pledge

[Jcfraz]

should Boy Scouts have to say the pledge to pass in rank?

[evmori]

Yes. Let me repeat. Yes.

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[NJCubScouter]

OK, I voted twice again, but this time I voted two different ways. By the time I looked at it from my work computer I had changed my mind. My initial answer was "yes," and I was so happy that I was going to get to agree with some of the people I usually disagree with with. Then this morning, I realized that the answer from both my perspective and a Scouting perspective had to be "No if against religious beliefs." (I would say it, Yes, unless against religious beliefs, but it works out the same.)

 

To begin with, it's a somewhat odd question (even aside from the fact that it does not identify what "pledge" is involved, the pledge of sobriety, Lemon Pledge, or what, but we can assume from the context that it is the Pledge of Allegiance.) Unless they have changed the rank requirements more than I thought, I am not aware of any blanket nationwide requirement to say the Pledge to advance in rank. I also am not aware that every unit is required to do the pledge at every meeting. On the other hand, I doubt I have ever been to any Boy Scout or Cub Scout meeting at which the pledge was not said, so it's probably a moot point. If a unit says the pledge at every meeting and a Scout refuses to participate, I assume the Scout is going to have a problem passing the "Scout spirit" requirement for his next rank, if nothing else. (All of this is subject to the exception discussed below.)

 

Because this question is being asked in the context of the recent Ninth Circuit decision, there may be an assumption by some (possibly including Ed with his emphatic response) that the reason why a boy would not say the Pledge is the phrase "under God." I don't think that's the real issue. If the boy won't say "under God" in the Pledge then he probably also will not promise to "do my duty to God" in the Scout Oath. My understanding of current BSA practice is that if a boy refuses to say the Oath and Law, and the reason is that he does not believe in God, he does not advance, and may be removed. I am not opposed to that, because belief in a higher power is one of the tenets of Scouting.

 

OK, so if the BSA does not recognize the religious objections of atheists to saying the Pledge, whose religious objections does it recognize? Quakers, for one. Quakers do not believe in taking pledges or oaths except those directly to God. They will not "swear" in an oath of office. Whether the words "under God" or "God" are included is irrelevant. They do not say the Pledge of Allegiance and never have, regardless of the version. They do not swear to tell the truth on the witness stand. (They "affirm" instead.) They do not swear to fulfill the terms of an elective office. They are the primary reason why the U.S. Constitution allows a new president to "swear or affirm" in the oath of office, and at a much more pedestrian level, when I was "sworn in" as a local school board member last week, I had the option under state law of "affirming" and leaving off the words "I swear to God." (I chose to swear, and to swear to God.)

 

And, although I don't know this as absolute fact, I strongly suspect that the reason the Scout Oath (or Promise) is called the Scout Oath (or Promise) is so that Quakers, and anyone else whose religion prohibits the saying of oaths, may say it as a promise instead of an oath. It's the same as "swear (or affirm)" in an oath.

 

Therefore, it seems very likely to me that a boy whose religious beliefs prohibit the saying of the Pledge of Allegiance (for example, a Quaker) is not going to be penalized by Scouting for not saying the Pledge.(This message has been edited by NJCubScouter)

[evmori]

NJ,

I just heard that the child who's father filed the complaint actually has no complaint about saying the Pledge in it's current form. It's the dad who is making all the waves and it sounds like it is purely self gratifying! What a bunch of whoey!

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

 

 

[NJCubScouter]

Yes Ed, there's a whole other thread about that. This poll and thread really are not about that at all, as I explained.

 

But since you brought it up here, I partially agree with you. I do have problems with this particular guy bring the lawsuit on behalf of his daughter if his daughter did not want to do so. From the limited amount I have read, it sounds to me like the man and his ex-wife went through a particularly nasty divorce and maybe he started this lawsuit on behalf of the daughter partly as an attack on his ex-wife. This is one of the reasons I don't do divorce law. I can't imagine that he will have much of a relationship with his daughter after this.

 

Nevertheless, the constitutionality of a statute is not determined by whether I like the plaintiff who challenges it. The guy (and more importantly, two judges of the Ninth Circuit) do have a point about the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools. I personally think the Pledge is "harmless" in a school setting, and that if you don't want to recite it, it isn't going to harm you to listen to it. (Which is the current state of the law, not counting this recent decision.) But if you believe that prayer has no place in public schools (and I'm not assuming that you do, Ed, but I do), then as a technical constitutional matter, it is difficult to to justify recitation of the current pledge in public schools.

 

Not to worry, however. As I have said before, the current Supreme Court is not likely to uphold this decision, and it may not even get past the full Ninth Circuit. And none of this affects the place of the Pledge in Scouting. I guess potentially we could end up with two pledges of allegiance, one with "under God" and one without. I love the law.

[bt01]

Yes

[acco40]

Ed, think before you vote! (That was said in jest everyone!) This past year in my troop we have had three boys who were not citizens of the United States (nor were their parents). Why should we make them recite the Pledge of Allegiance to the US Flag to "pass in rank." That is ludicrous.

 

[Jcfraz]

Thank you everyone for your responses. They have all been helpfull.

 

My current situation is that I will be 1st class soon but when My scout master found out Saying the pledge is aigainst my religios beliefs he questioned my qualifications to pass any ranks at all!

 

If any one kn ows about anything that says I couldn't please tell me.

-Jcfraz

[NJCubScouter]

As I said in my post, it depends what religious beliefs you have that prohibit you from saying the Pledge. If it is because you do not believe in God, you have a problem. If it is because you are a Quaker or some other faith that does not believe in taking a pledge or oath, then you probably want to have your parents or religious leader speak with your Scoutmaster and explain the issue. There may be "higher level" channels available as well. I believe Quakers have a religious award that can be worn on the Scout uniform, so there should be someone in the church who can help you. If indeed that is your religion.

 

Oh, and forgive my snide remarks about the wording of your question, I thought you were an adult.(This message has been edited by NJCubScouter)

[Mike Long]

The fourth requirement to join Scouts is to repeat the Pledge of Allegiance.

 

It already is a requirement and you should have done it by now.

 

That said, I would think that it being against your religious beliefs that requirement could be waived. If your Scoutmaster doesn't agree then you need to talk to your district advancement chair and see what he says.

 

But before you call district, I do feel that is is necessary to say that patriotism IS one of the primary points of the BSA's federal charter. As such your Scoutmaster is probably unsure of how you could possibly be patriotic, be a good Scout and refuse to recite the Pledge. Maybe you could explain to your scoutmaster what your faith says about the Pledge and other oaths and also explain to him how your faith allows you to be patriotic. Help him to understand your position.

[Jcfraz]

Thanks for your help.

First off, I'm not a Quaker,(I'm a Presbytirian) I just don't believe in saying an oath to a flag. I also don't believe that our country is (as the pledge says,) indivisible.

 

If the BSA will waver that for the Quakers, I hope they will understand my positian.

 

Yes, I have done the req. that says to say the pledge. I'm just trying to get past that without having to say the pledge, (THERE"S JUST GOTTA BE A WAY!)

[Mike Long]

I can tell you that there is nothing in the mainline Presbyterian faith that admonishes you to not say the pledge. As a matter of fact many Presbyterians are ralling behind and support the Pledge in this current issue and were also a major force in getting the Pledge adopted and later adding "Under God".

 

I'd be interested to hear your reasoning as to exactly why you don't want to say the Pledge.(This message has been edited by Mike Long)

[Rooster7]

Jcfraz,

 

If it is truly against your religious beliefs (as NJ has stated), then you may have a "case", so to speak. In the 60's some boys claimed it was against their faith to be a combatant in a war. Yet, not everyone was successful in avoiding combat. Some were not able to prove their claim. You should be prepared to explain the teachings of your faith that corroborates your assertion; persons of my faith should not say a pledge to a flag and its nation. Even then, I'm not sure you have a strong a position. BSA is not the US government. They are a private organization (as has been stated in this forum numerous times). Perhaps they will make an allowance for your situation, if you can prove it to be true. On the other hand, I'm pretty confident that they don't have to be flexible on this.

 

I'm an elder and deacon in the Presbyterian Church. I know of no such teaching, either in the bible or by PCUSA that says you cannot pledge allegiance to a flag and the country it represents. In short, I think your case is pretty weak.

(This message has been edited by Rooster7)

[sctmom]

My sister (who is in her 40's) does not say the pledge because she says there is not "justice and liberty for all". She bases this on a case of a Native American who has been in prison for over 20 years and supposedly no concrete charges have been brought up against him. I can't remember his name right now.

 

The Pledge of Allegiance is an ideal we want the country to live up to. It is true that our country may be seen as "divisible" and that there isn't always "liberty and justice for all". Most people will admit they don't always do exactly as the scout law says, they make mistakes, but still as a Boy Scout you say the oath and try your best to live up to it.

 

Also, you are pledging allegiance to your country that the flag stands for.

 

If you have a weak case on the grounds of "against my religion" because it is a personal decision you are making not one taught by your religion.

 

Since you already repeated the Pledge of Allegiance to join Boy Scouts, when else is your scoutmaster expecting you to say it that would hold up your rank advancement?

 

[Jcfraz]

"One nation, under God, indivisible..." Really?

 

 

The current debate over the pledge of allegiance is an interesting one. Theres more to the discussion than most are aware.

 

Back in 1892, the 400th anniversary of Columbus discovery of America, a man named Francis Bellamy penned the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States. Bellamys purpose? Well, the Baptist pastor and open socialist had one goal in mind: to promote a fanatic nationalism in young children and adults alike. That is, a sentiment toward the state, our federal government, of unwavering devotion.

 

But, government, rightly understood, is our servant not our master. At least that was the design of the framers who were grounded in this biblical concept. However Bellamy, who was later defrocked for his rabid socialist activism, thought he had a better notion. So did the National Education Association, who made him a prominent leader of their march to conform all children, and their parents, to the goals championed by Horace Mann, Robert Owen, and later by Thomas Dewey: to have the government educate all children in order that we have a nation of people who would think and act alike. The pledge was a step in the right direction.

 

As the country happily embraced the idea of government teaching their children, the general attitude of the culture naturally began to shift toward more government dependency, and away from reliance on the freedoms and liberties given us by God.

 

In 1954 the words under God were added to the pledge, but the damage had been done. Those two words could not sanitize the mantra of Bellamy and the clamoring culture that had warmly embraced it.

 

We wanted more, and we got it. Ten years later the Bible and prayer were taken out of the government schools. The government taking over healthcare for older Americans soon followed. A few years later the government sanctioned the murder of innocent unborn children. Soon to follow were other fruits from the halls of government learning: celebration of sodomy, sanctioning of Wiccan services (devil worship) on military bases, and the redefining of almost everything we used to hold dear; toleration was sanctified while the church has remained predominantly silent.

 

Two other words deserve our attention: nationalism and patriotism. Nationalism is the worship of the state, looking not only to the state for all perceived needs, but defending most any action or claim of power that it decrees. Patriotism is the worship of the God of the Bible set in action within a country: defending life, liberty and property against tyranny from government, both at home and abroad.

 

Our patriots wrote, Governments... [derive] their just powers from the consent of the governed. The Declaration of Independence also rightly notes that when Government becomes destructive of these Ends (as did the British Crown), it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new Government...as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

 

Im not advocating secession, but by declaring our once great republic as one nation ...indivisible confines us to the whims of the state. Thanks to the Constitution, every 2 years we have the opportunity to change government. A free people understand freedom, government subjects understand only what the government gives them. Ideas have consequences.

 

No, adding the words Under God can not sanitize the pledge of allegiance to the state. In God We Trust embossed on our copper-nickel coins or printed on our fiat notes can not hide their inherent worthlessness. And putting prayer back into government schools will not redeem them, neither will vouchers. Looking for salvation through state dedication, inflation, education or medication can not save a country that has lost its soul. These faulty concepts were not birthed in the cradle of liberty, but in the halls of humanism.

 

The United States are in need of redemption. My prayer is that these ideas will awaken a nation in love with itself and stir it to join me in repentance and restoration. Let us secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, recognizing that only our triune God is indivisible. He alone is the author of life, liberty, and justice. He and His standards alone are worthy of our allegiance.