One nation under Allah

[Gob]

A school in New York state has apologised after receiving complaints because a student recited the US Pledge of Allegiance in Arabic.

The school's foreign language department arranged for the pledge to be read in a different language each day for a week.

Complaints were received from people who lost family in Afghanistan and from Jewish parents, an official said.

Neither the US nor New York state has an official language.

The school district superintendant, Joan Carbone, told the Times Herald-Record newspaper that the Arabic pledge has "divided the school in half" and that she had received numerous complaints.

A statement from the district apologised "to any students, staff or community members who found this activity disrespectful" and said the reading was intended to "promote the fact that those who speak a language other than English still pledge to salute this great country".

An Arabic-speaking student read the pledge during morning announcements at Pine Bush High School in Pine Bush, New York, on Wednesday.

Officials said the school's foreign language department organised for different pledge translations to be read in celebration of National Foreign Language Week.

Many students reportedly shouted their disapproval during the recitation, and later complained on social media.

Later in the afternoon, the school's principal made a school-wide announcement to explain why the pledge was read in Arabic and to apologise for those who took offence.

Ms Carbone said the pledge would only be read in English in the future.

The school's student leader, Andrew Zink, who is in charge of the morning announcements, told the local newspapers that he knew the reading would attract controversy.

He permitted it to go forward, because he believed it was "the right thing to do".

"All Americans who value our nation's history of religious and ethnic diversity should be concerned" by the reaction and subsequent apology, said Sadyia Khalique, a spokeswoman for the New York chapter of the Council of American-Islamic Relations.

[Lord Jim]

I'm frankly happy to see kids reciting The Pledge Of Allegiance in school in any language; too many schools have abandoned the practice entirely, which I think is disgraceful...

Assuming it's the same Pledge, (they're not pledging allegiance to ISIS or France just because they're reciting it in Arabic or French) I see absolutely nothing wrong with spending one week out of the school year reciting the Pledge in different languages...

The policy could even serve as a teachable moment to get the kids to think about the words and their meaning, rather than just reciting them ritualistically...

I don't see anything to bitch about here...(And Lord knows I'm always up for a good bitching...)

[Econoline]

There seem to be two distinct questions here: (1) May the Pledge of Allegiance EVER be recited in ANY other language than English? and (2) If the answer to Question (1) is "Yes", should the recitation in Arabic be permitted?

I have no opinion on the first question. Personally I find the whole idea of a mandatory recitation of a pledge to a piece of cloth (especially with the addition of the words "under God", which happened during the time I was in school and required to say the pledge) rather weird--a little creepy, even. (OTOH, the Pledge of Allegiance was written in English, and an argument can be made that any translation of anything* inevitably changes the meaning, subtly.) But if the answer to the first question is "Yes", then certainly the answer to the second question should also be "Yes". The U.S. has no official language, and should not be engaged in banning any particular language, ever.


* (including the Bible or the Koran)

[rubato]

I don't understand what they are complaining about or why there was an apology.

PS
No one has been required to say the pledge since I was in school. Because of the good efforts of the ACLU you cannot be required to participate.

Yrs,
Rubato

[Lord Jim]

PS
No one has been required to say the pledge since I was in school. Because of the good efforts of the ACLU you cannot be required to participate.

Yrs,
Rubato

Well, not exactly...(or even approximately...)

No one has been "required" to say The Pledge since 1943, (which I suspect was a bit before your school years) "because of the good efforts" of the Jehovah's Witnesses:

West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943), is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States holding that the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution protected students from being forced to salute the American flag and say the Pledge of Allegiance in school. The Court's 6-3 opinion, delivered by Justice Robert H. Jackson, is remembered for its forceful defense of free speech and constitutional rights generally as being placed "beyond the reach of majorities and officials."

It was a significant court victory won by Jehovah's Witnesses, whose religion forbade them from saluting or pledging to symbols, including symbols of political institutions. However, 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.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Virgi ... ._Barnette

I have to say though rube, I'm not surprised that you had that bollixed...

Afterall, apparently you were "educated" in a school that didn't even teach you the proper meaning of "one man one vote"....

[rubato]

PS
No one has been required to say the pledge since I was in school. Because of the good efforts of the ACLU you cannot be required to participate.

Yrs,
Rubato

Well, not exactly...(or even approximately...)

No one has been "required" to say The Pledge since 1943, (which I suspect was a bit before your school years) "because of the good efforts" of the Jehovah's Witnesses:

West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943), is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States holding that the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution protected students from being forced to salute the American flag and say the Pledge of Allegiance in school. The Court's 6-3 opinion, delivered by Justice Robert H. Jackson, is remembered for its forceful defense of free speech and constitutional rights generally as being placed "beyond the reach of majorities and officials."

It was a significant court victory won by Jehovah's Witnesses, whose religion forbade them from saluting or pledging to symbols, including symbols of political institutions. However, 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.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Virgi ... ._Barnette

I have to say though rube, I'm not surprised that you had that bollixed...

Afterall, apparently you were "educated" in a school that didn't even teach you the proper meaning of "one man one vote"....

A case brought by the ACLU, as described, and which was in place when I was in school. Also, as described. You are losing it, little man. Your pathetic need to find something to criticize leads you further and further into slobbering idiocy.


I shouldn't pick on such mental defectives as you. Should I? I'll go to hell for it fer sure. OK, I'll try to be more compassionate.


Here we go: If I said "it has been true since 1961 that you have not been required to recite the pledge of allegiance in school" Have I said that it was not true before that time? Now really get those little brain cells going and come back with a cogent answer!



yrs,
rubato

[Joe Guy]

Here we go: If I said "it has been true since 1961 that you have not been required to recite the pledge of allegiance in school" Have I said that it was not true before that time? Now really get those little brain cells going and come back with a cogent answer!

You're on a roll today, rubester.

I'd suggest for you to quit now for your own good but it's too entertaining.

Please continue...

[rubato]

Here we go: If I said "it has been true since 1961 that you have not been required to recite the pledge of allegiance in school" Have I said that it was not true before that time? Now really get those little brain cells going and come back with a cogent answer!

You're on a roll today, rubester.

I'd suggest for you to quit now for your own good but it's too entertaining.

Please continue...

Too difficult for you, as well?



yrs,
rubato

[Joe Guy]

Too difficult for you, as well?

Thanks!

You can do better but that's good for the interim...

[Lord Jim]

LMFAO

I obviously struck a nerve with my spot on analysis of him in the other thread...

And as he has done before, he thinks he can some how "hurt" me with his bullshit in the same way I have stung him with the facts...

Sorry Bee Boy, I'm not insecure enough for that....

A case brought by the ACLU

Oh dear me, wrong again, Your Royal Wrongness...

West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette - Significance, Supreme Court Holds That Compulsory Flag Ceremonies Violate Constitutional Guarantees Of Free Speech, The Flag Salute

Appellant

West Virginia State Board of Education

Appellee

Walter Barnette

Appellant's Claim

That a state law mandating a daily salute of the American flag by public school children does not violate the First Amendment's guarantee of religious freedom.

Chief Lawyer for Appellant

W. Holt Wooddell

Chief Lawyer for Appellee

Hayden C. Covington


http://law.jrank.org/pages/12562/West-V ... nette.html

Now just who was Hayden Covington? A founding Firebrand for the ACLU?

Well, not exactly...

Hayden Cooper Covington (January 19, 1911 – November 21, 1978) was legal counsel for the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society during one of its most difficult periods in the mid-20th century. Hayden Covington has a record 37 victories in the United States Supreme Court, the most since the Judiciary Act of 1869 which fixed the Supreme Court of the United States to 9 Justices. He argued numerous cases before the United States Supreme Court on behalf of Jehovah’s Witnesses in defense of their religious freedoms, winning most of them. In 1967, he famously defended then world heavyweight champion Muhammad Ali in his legal battle against the draft during the Vietnam War.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hayden_C._Covington

So rube, the next time you want to thank somebody for not being required to salute the flag or say the Pledge Of Allegiance, forget you pals at the ACLU...

And raise a toast instead to Hayden Covington, and the God believing religious folks in the Jehovah's Witnesses...

The next time they come to your door instead of pretending you're not home, you should welcome them warmly and give 'em a few bucks... (And maybe a nice big jar of honey...)

How's that for cogent?

[Lord Jim]

You're on a roll today, rubester.

I'd suggest for you to quit now for your own good but it's too entertaining.

Please continue...

Yes, it is quite amusing...

As I recall, he pulled the same routine about the same time last Saturday...

I think 11AM on Saturdays may have become Cocktail Hour at Chez Rube....

[rubato]

It is even mentioned on the ACLU website:

https://www.aclu.org/successes-american ... ties-union

1943
West Virginia v. Barnette
Compelling Jehovah's Witness children to salute the American flag against their religious beliefs was unconstitutional.

As is this one defending a racist anti-semite Catholic priest (what a shock, eh?)"

1949
Terminiello v. Chicago
In this exoneration of a priest convicted of disorderly conduct for giving a racist, anti-semitic speech, Justice William O. Douglas stated, ""the function of free speech under our system of government is to invite dispute.""

The ACLU, they've done more to protect your rights than any other group in history.


yrs,
rubato

[Lord Jim]

The ACLU, they've done more to protect your rights than any other group in history.

Actually, that would be the men and women of The Armed Forces, but be that as it may...

It is even mentioned on the ACLU website:

Oh, well that settles it then...

You've got the ACLU taking credit for itself; all I've got is:

Law Library - American Law and Legal Information

This law and legal reference library provides free access to thousands of legal articles, covering important court cases, historical legal documents, state laws & statutes, and general legal information. Popular articles include Landlord and Tenant Relationship, Health Insurance Law and Employment Law. The legal reference database also covers historically important court cases such as the Ulysses obscenity trial, Plessy vs. Ferguson, Roe vs. Wade and many others.

All of the legal information on this website was professionally written and researched, and each law article has been carefully selected -- all to create the most comprehensive legal information site on the web. Search the online legal encyclopedia using the search box below:

Read more: Law Library - American Law and Legal Information - JRank Articles http://law.jrank.org/#ixzz3V450mFmq

Clearly you have the more reputable and reliable source....

law.jrank.org must have made up that bit about Hayden Covington being the Appellee attorney...(Why would anybody use the guy who was their staff counsel for decades, and who won more cases in the Supreme Court in modern times than any other person, when they could hire the ACLU instead?...I don't know what I was thinking....)

Thanks for setting me straight rube...

ETA:

In case you'd like to dig that hole you're standing in a little deeper: