Total Utter Abysmal Trash, Or Total Ingrates

Mad_Michael · June 20, 2007

Tonight, I attended, with my wife, my parents and my father in law, a "moving up" ceremony for students graduating elementary school and moving to Middle School. It was a glorious evening and event overall.
What did make me sick was something my parents saw, but I did not witness. They saw an Iranian immigrant family, in country for 30 years, who refused to utter the Pledge of Allegiance (text below) or even put his hand on his heart during the pledge. They spoke perfect English, were obviously otherwise assimilated, and taking advantage of life in the world's second greatest country (after our neighbor to the north) and being utterly ungrateful for it.

Personally, I felt like seeking them out and kicking them in the teeth. In both our countries we have given many of the world's people a chance at avoiding medieval chaos and getting ahead. There is no worse garbage than people who don't appreciate.

Thankfully, most do. A good 500 people there had their hands on their heart and were saying the Pledge.1

1Text of Pledge of Allegiance: I pledge allegiance to the flag, of the United States of America. And to this Republic, for which it stands, one nation, under G-d, indivisible, with liberty, and justice, for all.

Who says this Iranian family was not thankful for the opportunity to live in America? Nothing in what you describe of thier actions suggests or supports this conclusion.

That they object to the recitation of the pledge, I can understand. Anyone who comes from a totalitarian country rightfully would be suspicious of such common totalitarian tactic (forcing people to recite loyalty pledges).

In other words, does an immigrant family have to buy guns in America to prove they accept American culture? Do they have to watch American Idol? Do they have to like hot dogs?

Just because many Americans just don't see anything wrong with the 'loyalty pledge', doesn't mean that the rest of the planet shares this view. Too many totalitarian despots have insisted upon such 'loyalty pledges' so often in the past that the practice is quite rightly viewed with extreme suspicion now.

cybercoma · June 20, 2007

Loyalty pledges, executing prisoners and not allowing consenting adults (of the same sex) to marry...

Hmm. The more I think about it, the more I wonder why any of this is allowed.

fellowtraveller · June 20, 2007

The reasons why the family chose not to recite the pledge do not matter. There are many Caucasian non-immigrant families that would do the same thing, so I find the ethnic reference to be a bit disturbing.

What does matter is that they are free to recite or not recite, that is their right to free expression.

It is also the same right of the OP to feel disgusted and say so.

You can't have it both ways.

WestViking · June 20, 2007

That they object to the recitation of the pledge, I can understand. Anyone who comes from a totalitarian country rightfully would be suspicious of such common totalitarian tactic (forcing people to recite loyalty pledges).

Totalitarian tactic? You have to be kidding. The original Pledge was published in 1892 as part of America's planned celebration of the 400th anniversary of Columbus' discovery of America. Two men interested in both education and planned Columbus Day celebrations around our Nation's 44 states were Francis Bellamy and James Upham. To this day it is still unknown which of the two men actually authored the words that were to become the Pledge of Allegiance. It was published anonymously and not copyrighted. James Upham was an employee of the Boston publishing firm that produced "The Youth's Companion" in which it first appeared. Francis Bellamy was an educator who served as chairman of the National committee of educators and civic leaders who were planning the Columbus Day activities.

In other words, does an immigrant family have to buy guns in America to prove they accept American culture? Do they have to watch American Idol? Do they have to like hot dogs?

No, they have last out working at least 6 months for Donald Trump and agree to appear in one of Michael Moore's movies.

Just because many Americans just don't see anything wrong with the 'loyalty pledge', doesn't mean that the rest of the planet shares this view. Too many totalitarian despots have insisted upon such 'loyalty pledges' so often in the past that the practice is quite rightly viewed with extreme suspicion now.

Why on earth would 'the rest of the planet' care what pledge Americans make to their nation?

Since when do totalitarian dictators demand that people pledge allegiance to their flag and the nation and democratic government that flag represents? Fealty is very different from allegiance. You swear fealty to a person but allegiance to a nation.

The American Pledge of Allegiance is to the nation, its legitimate governments and its flag symbol, not to the President or Governors who happen to be in office at the time.

Leafless · June 21, 2007

You are mistaken. I most certainly would not and do not feel pride for my tribe to the exclusion of others.

Who is talking about the exclusion of others, you added that.

'Others' would only have to follow the existing traditions of Canada, unlike the kind of mess of a country Trudeau left us with his 82' amendments to our constitution that have created in effect ' a no name country'.

Anyone can move in to Canada with all their political baggage and set up their own political ideologies and customs with little governmental interference.

To-day I am neither proud or dedicated to Canada that has become a socialist of the world 'haven' to accommodate all and any culture with no strings attached.

Peter F · June 21, 2007

Who is talking about the exclusion of others, you added that.
'Others' would only have to follow the existing traditions of Canada, unlike the kind of mess of a country Trudeau left us with his 82' amendments to our constitution that have created in effect ' a no name country'.

You're talking about the exclusion of others...you spoke of pride in the tribe. You excluded those who are not in the Tribe.

as for following the existing traditions of Canada - What are those? and why must immigrants follow them when I, a citizen born in this country, am in no way required to follow these undefined traditions?

jbg · June 21, 2007

Personally, I think such pledges are meaningless pap.
That is because you do not know what a REAL country is. And that is a country that belongs to your tribe and no one eles's. Then you would feel proud and dedicated.

Are you saying that the US is a real country and Canada is not?

jbg · June 21, 2007

I have to say I am also one of those who would not recite that , nor would I recite any grace or prayer when in church for a funeral or whathaveyou. I dont agree with my mom and her grace before a meal, but I sit there and keep quiet.
Now if these people were making a vocal stand against it, then I am in your camp. That would be, is, plain rude. But a silent refusal to do so gets a pass from me.

Sorry jbg.

And doesnt the fact that it was penned by a socialist baptist minister not at least raise your eyebrow?

No apology needed. You are a Canadian and you have your own way of expressing love for your country. As far as the etiology of the "Pledge", no it doesn't bother me at all. As I say tirelessly, there is no "separation of church and state"; there is a prohibition against government establishment of religion, and/or restraining free exercise of religion. The term "separation of church and state" is a shorthand rendition of those two strands.

jbg · June 21, 2007

We rarely stop to recognize or give thanks to the generations who sacrifices and suffered to build and to protect the nations and the plenty we enjoy today. We seem reluctant to accept that there is value in the lessons of our grandfathers; we need to avoid repeating their mistakes as mush as we need to learn from their many, many triumphs.
People are the foundation of any democracy. The nations we live in are the result of the cumulated efforts of generations of ordinary people. We are governed to the extent that we will allow those we elect to govern us.

When we make a pledge or oath of allegiance to our nation and its symbols, in part we undertake an obligation to make our nation better; to refuse to allow our nation to slide into sloppy ways; to quit blaming 'government' for governance ills and work for improvement; to ensure that we and our fellow citizens are treated equally, with compassion, justice; and that our freedom is forever protected.

Past generation fought for our liberty; we owe it to them to ensure our liberty is not infringed upon by those we have selected as leaders. We will always face power-hungry politicians eager to limit our freedoms ‘for our own good’. As long as we retain the right of the vote, we can curb their excesses and rid ourselves of tyrants in sheep's clothing.

Ultimately, our allegiance to our nation is of far greater importance than our allegiance to any political or religious or any other body. The power and influence of secular and religious bodies grow and wane over time; the nation we build together is our heritage to our children and future generations. Our nation, with all its flaws, is worthy of our protection and respect. We really do 'stand on guard for thee'.

Wow. That's all I can say, but a song, not directly relating to the pledge sums up the spirit you describe so well, and which you celebrate.

'Tis the gift to be simple, 'tis the gift to be free,
'Tis the gift to come down where we ought to be,

And when we find ourselves in the place just right,

'Twill be in the valley of love and delight.

When true simplicity is gain'd,

To bow and to bend we shan't be asham'd,

To turn, turn will be our delight,

Till by turning, turning we come round right.

Leafless · June 21, 2007

Personally, I think such pledges are meaningless pap.
That is because you do not know what a REAL country is. And that is a country that belongs to your tribe and no one eles's. Then you would feel proud and dedicated.
Are you saying that the US is a real country and Canada is not?

Unfortunately yes.

The amendments Trudeau made to the constitution, excluding participation by the citizens of Canada, make it sound like Canada is a newly created Liberal country.

This artificial newly created Liberal country mocks a republic but in reality continues to use the monarchy pertaining to the government of Canada as a constitutional monarchy and a parliamentary democracy for the sheer power to implement any policy, law, amendments to the constitution, overriding any type of democratic participation by the citizens of Canada.

Everything relating to Canada's history and traditions as been undemocratically altered primarily by the Liberals including our flag.

jbg · June 22, 2007

To-day I am neither proud or dedicated to Canada that has become a socialist of the world 'haven' to accommodate all and any culture with no strings attached.

The fight to restore the Canada of Vimy Ridge, the proud beacon of the Anglosphere must not be surrendered.

cybercoma · June 23, 2007

To-day I am neither proud or dedicated to Canada that has become a socialist of the world 'haven' to accommodate all and any culture with no strings attached.
The fight to restore the Canada of Vimy Ridge, the proud beacon of the Anglosphere must not be surrendered.

Having our men and women slaughtered in Afghanistan to help build a nation free from the tyranny of the Taliban, after the US successfully threw them out, is not good enough for you?

M.Dancer · June 25, 2007

Slaughtered?

Wow...if afghanistan is "slaughtered" Dieppe must have been the holocaust/armegeddon/influenza/black plague all rolled into one.....

Imagine Ypres?

cybercoma · June 26, 2007

Slaughtered?
Wow...if afghanistan is "slaughtered" Dieppe must have been the holocaust/armegeddon/influenza/black plague all rolled into one.....

Imagine Ypres?

Let's split hairs. Shall we say, brutally killed instead of slaughtered?

ScottSA · June 26, 2007

Slaughtered?

Wow...if afghanistan is "slaughtered" Dieppe must have been the holocaust/armegeddon/influenza/black plague all rolled into one.....

Imagine Ypres?

Let's split hairs. Shall we say, brutally killed instead of slaughtered?

I take it you know of a place in which people are gently killed?

cybercoma · June 27, 2007

slaughtered...

brutally killed...

just plain killed....

What difference does it make again?

ScottSA · June 27, 2007

slaughtered...
brutally killed...

just plain killed....

What difference does it make again?

None, I suppose. Except that you're the one attaching adjectives, so you must have a reason for doing so, eh wot?

cybercoma · June 27, 2007

When the enemy combatants dress up as civilians, attack hospitals/medical personnel, saw off prisoners' heads, make shrapnel bombs, etc... I guess it's a little more brutal than simply being shot or completely blown up with a rocket.

ScottSA · June 27, 2007

When the enemy combatants dress up as civilians, attack hospitals/medical personnel, saw off prisoners' heads, make shrapnel bombs, etc... I guess it's a little more brutal than simply being shot or completely blown up with a rocket.

I guess you've never seen anyone who has been blown up with a rocket, huh?

WestViking · June 27, 2007

How does all this relate to patriotism and the pledge of allegiance? That was the subject of this thread.

M.Dancer · June 27, 2007

When the enemy combatants dress up as civilians, attack hospitals/medical personnel, saw off prisoners' heads, make shrapnel bombs, etc... I guess it's a little more brutal than simply being shot or completely blown up with a rocket.

I guess you've never seen anyone who has been blown up with a rocket, huh?

I've seen my friends ripped apart by a grenade....is that close enough?

M.Dancer · June 27, 2007

Slaughtered?

Wow...if afghanistan is "slaughtered" Dieppe must have been the holocaust/armegeddon/influenza/black plague all rolled into one.....

Imagine Ypres?

Let's split hairs. Shall we say, brutally killed instead of slaughtered?

Slaughter has a nuance that is hyperbolic. 60 Canadians being killed in the space of 5 years is not a slaughter. Canada endured over 24,000 casualties in the battle of the Somme....and became known after that for the remainer of the war as shock troops.

jbg · August 12, 2010

Slaughter has a nuance that is hyperbolic. 60 Canadians being killed in the space of 5 years is not a slaughter. Canada endured over 24,000 casualties in the battle of the Somme....and became known after that for the remainer of the war as shock troops.

Canada is known for beign a militarily heroic country. I thank G-d they're our neighbor.

bloodyminded · August 12, 2010

Personally, I think such pledges are meaningless pap. To me anyways. Others find value in such things.

I agree. If people like doing it, they should go right ahead. But I gather no comfort in it, and consider such things to be a form of wilful indoctrination.