Why 10-Year-Old Won’t Say Pledge Of Allegiance
Will Phillips of West Fork School District in Washington County, Arkansas, refuses to say the Pledge of Allegiance. His family is involved in the gay rights issue, straight allies to that community, and Will doesn’t believe there is “liberty and justice for all” in America.
Laura Phillips is Will’s mother. “Yes, my son is 10,” she said. “But he’s probably more aware of the meaning of the pledge than a lot of adults. He’s not just doing it rote recitation. We raised him to be aware of what’s right, what’s wrong, and what’s fair.”
On October 5, after asking his parents it was legal to do so, he sat down during his class’s recitation of the Pledge. The substitute teacher that week became more and more agitated each day with Will’s refusal to stand and, when she kept pressing the issue Phillips told her, “With all due respect, Ma’am , you can go jump off a bridge.” After Will’s parents spoke with the school, which admitted he had the right not to stand, they asked for an apology from the teacher, but have not received one.
After Phillips put a post on the instant-blogging site twitter.com about the incident, several of her friends got angry and alerted the news media. Meanwhile, Will Phillips still refuses to stand during the pledge of allegiance. Though many of his friends at school have told him they support his decision, those who don’t have been unkind, and louder.
Resisting being programmed into a drone, good for him.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
“Phillips told her, “With all due respect, Ma’am , you can go jump off a bridge.””
That’s pretty funny. Why should the teacher care if he stands or not?
I like the “with all due respect” line. That’s a prefix phrase to an direct insult. There’s also the “bless his/her heart” which is a suffix phrase to an indirect insult.
For example: “TDro, with all due respect, you’re a noobcake.” Or: “TDro is a noobcake, bless his heart.”
November 12th, 2009 at 4:11 pm
I thought the Supreme Court ruled on the behalf of Jehovah’s Witnesses that no one could be forced to say the pledge of allegiance. Well, if it was a substitute they can simply remove the person’s name from the list for that school. Its much ado about nothing and just another story trumped up to give voice to the gay movement, kids refuse to say the pledge all the time simply because they are too lazy to get out of their chairs. The world won’t end just because people don’t go through antiquated rituals at an institution the government forces them to attend.
If he refused to swear to the truth in a court of law or pledge to uphold the constitution in a government position there might be an issue, but it sounds like someone who wasn’t formally trained and isn’t aware of student rights made an issue and the school backed the student’s civil rights. Moving on now.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:17 pm
“…the Supreme Court ruled on the behalf of Jehovah’s Witnesses that no one could be forced to say the pledge…”
Guess again. You’re all screwed up.
The original pledge, by Francis Bellamy (1855-1931), a Baptist minister, a Christian socialist, and the cousin of socialist utopian novelist Edward Bellamy:
“I Pledge Allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all.”
Be sure to check out the Bellamy salute to be used while saying the pledge: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellamy_salute
piffle Reply:
November 12th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
Rocky, get with the program. Everyone knows who started the Pledge of Allegiance and why it was started. Its not the 1950s where they were trying to use the pledge to protest communism or the 1980s where Pappy Bush was trying to taint Dukakis with the stench of fifth columnist treason. Jehovah’s Witnesses claimed it was against their religion and the courts exempted them on behalf of religious protection. The ACLU used to get things right before they became the pro bono social worker’s for international terrorism.
Its just a ritual, the back story isn’t that relevant because the pledge has been used by various groups for certain agendas and in this age where nothing is sacred anymore people don’t have to participate, and there is legal protection. I am saying the kid is right and the “teacher” is an ignorant fool, but I chalk that up to it probably being some dolt who didn’t go through the education process. Pretty much anyone can become a substitute and a lot of people are because of the lack of full time employment. The school went to bat for the kid, his rights were recognized, and its not all that unusual. The only reason its getting a point in the blog is because its being used to protest the kid’s objections to the contractual laws, which anyone can do thanks to the first amendment. It is completely in line with a Scalia originalist interpretation of constitutional protections and has no need to be a partisan line if the sole issue is abstaining from the pledge, which legally that is the only issue.
Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler Reply:
November 12th, 2009 at 6:09 pm
“…get with the program…”
Any program from you can be stuck you know where.
piffle Reply:
November 12th, 2009 at 7:11 pm
I figured thats what you would say about reality.
Your argument about Bellamy has about as much to do with this pledge controversy as Betsy Ross allegedly sewing the first flag.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:44 pm
Sorry Roky, but I have to defend Piffle on this one. He’s right that the courts ruled in favor of the Jehovah’s Witnesses when they refused to pledge allegiance to the flag in contravention of their religious beliefs.
Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler Reply:
November 12th, 2009 at 6:20 pm
Nope, still got it wrong.
“…the Court did not address the effect the compelled salutation and recital ruling had upon their particular religious beliefs, but instead ruled that the state did not have the power to compel speech in that manner for anyone.”
piffle Reply:
November 12th, 2009 at 7:13 pm
Apples to oranges. You didn’t read what I said, I said the kid’s rights are protected and his objections on the fact taht he doesn’t believe the liberty and justice for all phrase is ancillary, the same as the religious beliefs being the basis of Jehovah’s witnesses’ opposition. If it was a decision solely on religious grounds the kid could be forced to say the pledge. You fail at logic.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:56 pm
The kid is wrong for the bridge comment and should apologize. There was no “due respect” in it.
He should not be forced to recite the pledge, in America we have the freedom to not be coerced like that.
Plus, forcing someone to do so is contrary to the concept of liberty anyway.
“To believe that patriotism will not flourish if patriotic ceremonies are voluntary and spontaneous, instead of a compulsory routine, is to make an unflattering estimate of the appeal of our institutions to free minds.” – - – Robert H. Jackson
piffle Reply:
November 12th, 2009 at 5:50 pm
“Plus, forcing someone to do so is contrary to the concept of liberty anyway.”
There’s not too much liberty left in this country anyway and for some reason people keep confusing the loss of rights with a more free society. But otherwise I think you have a good post.
burqa Reply:
November 12th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
I’m thinking for the bridge comment, the kid should have to wash the teacher’s car in the school parking lot right where everyone can see from inside the school….
piffle Reply:
November 12th, 2009 at 7:14 pm
Nah, I admire his insight. He sounds like an unusually bright kid for being 10, I’m surprised his parents are wasting his talent on a government school. Surely he could get a scholarship to somewhere with a better learning environment.
November 12th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
One thing that upsets me are parents who feel the need to use their children to help bring about the five minutes of attention the parent believes their cause deserves. Its pretty clear the 10 year old boy was set up to this by his parents. Sad really.
burqa Reply:
November 12th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
Good point, Bernie.
I don’t like seeing kids used that way by parents or other adults on either side of the political spectrum. In my household, I had no idea what my parents’ political leanings were until I was an adult. They would discuss both sides of an issue and never tried to impose their political beliefs on me…
flap Reply:
November 12th, 2009 at 10:07 pm
“never tried to impose their political beliefs on me”
Wait a sec…don’t political beliefs represent ideas and VALUES? I’m not saying forcibly make your kids libs or cons, but isn’t it reasonable to give children opinions and the rationale behind those opinions?
I was never indoctrinated per se but both my parents were conservative and I sort of knew that I think, especially later in my teens.
michael Reply:
November 12th, 2009 at 11:45 pm
Both my parents are conservatives, and I’m a liberal. I’m very close with my parents and they certainly taught me values, i.e. hard work, kindness, etc. That doesn’t necessarily mean that I’m going to agree with my parents on everything and I doubt that’s the case in any parent/child relationship, hence the existence of the “generation gap.” Take the issue of gay rights. To my very conservative dad, gays have rights, but they are “social and sexual deviants” whose relationships should not be sanctioned by the government in any way. My mom accepts the possibility that homosexuality is innate and that gays should not be discriminated against, but only believe in civil unions because “marriage is between a man and a woman,” with no further explanation. Contrast that with my view that gays are people who are simply different who have been historically marginalized by society in the same way that all other minorities have, and that do deny them their basic right to marry the person they love is in direct violation of their civil rights, and to do anything less, i.e. civil unions, is “separate but equal.”
Now, does any of this mean that my parents are not good parents? No. But it does prove that 100% of the “values” that our parents teach us are going to sit right with us. My parents, especially my dad, are very interested in politics and have always openly discussed their views with me and recently even debated with me. They respect my right as an American to believe whatever I want to believe and they always have. What’s important to them is that they got through to me on the really important universal values in life, i.e. hard work, kindness, honesty, etc. Whether or not I see eye-to-eye with Paul Krugman or Milton Friedman economics is totally up to me.
flap Reply:
November 13th, 2009 at 9:59 am
Well, Michael, I think it does show that you have good parents that you can disagree but still have a good relationship. I think if I was a lib I would still have a good relationship with my parents. Let me rephrase…if I was a reasonable lib such as yourself I would still have a good relationship with my parents. Heheh.
“marriage is between a man and a woman,”
That’s a religious, social, cultural tradition, Michael. Even if you believe it should be changed, which is a reasonable position, not allowing two men or two women to get married in a “traditional” marriage is not necessarily discriminatory. I’ll go back to the polygamy example or the incest example. Why can’t I marry multiple people I love? Or my biological sister? Is there a compelling reason to not allow those, other than saying that marriage is traditionally between a man and a woman?
In other words, right or wrong, those who support gay marriage are for broadening the definition to “two consenting adults.” Seems like that could be broadened further to “any number of consenting individuals.”
Gays can marry…they just can’t marry people of the same sex (in many places), because that isn’t how marriage is defined. I know that’s kind of a circular argument, but I go back to the social/religious/cultural tradition. Perhaps that is wrong, but I don’t see it as a civil rights issue since homosexuality and heterosexuality are tendencies that cause behavior, not something immutable that you cannot alter (such as skin color).
November 12th, 2009 at 6:27 pm
The poor little useful tool- being used by his parents.
I’m sure he knows calculus and nuclear physics too!!
OldLefty Reply:
November 12th, 2009 at 6:52 pm
I said this before, but I find it amusing to think of what would happen if a socialist wrote the pledge TODAY, and it became part of the school curriculum for children to recite it, by proclamation of president Barack Hussein Obama.
burqa Reply:
November 12th, 2009 at 7:13 pm
SOCIALIST!
Glenn Beck would immediately start a campaign to get those responsible fired…..
luv2lift48 Reply:
November 13th, 2009 at 11:34 am
The poor little useful tool- being used by his parents.
I’m sure he knows calculus and nuclear physics too!!
..
Maybe maybe not..but unlike a previous president, I bet he can pronounce “nuclear”
November 12th, 2009 at 6:44 pm
So, INEEDABEERNOW, I repeat my above question to you,
I said this before, but I find it amusing to think of what would happen if a socialist wrote the pledge TODAY, and it became part of the school curriculum for children to recite it, by proclamation of president Barack Hussein Obama.?
November 12th, 2009 at 8:24 pm
I think Paul Simon wrote it best “God keeps his eye on us all, and he used to lean upon me as I pledged allegience to the wall”. The sad reality of it, is that I was forced to pledge an oath to a peice of cloth every morning for 12 years. I did 20 years in the military and learned, that only an idiot dies for a peice of cloth. It’s the fabric of our constitution and the bill of rights that you swear to fight and even die for. There is something anti-freedom about making someone swear an oath of loyalty (hitler made his army swear allegience to him). When we force loyalty down someones throat, we violate the principles better people then you and I bled and died for. The reality of the whole situation, is again..the right wing nut cases that scream so loudly about loyalty and the flag..skulked away when their turn to serve came around. If right wing radio bozo’s really want some credibility, maybe get a vet to host one of these shows.
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
November 13th, 2009 at 9:26 pm
I somewhat agree with you….
November 13th, 2009 at 9:18 am
I think the only clear thought I had running through my head up until I was 10 years old was “Get more candy!” School, family, friends, these were all just obstacles on my way to getting more candy.
November 13th, 2009 at 10:29 am