The View from Here: Don’t say pledge and get beat up
What has been described as “mob action” in a school district located in the Chicago vicinity is a good example of why Tennessee lawmakers should not pass laws that require mandatory recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools.
There is an idea on the table, passed by a legislative subcommittee earlier this week, that would indirectly force students to say the pledge. And while a noble and understandable effort that simultaneously reeks of political motivations, do we really want to legally push our morals because we believe in them so strongly we think everyone else should, too?
Let’s not turn the “shoulds” into “musts.” Essentially forcing speech is not my idea of freedom, no matter how popular patriotism is right now.
The Chicago incident in question concerns about two dozen students who prove why the idea can’t work. Students reportedly continued a scuffle in retribution for a “pushing match” that had gone on between the two groups previously. As the injuries mounted, it’s easy to assume the students didn’t know when to call it quits.
That type of immaturity may be applied to a group of students who refuse to say the pledge, for whatever reason. We might see one side, perhaps a child of a public official similar to the ones killed in the Sept. 11 attacks, feel justifiably strongly about saying the pledge. But you might have another child who doesn’t feel that strongly about it.
Perhaps he or she doesn’t believe in God. The Chicago incident, if the allegations are ultimately proven, shows violence escalates from something as simple as a pushing match that could have been ended by simply walking away.
From what I understand, while a child or teacher may opt out of saying the pledge, isn’t it realistic to assume someone who would object would feel uncomfortable doing so? Isn’t school about not questioning what people in authority tell you to do? It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure this one out: Being labeled as the weird kid who didn’t want to say the pledge would be inevitable.
I remember a kid I went to school with from kindergarten through 12th grade who never said the pledge in elementary school, I believe at the request of his parents. When everyone else stood and put their hands over their hearts, he just stood. Everyone noticed. He never really melded in with the rest of the crowd – ever.
On the playground, the kids told rumors like they were “the” authority on Daniel, the one (American) kid at our school who never said the pledge. Some said he was a Satanist. Some said he had no religion, while others said he believed in a different God, or maybe gods, hence the perceived objection. No one, of course, knew what they were talking about. They guessed.
I’m pretty sure the school didn’t force it on every classroom, but the pledge is something teachers apparently felt obligated to do nonetheless and students didn’t question. But giving more credibility to a voluntary act (a should) with a law (you must) means the ones who agree can now say, “See, I told you so,” and the ones who don’t feel compelled to explain themselves when they shouldn’t have to.
I wonder if Daniel’s later school experiences would have been different if he had just said the pledge at the ripe old age of 6.
It’s a wonderful pledge designed to unite the country, and I have no problem saying it. But I think politicians should leave it alone. The words “liberty and justice” mean something and for people who don’t agree, making laws about it boils down to abridging their First Amendment right to free speech.
(Amy Satterwhite is a reporter for the Standard. She can be reached at 473-2191 or by e-mail at [email protected].)