To Pledge or not to Pledge? That is the question...

This topic is close to my heart. An 11-year old in California refused to stand for the pledge of allegiance. His teacher questioned him and the district will apologize.

While some states require the pledge to receive class time, I don't think there is a single law that does or even can require students to say it.

I am as patriotic as the next guy, but I have many problems with the pledge. It seems so bizarre that we teach kids to say it in school before they know what half the words mean. Utah state law requires that the class takes time to say it each day. An Australian substitute I had made an interesting comment: the only other country she had ever seen where the kids swear allegiance is China. Ouch.

Secondly, why is it that a country with no established religion has the words "Under God" in a supposedly secular setting. I'll tell you why, and it has nothing to do with religion. During the height of the Cold War, we wanted to show that we weren't those Godless commies in the Soviet Union. So In 1954, a Republican Dominated 83rd session of congress added a joint resolution to add the phrase to our pledge.

My two questions for today:

1) Do references to God in our pledge, currency, national motto (In God we Trust), infringe upon the rights of Atheists, and should we have these references in our country?

2) Is having a national pledge indoctrination? Should we have one at all?


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/10/25/calif-district-to-apologize-to-11-year-old-who-didnt-stand-for-pledge/

Attack on Canadian Parliament

A radical Muslim convert attacked the Canadian parliament on Wednesday.  Thankfully this was stopped and Parliament was able to return to work. This raises two questions,

1) Why did he attack?

2) What will Canada do about it?

As for the first question, my opinion is that he was upset that Canada agreed to join air strikes on the Islamic state. He could be mad that they are attacking people he identifies with.

Should we be bombing ISIS at all? That's another can of worms and a discussion for another day, but I will say this: when we have the capability to bomb other people without using ground soldiers, it makes it far easier to overuse deadly force.

As for the second question, the Prime Minister has already vowed to strengthen laws against terrorism. Should we be expecting a Patriot act style piece of legislation form the Canadian Parliament?

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-29743711

http://www.latimes.com/world/mexico-americas/la-fg-headlines-canadian-prime-minister-to-strengthen-terrorism-laws-in-wake-of-parliament-shooting-20141023-premiumvideo.html

Gay Marriage Appeal Refused to be Heard by Supreme Court. Lower Court Rulings Stand. Gay Marriage Legal in Oklahoma, Indiana, Wisconsin, Virginia, and Utah.

The title of this post says it all, even if it's a bit long winded. By refusing to take the case of these states, gay marriage is legal in these states, as per the ruling of the lower courts.

I imagine it's not very long before it is legal in all states, whether by legislation or judicial ruling.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/06/politics/scotus-same-sex-marriage/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Democracy and Protest in Hong Kong

Hong Kong has an interesting relationship with China. While technically part of China, Hong Kong is a capitalist powerhouse. The official term used for this phenomenon is "One country, two systems."

Hong Kong is due to have elections for its own chief executive. China acknowledges that this is part of their agreement, but with a caveat, candidates who can run must be approved by Beijing.

Understandably, this creates resentment, as Hong Kong's cultural identity is very different than China's and it is unlikely a candidate approved by Beijing would represent Hong Kong well.

Protests ensue. Despite a government deadline for the pro-democracy protestors to leave, many remain. This is a story we will want to keep tabs on for further development.


http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-29494885