Pledge of Allegiance vs. Constitution?

[Penguin]

While reading about the POA I was astonished that it was state law to recite it - at least in Florida . 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]

Originally Posted by Dowly

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?

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.

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]

[Penguin]

Originally Posted by The Third Man

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]

Originally Posted by Penguin

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.

Originally Posted by Penguin

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]

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]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

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

[frau kaleun]

Originally Posted by Penguin

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

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.

[Sailor Steve]

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]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

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".

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]

Originally Posted by frau kaleun

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?

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by conus00

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]

Originally Posted by UnderseaLcpl

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

I thought PPS stood for Pistolet pulemjot Sudaeva?

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.

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.

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

I would mark this as an Incomplete answer...

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

I thought we were a republic?

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?