for your contribution. Slamming _Bush v. Gore_ was very constructive, especially considering that you have to turn the ruling on its head to arrive at your conclusion. > [@](#): > > _Apos:_ > The Chief Justice and Scalia have both previously shown a broad ability to be misleading about the founding fathers When? Is this a reference to Rehnquist’s dissent in _Lemmon v. Kurtzman_? If so, I would love to see any evidence you have that he actually misrepresented the truth in that opinion. (This is a sincere request) > [@](#): > > _Apos:_ > “Ceremonial Deism” is the biggest joke around. I agree that ceremonial deism is largely a farce. But the fact that some things existed from the inception of our Union is informative as to what the Founders meant by the words they used in the Constitution. For example, how can opening Congress with an invocation, or opening a session of the Supreme Court with the words "God save . . . " violate the Establishment Clause when the very people that drafted and adopted the First Amendment opened Congress with an invocation and opened the Supreme Court with the words “God save . . .”? ---
**Author:** ![amarone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e0b2c6/32.png) [@amarone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amarone)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2003, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pledge-of-allegiance-case-goes-before-supreme-court/207375/35 "2003-10-14T20:06:00Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Dogface \* > \*\*As for the alleged, so-called “enlightened” status of Europe, let us not forget the blatantly discriminatory religious laws of the UK, most specifically their laws of succession. No Brit has the least right AT ALL to lecture anybody in the USA on matters of religious tolerance so long as a specific religious group is explicitly excluded from the succession. \*\* Well, this Brit believes that anybody has the right to criticize anybody else. It’s called “free speech”. You Americans used to be quite big on it. Of course, such criticism can lead one open to counter claims of hypocrisy, but I don’t feel at all hypocritical about discrimination in the UK royal family line of succession, given as how I had absolutely no say whatsoever in its rules. Actually, the UK line of succession is an object lesson in how you can screw things up if you intertwine state and religion. The UK monarch is also the head of the Church of England. It obviously makes sense that the head of the CofE not be a Catholic or Moslem, but that then excludes them from being monarch. Moral: keep religion and state separate. ---
**Author:** ![CyberPundit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/76d3ee/32.png) [@CyberPundit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CyberPundit)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2003, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pledge-of-allegiance-case-goes-before-supreme-court/207375/36 "2003-10-14T20:16:17Z")
“But I also doubt they will be able to come up with a coherent explanation of why they did not either” I don’t think it will be that hard. The fact is that the hyper-strict separation of state and religion has never been the law of the land. For instance the Congressional chaplain, the Federal Christmas holiday, “In God we trust” etc are constitutional. So is the pledge under the concept of “ceremonial deism” ---
**Author:** ![amarone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e0b2c6/32.png) [@amarone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amarone)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2003, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pledge-of-allegiance-case-goes-before-supreme-court/207375/37 "2003-10-14T20:21:52Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mehitabel \* > \*\*Not to hijack, I hope, but since us Merkuns keep getting told that we should look more and more to Europe, could any UK Dopers let me know if there’s any controversy about your national anthem, which is after all just a long prayer to the Lord to help out the Queen? Do British athiests refuse to sing it altogether, or do they just shrug and do it? Is is a problem at all? > \*\* The situation hardly ever comes up, so it’s not much of a problem anyway. The national anthem is played much less than the US one, for example we only play it at international sporting matches, not before every sporting event. I cannot remember hearing of any controversy. Although I am an atheist, non-monarchist, I wouldn’t have a problem singing it (apart from an inability to sing) because it is still the anthem of my country, and I would sing it in support of my country, whatever the words actually say. ---
**Author:** ![Ninas\_grandpa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/54ee81/32.png) [@Ninas\_grandpa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ninas_grandpa)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2003, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pledge-of-allegiance-case-goes-before-supreme-court/207375/38 "2003-10-14T20:37:38Z")
I have not sung the National Anthem for many years (despite being able to sing well enough). On the few occasions that I have been present when it is played or sung, I have refused to stand for it. ---
**Author:** ![Cervaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cervaise/32/16693_2.png) [@Cervaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cervaise)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2003, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pledge-of-allegiance-case-goes-before-supreme-court/207375/39 "2003-10-14T20:59:20Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mehitabel \* > **Has Dubya said much about it?** I don’t have a direct quote, but here’s a paraphrase: “God church flag Jesus prayer faith patriotism God history Jesus history church America God flag tradition prayer Jesus faith church freedom church God faith church Jesus flag, amen. Or the terrorists win.” ---
**Author:** ![litost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/c4cdca/32.png) [@litost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/litost)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2003, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pledge-of-allegiance-case-goes-before-supreme-court/207375/40 "2003-10-14T21:27:47Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Cervaise \* > I don’t have a direct quote, but here’s a paraphrase: > > “God church flag Jesus prayer faith patriotism God history Jesus history church America God flag tradition prayer Jesus faith church freedom church God faith church Jesus flag, amen. Or the terrorists win.” Not an accurate para-phrasing, **Cervaise**. The correct quote is: "Since 9/11, God church flag Jesus prayer faith patriotism God history Jesus history church America God flag tradition prayer Jesus faith church freedom church God faith church Jesus flag, amen. War. Or the terrorists win. " [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pledge-of-allegiance-case-goes-before-supreme-court/207375.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pledge-of-allegiance-case-goes-before-supreme-court/207375.md?page=3)