Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

(This is the forums archive - If you want to get back to the main site simply click the banner above and you will be taken to our homepage.)

Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums is the Ultimate Online Resource for Owners and Enthusiasts of American Luxury Cars. Feel free to browse through our archive - but make sure you make it back to our main site - Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

Cadillac XLR : Cadillac CTS : Cadillac : 2005 Cadillac STS : Cadillac Forums : 2000 Lincoln LS : Lincoln Mark VIII : Lincoln Mark VII : Car Wax
Lincoln Town Car : Lincoln Air Suspension : Lincoln Continental : Lemon Law : Do It Yourself Car Repair : Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums : Mesothelioma

Back to the Archive Main Page

Pages: 1

Students Ban Pledge of Allegiance

(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: fossten

Thursday, Nov. 9, 2006 9:50 p.m. EST

Students Ban Pledge of Allegiance

Student leaders at a California college have touched off a furor by banning the Pledge of Allegiance at their meetings, saying they see no reason to publicly swear loyalty to God and the U.S. government.

The move by Orange Coast College student trustees, the latest clash over patriotism and religion in American schools, has infuriated some of their classmates -- prompting one young woman to loudly recite the pledge in front of the board Wednesday night in defiance of the rule.

"America is the one thing I'm passionate about and I can't let them take that away from me," 18-year-old political science major Christine Zoldos told Reuters.

"The fact that they have enough power to ban one of the most valued traditions in America is just horrible," Zoldos said, adding she would attend every board meeting to salute the flag.

The move was lead by three recently elected student trustees, who ran for office wearing revolutionary-style berets and said they do not believe in publicly swearing an oath to the American flag and government at their school. One student trustee voted against the measure, which does not apply to other student groups or campus meetings.

The ban follows a 2002 ruling by a federal appeals court in San Francisco that said forcing school children to recite the pledge was unconstitutional because of the phrase "under God." The U.S. Supreme Court struck down the ruling on procedural grounds but left the door open for another challenge.

"That ('under God') part is sort of offensive to me," student trustee Jason Bell, who proposed the ban, told Reuters. "I am an atheist and a socialist, and if you know your history, you know that 'under God' was inserted during the McCarthy era and was directly designed to destroy my ideology."

Bell said the ban largely came about because the trustees didn't want to publicly vow loyalty to the American government before their meetings. "Loyalty ought to be something the government earns through performance, not through reciting a pledge," he said.

Martha Parham, a spokeswoman for the Coast Community College District, said her office had no standing on the student board and took no position on the flag salute ban.

"If their personal belief is that they don't want to say the Pledge of Allegiance, the district certainly isn't going to dictate what they do," she said.
More than 28,000 students attend the community college, located in conservative Orange County, California, south of Los Angeles.

(c) Reuters 2006. All rights reserved.

Here comes the slide into anarchy - thank you liberalism!

Posted by: evillally

These so-called "students" (and they're not, considering they haven't learned SH!T) should all be shot in the head.

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by evillally

These so-called "students" (and they're not, considering they haven't learned SH!T) should all be shot in the head.

Is it not clear to the rest of you that our institutions of "higher learning" have become institutions of indoctrination?

Posted by: TheDude

See... This pisses me off now; I was initially pissed at the "Under God" part being mandatory as I have felt religion is one's choice. But banning it altogether is no different than shoving it down someone’s throat. I would have flung feces at that "trustee" board like a wild rabid chimp...

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

Thursday, Nov. 9, 2006 9:50 p.m. EST
The move was lead by three recently elected student trustees, who ran for office wearing revolutionary-style berets...

LOL... Wannabe Che Guevaras.

Posted by: Calabrio

Schools that permit the banning of the pledge, or block military recruiters from the campus, need to have ALL federal funding cut off.

And the "under God" shouldn't be offensive to anyone. Have you ever read the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence?

The Constitution is more secular, but right in the preamble it speaks of it's purpose to "secure the blessings of liberty."

But the Declaration of Independence speaks directly about "God"
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by 95DevilleNS

LOL... Wannabe Che Guevaras.

Yeah, it's the same as those idiots (like some in the media as well) that wear t-shirts with the hammer and sickle. These people have absolutely no idea what they are representing and idolizing. Guevara was nothing more than a terrorist thug, and the Soviet Union murdered tens of millions.

Posted by: taylor414ce2003

WTF!!!!! maybe Bush should invade Cali -I have more fear of what the freaks and whackos are doing in this country over Bin Ladden .Not only should they lose the money from the feds they should loose their license to run a school

Posted by: MAC1

These are “student” leaders that banned the Pledge of Allegiance, not the school.

Since the student trustees are part of a student organization then I suppose they can ban the Pledge. If this is offensive to a majority of the members in the organization then they should try to throw the board members out of office provided the organization’s governing document permit a recall. Obviously, the trustees that enacted the ban want to dictate what the organization stands for. The bottom line is that the organization’s members need to speak out against the Pledge ban and seek to have it reinstated—if that’s what they want. He should have never been elected in the first place.

I can’t help but to feel to some degree that the students are reaping the consequences of their willingness to elect individual(s) that have fundamental beliefs that are apparently radically different then their own. The student who proposed the ban, Jason Bell, is an atheist and socialist. Apparently, part of his agenda includes imposing his atheist beliefs on the rest of the membership.

Posted by: mint05LS

If they have a problem with god and the flag of our country, why don't they leave? Let them go live in iraq and see if it's any better. People like this should be beat down with a wiffle ball bat if you ask me.

Posted by: JLewisinSyr

I have no problem with the pledge, I do not agree with the "under god" as it is a true reference and can create a grey line in the seperation between church and state. However I am also very much a believer, that although the founding fathers wanted a nation without religous persecution, that their own actions created some persecution.

It will never be a perfect society, not everyone will ever be happy. And although this does not have a complete bearing on the current topic, people complain about the liberals and their radical ideas, but they lose sight all too often at the conservative's radical ideas of creating laws and rules encouraging just one religous belief (ie. Defense of Marriage Amendment).