SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - Pledge of Allegiance vs. Constitution?

Page 2 of 3

Show 20 post(s) from this thread on one page

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)

- - Pledge of Allegiance vs. Constitution? (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=173492)

Penguin

08-11-10 01:56 PM

While reading about the POA I was astonished that it was state law to recite it - at least in Florida :o. I always thought it would be voluntarily with most students saying it out of tradition, conviction and/or peer pressure.

While I want to leave the constitutional discussion to the Americans, reading the oath of allegiance raises a new question:
Why does it explicitly mention a prince? Wouldn't he already be covered by potentate or sovereignty? Or did the US had some beef with a prince at the time the oath was introduced?

frau kaleun

08-11-10 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dowly (Post 1465089)

PPS. this has been bothering me, is it PPS or PSS. My brother uses PSS, but is it not PPS, as in post-post-scriptum or someting? :hmmm:

It's PPS, not PSS, and for the very reason you stated. The 'post' is Latin for 'after' so something written after the postscript would be a post-postscript.

Your brother, on the other hand, is speaking Parseltongue and is probably a Death Eater.

The Third Man

08-11-10 02:13 PM

Quote:

Why does it explicitly mention a prince?

Was there a prince named flag, and the republic it stands for?

Ultimately it is an oath to a republic.

Takeda Shingen

08-11-10 02:18 PM

http://images1.fanpop.com/images/ima...31_600_191.gif

Penguin

08-11-10 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Third Man (Post 1465118)

Was there a prince named flag, and the republic it stands for?

Ultimately it is an oath to a republic.

I was asking about the oath of allegiance which the OP cited in post #7

frau kaleun

08-11-10 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Penguin (Post 1465100)

While I want to leave the constitutional discussion to the Americans, reading the oath of allegiance raises a new question:
Why does it explicitly mention a prince? Wouldn't he already be covered by potentate or sovereignty? Or did the US had some beef with a prince at the time the oath was introduced?

The "oath of allegiance" quoted above and the "pledge of allegiance" to the flag are two different things.

The former is taken by someone who is not a citizen of the US, but is about to become one. In order to be sworn in as a US citizen, he/she must renounce all prior claims of citizenship or subjecthood to any foreign government, power, or ruler. Some foreign nationals are subjects of a monarch who is considered the head of state in their country of origin.

The Third Man

08-11-10 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Penguin (Post 1465130)

I was asking about the oath of allegiance which the OP cited in post #7

Oh, now I see what you're getting at. Fortunately that is not the US pledge.
Ours proclaims the supremecy of the republic, not one individual.

Penguin

08-11-10 02:46 PM

yep, but "prince" is basically covered by the terms "sovereign" or "potentate", that's why I was wondering why particularily "prince" - if you want to specificaly adress monarchy, the term "monarch" would be more fitting

UnderseaLcpl

08-11-10 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen (Post 1465123)

http://images1.fanpop.com/images/ima...31_600_191.gif

Please excuse me while I take a short detour down nostaligia lane. <sigh>

frau kaleun

08-11-10 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Penguin (Post 1465174)

Maybe because some states are technically "principalities" and ruled by princes? I'm thinking of Monaco, for example.

I don't know the protocol for slapping labels on dynastic heads of state, maybe there's some kind of technical difference between a prince and a potentate and they didn't want to leave any loopholes. :06:

Sailor Steve

08-11-10 03:12 PM

A King is the ultimate Prince. I don't know about today, but in older times it was characteristic for the King of England to refer to himself as a "Prince", and there are speeches recorded in which Queen Elizabeth (the original) actually called herself a "Prince".

frau kaleun

08-11-10 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve (Post 1465203)

Yeah, and then she went with that weird squiggly thing for a while and everybody just called her "the monarch formerly known as a 'Prince.'" It never did catch on.

Dowly

08-11-10 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frau kaleun (Post 1465115)

Your brother, on the other hand, is speaking Parseltongue and is probably a Death Eater.

Hmm.. well... he is the the one who I have to thank for introducing me to heavy/death/black metal, so yeah... he just might be the Death Eater... quite awesome. Does that make me the lil' death eater? :hmmm:

Skybird

08-11-10 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by conus00 (Post 1464983)

Okay gents,
I have been studying for my US citizenship test and me and my g/f had an interesting conversation. This horse has been probably beaten do death many times already but I would like to know your opinion on this question:

Is the Pledge of Allegiance in direct contradiction with U.S. Constitution?

Can somebody explain this to me:

The Pledge of Allegiance
I pledge allegiance to the Flag,
of the United States of America
and to the Republic for which it stands,
One Nation, under God
Indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for All.

and accordig to the Bill of Rights (The First ammendment):

You can practice any religion, or not practice a religion at all.

I understand that there were 4 changes to The Pledge of Allegiance (the last one made President Eisenhower in 1954 adding the words "under God").
Doesn't this make The Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional?

Are the atheists/agnostics, still, bound by it?

I do not want this thread to turn into another "religious" war on subsim, but this just does not make any sense to me.
Your opinions?

Since you explicitly marked the words "under god", and due to your general question, you may find this site with some historic background of the matter useful, make sure you check all pages:

http://bmccreations.com/one_nation/index.html

TLAM Strike

08-11-10 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UnderseaLcpl (Post 1465099)

It depends on the context. PS is Post-scriptum and PSS is post sub-scriptum. I'll explain it later. :salute:

I thought PPS stood for Pistolet pulemjot Sudaeva? :O:

Back OT: In high school we never had to say the pledge, we just had to stand and take off our hats. Even if we did we did not have to say the "Under God" part if we did not want to. ;)

Quote:

You are welcome. One of the ways how we improve ourselves is being questioned by others. On different (but related subject) you should take a look at this: http://usgovinfo.about.com/blinstst.htm

It is the list of questions required for U.S. citizenship test. It might be little bit outdated but it will give you an idea. I believe that majority of U.S. citizens would flunk the test. My g/f (smart and born and raised American) didn't know the answers to approx 1/3 of the questions.

Intresting. I got about 90 of them right.

Quote:

46. Which countries were our enemies during World War II?
Germany, Italy, and Japan

I would mark this as an Incomplete answer... ;)

Quote:

78. What kind of government does the United States have?
Democracy

I thought we were a republic? :hmmm:

Quote:

87. What is the most important right granted to U.S. citizens?
The right to vote

Isn't that more of a question of a opinion? Wouldn't someone from a country where they religion is suppressed perhaps think our freedom of region is more important?

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:34 AM.

Page 2 of 3

Show 20 post(s) from this thread on one page