St. Louis Park, Minnesota, city council has decided to remove the pledge of allegiance from their meetings. Your thoughts? More info below:

The city council member, Anne Mavity, who proposed the idea says that not everyone who has business with the city council is a citizen. She says, “They certainly don’t need to come into city council chambers and pledge their allegiance to our country in order to tell us what their input is about a sidewalk in front of their home.”

But aren't the city council members part of government? Aren't they part of our country? Don't the city council members owe allegiance to their flag and their country?

Do we have to alter our allegiance to our own country because of foreigners who might live here?

https://therealside.com/2019/07/minnesota-city-council-says-no-more-pledge-of-allegiance/

What are your thoughts?

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

NativeOregonian · 51-55

In 1943 the US Supreme Court ruled that the Pledge is not mandatory. This was due to the fact that a group of Jehovah's Witnesses sued over religious grounds. I remember in jr high we had a foreign exchange student from Australia that refused to recite along with everyone else, stating that she was loyal to her own country and felt she should not feel compelled to recite to her host country. When my school threatened to suspend her, she threatened to sue and contacted the Australian consulate in Washington DC. My school backed down and she was able to finish out the year, this was in 1985.

wilderflower · F

@NativeOregonian That’s different. She wasn’t on a city council. She wasn’t representing anyone but herself.

NativeOregonian · 51-55

@wilderflower No, it is not, the 1943 ruling states that the Pledge is not compulsory to recite for anyone. Forced patriotism is fascism.

4meAndyou · F

@NativeOregonian No one wants to force people to do anything. We won't march into St Louis Park with a gestapo and force them at gunpoint to recite the pledge. We allow people the freedom to behave in the way they want.

We also have our own individual freedoms to feel a deep, deep sense of disgust at members of our own government who can't get behind the idea of swearing allegiance to the country they supposedly serve.

NativeOregonian · 51-55

@4meAndyou Your second paragraph pretty much contradicts your first one by saying you wish compulsory recitation, which is fascism.

4meAndyou · F

@NativeOregonian Incorrect. I feel a very deep sense of disgust. VERY deep. That is my right. I am pointing out their lying hypocrisy.

Our state officials swear an oath of office similar to the one below:

The following oath of office is one that is commonly used:
"I, _____, do solemnly swear [or affirm] that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution and laws of the State of Washington, and all local ordinances, and that I will faithfully and impartially perform and discharge the duties of the office of _____, according to the law and the best of my ability."

"The pledge began as an intensive communing with...our national history, from the Declaration of Independence onwards; with the makings of the Constitution...with the meaning of the Civil War; with the aspirations of the people...

--Francis Bellamy, author of the original Pledge of Allegiance"

So the two faced members of the city council of St Louis Park swear an oath to support the Constitution with their right hand upheld to verify the truth of their words, and with their left hand they take away the honor due to our history and to the Constitution.