|
Ron Jackson's Perspective
The Sunday Journal
Kankakee, Illinois
August 3, 2008
No allegiance to
the 'Pledge' |
 |
|
Court ruling gives students an out
It’s
August already. After what seemed like a never-ending winter, hot
August nights seemed about as possible as a $3 gallon of gas. And
with August comes those three dreaded words – back to school. Good
luck, teachers.
To pledge or not to pledge, that is the protest.
This new school year may begin with another anxiety-causing
three words – Pledge of Allegiance. A recent circuit court ruled
that a student can’t be forced to stand during the recitation of the
Pledge of Allegiance and cannot be punished. In 2005, a Florida
high school student was berated by his teacher and sent to the
dreaded principal’s office for refusing to stand during the
state-mandated recitation.
Like most things involving today’s young generation, this
constitutional right to rebel against tradition, ritual, or
authority could become as popular as a Hannah Montana handbag and
spread like her provocative photos. After all, we should appreciate
it when young people actively participate in our governing process.
The issue of children challenging the requirement to pledge any
blind loyalty to this country is not new. Many children are
forbidden to participate in civic activities because it may conflict
with their parent’s personal, political or religious convictions.
That is understandable to a point. Convictions are wonderful. If
they conflict with a government policy, our right to protest is
protected.
Having grown up in an era when the oft-revised pledge was
second nature, it never occurred to me to abstain. It was only
required once per day at school and at public events. Although I am
in full support of the right to free expression, the in-school issue
is troubling. The main point of contention is that these students
are protesting against a policy while getting free benefits. I
question how any parent can teach a child to refuse to honor or
pledge support for an institution while at the same time receiving
free resources.
After paying full price to attend a sporting event, you should
have the right to respectfully conduct yourself as you please. You
don’t have to pledge any support to the participants by cheering or
singing. You can sit on your seat as you please. However, if you
are in school receiving a free education, I think your priorities
should reflect that. Or if your personal convictions allow you to
receive government subsistence such as health care or food aid, why
would it prevent you from a 15-second acknowledgement of support of
the very same institution that provided those benefits?
In the 1892 original version, the pledge was designed to
enforce our post Civil War unification. “I pledge allegiance to my
Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible,
with liberty and justice for all.” The words, “under God” were
added 60 years later. That addition has its own protesters. So,
just whom are we pledging to? It’s not to a political party or
administration. Collectively, we all make up the republic and the
pledge is merely an acceptance of our imperfect but workable form of
government. What is wrong with pledging undying support to
everyone? Isn’t the pledge on a national scale comparable to the
directive to love ye one another?
I am all for parents teaching young people the importance of
exercising their constitutional rights. But if your children are
riding to school on a free bus, learning from free books, and having
teachers teach them at no cost, is a quarter of a minute too much to
sacrifice?
The Pledge of Allegiance may soon go the way of another
stand-up tradition. Not as many people are standing up to say “I
do” as in the past. Yet, they continue to receive the same benefits
of those who do. |
|
|
Thanks for stopping by! |
|
|
Home
| About | What's New |
Books | Columns |
Archives |
Seminars | Search |
Contact |
|
|
|
|
