Interesting Thought (standing for the pledge...)

by darthfader 41 Replies latest social humour

• 

  undercover

  James, you said

  "And is it not ironic that here we have several people applauding the JW fights in the supreme court to enable these people to do exactly this?"

  (sorry, the quote box ain't workin for me these days)

  I find myself in the unusual position of defending the WTS to a small degree here (as distasteful as it is). The WTS championed the right to not have to say the pledge or sing the NA... but to their credit, they have always recommended that their followers (cult members that they are) should always be respectful of the government, its leaders and the flag. (one can argue that it is disprestful to stay seated and I actually agree with that sentiment) but to stand quietly and let other recite their pledges without becoming a spectacle is not the same as the group the George is describing. Those kids are just rebels without a cause and are doing it to cause a disruption and to show disrespect.
• 

  Diest

  I always stood for everything.

  As for someone 'dying for my freedom' that has not happened since the war of 1812. I agree with the premise behind WWII and would have faught in that war, but the thought that someone is over in Iraq for me is a strech.

  As for how people saulted the flags in the past, that was not an issue of how bad socialist contries did it, many countries saluted with thier hand out streched....Hitler stole it from Cesar.
• 

  james_woods

  I find myself in the unusual position of defending the WTS to a small degree here (as distasteful as it is). The WTS championed the right to not have to say the pledge or sing the NA... but to their credit, they have always recommended that their followers (cult members that they are) should always be respectful of the government, its leaders and the flag.

  OK - but the cynic in me says that the JW leadership merely requested "respect" to cover their own butts. They certainly did not want to repeat the experience of Rutherford & company getting thrown into prison for actively preaching sedition. Certainly, the JW leaders had no innate real respect of the government or the flag.

  Remember - those of us who were of draft age in the 1960s were strictly forbidden (verbally - nothing was put in writing publically) to say that the Watchtower told us not to accept the service. We were supposed to pretend that it was all entirely our own idea.

  Then, later - when they changed their minds about non-military service (conscious objector status) - they reminded those of us who went to prison that in fact, it was all entirely our own idea!!!
• 

  No Room For George

  Remember - those of us who were of draft age in the 1960s were strictly forbidden (verbally - nothing was put in writing publically) to say that the Watchtower told us not to accept the service. We were supposed to pretend that it was all entirely our own idea.

  Now that's interesting, not to mention completely messed up. I didn't know that. That's, wow, that's just dispicable. Although it shouldn't surprise me because it still goes on today with the blood doctrine, and being able to leave JWs of our own volition yet the consequences not being stated on the surface. So those pricks up in Walkhill wanted you to go to prison but emphasized that it was all your own idea? That's messed up. Wow.
• 

  james_woods

  So those pricks up in Walkhill wanted you to go to prison but emphasized that it was all your own idea? That's messed up. Wow.

  They even admitted it in a 1990s watchtower - essentially they reminded people that went to prison that it was all their own idea. This was to cover their sorry butts when they changed their rule on conscientous objector status and the draft.

  I think that technically, if challenged legally on the issue, they would say this about an individual witness not saying the PoA or not joining in the national anthem, too.
• 

  undercover

  but the cynic in me says that the JW leadership merely requested "respect" to cover their own butts. They certainly did not want to repeat the experience of Rutherford & company getting thrown into prison for actively preaching sedition. Certainly, the JW leaders had no innate real respect of the government or the flag.

  Yea, I'm sure there is some merit to that cynicism... they are a cult, afterall. Interested in their own interests only and have no real respect for any governing body except their own. I actually thought about the Rutherford years while I was typing my earlier response. He certainly had no qualms about showing disrespect, but fortunately for most latter JWs the later leaders learned a lesson from his stupidity.

  A cult is a cult is a cult, but I usually refrain from pointing out the flag salute as a cause of criticism of the religion to outsiders because of all the nuances and intricacies of how it all went down and how it has changed over the years.

  But speaking to those in the know, what bugs me most about the WTS championing the constitutional rights of their followers (i.e. JWs as a group) is that they don't allow individuals to individually practice constitutional rights. Collectively they can practice them...but only as the WTS sees fit. Individually, let a JW try to go against the precepts of the organization and see what ramifications are in store for practicing those so-called rights that the WTS worked so hard to win.
• 

  james_woods

  Individually, let a JW try to go against the precepts of the organization and see what ramifications are in store for practicing those so-called rights that the WTS worked so hard to win.

  Very true - and very ironic to anybody except the JW elites.
• 

  botchtowersociety

  I used to stand--never sit. I wanted to express as much respect as possible without violating our religious directives. However, I remember feeling uncomfortable about it. Especially in 5th grade, where our teacher was a tough as nails WWII and Korean War vet, and a vary patriotic gentleman (and an excellent teacher). He wore hearing aids from high frequency noise damage to his hearing from jet engines on aircraft carriers. Even my Elder father expressed respect and admiration for him.
• 

  J. Hofer

  we always had to stand up for the morning prayer. i hated it and was glad that later on they stopped doing it. not sure if it was because of some changes in law or simply because in higher grades they wouldn't do it. still they got a cross or crucifix in every class room.

  wow, i just read that pledge. that pledge is completely anachronistic. and what about that "under god"? no wonder the united states don't like atheists... i would tell my kids not to recite it, and that's got nothing to do with JWs.
• 

  darthfader

  I read the wikipedia article about the POA here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance

  Interesting about the addition of "under God" to the text:

  Prior to February 1954, no attempt to get the Pledge officially amended succeeded. The final successful push came from George MacPherson Docherty. Some American presidents honored Lincoln's birthday by attending services at the church Lincoln attended, New York Avenue Presbyterian Church by sitting in Lincoln's pew on the Sunday nearest February 12. On February 7, 1954, with President Eisenhower sitting in Lincoln's pew, the church's pastor, George MacPherson Docherty, delivered a sermon based on the Gettysburg Address titled "A New Birth of Freedom." He argued that the nation's might lay not in arms but its spirit and higher purpose. He noted that the Pledge's sentiments could be those of any nation, that "there was something missing in the pledge, and that which was missing was the characteristic and definitive factor in the American way of life." He cited Lincoln's words "under God" as defining words that set the United States apart from other nations.

  President Eisenhower, though raised as one of Jehovah's Witnesses, had been baptized a Presbyterian just a year before. He responded enthusiastically to Docherty in a conversation following the service. Eisenhower acted on his suggestion the next day and on February 8, 1954, Rep. Charles Oakman (R-Mich.), introduced a bill to that effect. Congress passed the necessary legislation and Eisenhower signed the bill into law on Flag Day, June 14, 1954.[ 12 ] (Bolding mine)

  The phrase "under God" was incorporated into the Pledge of Allegiance June 14, 1954, by a Joint Resolution of Congress amending §7 of the Flag Code enacted in 1942. [ 12 ]