Arizona Republicans Propose Bill That Would Prevent Atheists From Graduating

[pgwenthold]

Just words

This concept baffles me. If they are "just words" then why bother saying them?

Very clearly, they are NOT "just words" to the people who think that they need to be said (the same applies to "under god" in the pledge - don't tell me it's a meaningless phrase, considering the outrage at the suggestion to get rid of it)

If these are really meaningless words, then there should be no objections to getting rid of them.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

And why is a religious reference in the document at all?

 

[Dinwar]

What I find funny is that saying or drafting such an oath violates the very thing the oath is suposed to protect. American was founded on treason. Quite literally--the governing body of the United States of America declared war on Great Britain, who was at the time their government. The army of the USA took up arms against the army of their rightful government. Then, they went even further and specifically drafted ammendments and laws to protect those who would speak out against the government they created.

The single most patriotic thing an American can do is to stand up and say "I think what the government is doing is wrong." Somehow I doubt the idiots who drafted this pledge would like it if their students started to do that en mass.

Here's a fun article about this sort of thing.

Compared to the insanity of anywhere in the USA requiring a loyalty oath, the mention of God is trivial.

 

[Piscivore]

What I find funny is that saying or drafting such an oath violates the very thing the oath is suposed to protect. American was founded on treason. Quite literally--the governing body of the United States of America declared war on Great Britain, who was at the time their government. The army of the USA took up arms against the army of their rightful government. Then, they went even further and specifically drafted ammendments and laws to protect those who would speak out against the government they created.

The single most patriotic thing an American can do is to stand up and say "I think what the government is doing is wrong." Somehow I doubt the idiots who drafted this pledge would like it if their students started to do that en mass.

Here's a fun article about this sort of thing.

Compared to the insanity of anywhere in the USA requiring a loyalty oath, the mention of God is trivial.

+1

 

[dudalb]

I object to the oath, period. By what logic must a citizen swear allegiance to anything? What's the connection between this oath and graduating HS?

That oath read almost word for word as the Oath of Office for someone being commissioned in the Armed Services.

Not just being commisioned;I took that oath when I enlisted in the US Army with just a line added about obeying the lawful orders of all officiers placed over me....

 

[fitzgibbon]

Sorry for a stupid, Friday kind of question from a Canuck but isn't there supposed something about separation between church and state in the States? Just skimming through things, it seems like the States is incrementally patterning itself after Iran with better-dressed, more media-savvy ayotollahs.

Just sayin'

Fitz

 

[Piscivore]

Sorry for a stupid, Friday kind of question from a Canuck but isn't there supposed something about separation between church and state in the States? Just skimming through things, it seems like the States is incrementally patterning itself after Iran with better-dressed, more media-savvy ayotollahs.

You're not wrong.

 

[Frozenwolf150]

It doesn't matter what kind of pledge they come up with. We're talking high school seniors here. They're going to find ways to screw with the pledge, regardless of what it says.

"I, blank, do solemnly swear, that I will support and defend the Constipation of the United States against all enemas..."

 

[pgwenthold]

It doesn't matter what kind of pledge they come up with. We're talking high school seniors here. They're going to find ways to screw with the pledge, regardless of what it says.

"I, blank, do solemnly swear, that I will support and defend the Constipation of the United States against all enemas..."

"I, blank, do solemnly swear (damn it!) that..

 

[Weak Kitten]

As has already been pointed out similar oaths were found unconstitutional in the past by SCOTUS.

I will point out that this is actually a pared down version of the "Naturalization Oath of Allegiance to the United States of America". That actually explains some of the oddness of the language such as "I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion". That phrase makes sense in the context of people who are freely joining the USA as new citizens.

Not sure why they want students to make this oath. They are either already citizens by birth, are not interested in being citizens, or are working on that situation on their own.

 

[Freddy]

Since that Oath means so damn little to the elected officials who also swear it, I don't know why they bothered.
Besides, what office does High School graduation elect you to?

Indeed. Legislators swear the exact same oath (I believe; if not it's very close to the same). Including the legislators who proposed this bill. Given the unambiguous and on-point SCOTUS precedent forbidding this sort of compelled speech, I submit that any legislator who votes for this patently unconstitutional bill is breaking the very oath they wish to force everyone to swear. They should have their high school diplomas revoked.

 

[SezMe]

.... if they have one.

 

[pipelineaudio]

My facebook status

Impeach Representative Sonny Borrelli - AZ House District 5 for being a Taliban fascist, trying to ram down an Afghanistan style theocracy in the middle of a state emergency and two national wars. This is America, and this is Arizona! Not a theocracy. Read the Constitution. The First Amendment is not a toy for Ayatollah Borrelli to play with

Over the top?

 

[Dinwar]

My facebook status



Over the top?

Not so much over the top as missing the point. The real issue isn't that God was included--the issue is that in "....the land of the free and the home of the brave" someone in authority was moronic enough to propose we force people to take a loyalty oath in the first place. You could remove all mention of God/gods, remove all the theocracit trappings, and this would STILL be a reprehensible bit of legislation that violates the very principles it proports to defend. The issue isn't theocracy vs. secular government, but rather whether or not we have the right to question the government--meaning, liberty vs. dictatorship.

Or, to put it a different way: Remove the mention of God from the oath. Re-read it. Does that make you more comfortable with forcing all high schoolers to take the oath? Would you REALLY be comfortable with enforced obidience to a government just so long as that government was secular?

 

[DavidJames]

What's not stated is it's yet another example of the Republicans commitment to the Religious Right, something denied by their devotes on this forum. Usually by mumbling something about just doing it to placate the Christians and they really don't actually make laws about it.

Another of many such examples.

 

[Dorian Gray]

As long as everyone else has to say it, absolutely. See how long the rest of the class can keep a straight face.

To me, God is just a word, a harmless meaningless word referring to something that doesn't exist. Saying it isn't the same as swearing an oath to think or act a certain way. (Though I admit I'd still have to suppress the urge to burst into laughter while saying it.)

Let's just save time... is there anything you wouldn't say or that you think you should not be required to say prior to being allowed to graduate? If not, we're done here, and you should probably just look forward to being banned in the future. If there is, then you agree there's a line, you just disagree on where it should be drawn.

This is about being required to say that phrase, whether true or not. It's unconstitutional.

 

[Dorian Gray]

From the Arizona Republic:



Maybe he'll learn that true loyalty has to be earned, that he's trying to fix the wrong end.

Interesting. Of course, he just added this as an afterthought to his requirement to make an anti-bullying statement because a student felt embarrassed and humiliated afterward.

 

[Dorian Gray]

First off, some theists believe that saying there is no god will offend god, but obviously the void won't object to a statement that there is a god. So this isn't really a parallel. Second, I didn't say *no* atheist should or would object, only that *some* may not. It is possible that *some* theists would not object to your version, but that doesn't even matter. I never said that atheists shouldn't object to this legislation, or to saying the oath. The oath offends, without any commensurate benefit, and on that grounds alone it is bad legislation. But once again, that is not the same thing as preventing atheists as a category from graduating. It doesn't do that.

It doesn't prevent atheists from graduating in the same way that marriage laws don't prevent gays from marrying, as long as they marry members of the opposite sex.

 

[Dorian Gray]

Hey, everybody - look what's in Matthew, Chapter 5, as said by Jesus!
5:33 Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:
5:34 But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne:
5:35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.
5:36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black.

Jesus says not to take oaths. So even in the context of Christianity, this is prohibited. It's holy water for the Failboat to sink in.

 

[Ziggurat]

It doesn't prevent atheists from graduating in the same way that marriage laws don't prevent gays from marrying, as long as they marry members of the opposite sex.

No. The equivalent would be preventing two people of the same sex from marrying if they didn't say they were straight. In other words, they can accomplish the act that they want (marriage to the same sex, or graduation) with a lie that has no consequences.

Your attempted parallel does not provide any means of accomplishing the desired act, so it is clearly not a parallel at all.