(October 25, 2017 at 3:06 pm)Tiberius Wrote:

(October 25, 2017 at 2:57 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I think it is disrespectful if you are not protesting for a particular cause. Not standing up for no other reason than just because you "can't be bothered" is disrespectful. So many people have died for this country and risked their lives for it. Meanwhile someone else can't even be bothered to stand up for 2 minutes? I see that as disrespectdul to those people and especially to those people's families who have to deal with the fear for, and absense/loss of, their loved ones.

Which part of the pledge honors the people who died for the country exactly? It's a pledge of allegiance to the United States, it never mentions the military, veterans, war, etc. Same goes for the national anthem, which again is about the country and not the military.

Besides, this was at a school. It may be different if the pledge or anthem is said at an event honoring the troops, but if it's being said at the start of a school day, it has zero to do with anything military.

Right, it is a pledge of allegiance to this country. But it kinda flies in the face of people who sacrifice/die FOR this country when someone can't even be bothered to stand up during a pledge of allegiance to it.

Anyway, being a military wife, that's how I see it. People have the right to do what they want, but when someone doesn't stand up simply because they don't feel like it, it does hit me with a certain attitude of disrespect to those of us who are sacrificing.

I assume you have no problem with Jehovah's Witnesses who don't participate in such exercises. Right?

It is too bad these idiots are so far removed from the Nazis and WW2, that is what forced ritual looks like. These morons need a history lesson, or they need to move to North Korea.

I would kind of like a pledge to the survival of this planet, from every mutha, cos, we all live here, whatever bullshit we have swallowed.

Naive baby.

(October 25, 2017 at 3:25 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Right, it is a pledge of allegiance to this country. But it kinda flies in the face of people who sacrifice/die FOR this country when someone can't even be bothered to stand up during a pledge of allegiance to it.

Why? There's a massive difference between pledging allegiance to a country and honoring people who sacrifice / die for the country. You can respect the people in the military for their sacrifices and protest the country for the way it is perceived as heading.

Since the pledge has nothing to do with the military and is entirely about the country itself, it makes sense that not standing for the pledge is an indication that the person is not OK with the way the country is heading. It says nothing about their attitude towards the military.

There is a dangerous blend of national identity with the military, and it makes no sense. You can be patriotic and be against the military. You can be pro-military but object to the state of the country.

Quote:Anyway, being a military wife, that's how I see it. People have the right to do what they want, but when someone doesn't stand up simply because they don't feel like it, it does hit me with a certain attitude of disrespect to those of us who are sacrificing.

I think you are suffering from a bias of some kind due to your military background. You associate the pledge, the national anthem, etc. with the military. I can see how refusing to stand for it would come across as disrespectful towards the military, the veterans, the soldiers who died. However, my point is there is no reason to even think that the pledge or national anthem is about the military, because they just aren't. Unless they are specifically used in the context of "and now we'll sing the national anthem in honor of our troops", I don't see how either is not simply about nationalism and the country.

(October 25, 2017 at 3:30 pm)Crossless2.0 Wrote: I assume you have no problem with Jehovah's Witnesses who don't participate in such exercises. Right?

Like i said, people have the right to stay seated, but that doesn't mean I won't find it disrespectful if their reason for doing so is simply because they can't be bothered, and isn't out of genuine protest for a particular cause. I have no idea what a JW's reason would be, since I don't know anything about them.

(October 25, 2017 at 3:45 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I have no idea what a JW's reason would be, since I don't know anything about them.

They don't vote or participate in politics, amongst other beliefs. Would it make any difference, regardless of political/religious/ect affiliation? Why are you defending an act of violence?

(October 25, 2017 at 3:53 pm)LastPoet Wrote:

(October 25, 2017 at 3:45 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I have no idea what a JW's reason would be, since I don't know anything about them.

They don't vote or participate in politics, amongst other beliefs. Would it make any difference, regardless of political/religious/ect affiliation? Why are you defending an act of violence?

No, the difference is the motive.

What act of violence am I defending?

(October 25, 2017 at 3:57 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(October 25, 2017 at 3:53 pm)LastPoet Wrote: They don't vote or participate in politics, amongst other beliefs. Would it make any difference, regardless of political/religious/ect affiliation? Why are you defending an act of violence?

No, the difference is the motive.

What act of violence am I defending?

It's in the thread title.

(October 25, 2017 at 3:58 pm)Crossless2.0 Wrote:

(October 25, 2017 at 3:57 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: No, the difference is the motive.

What act of violence am I defending?

It's in the thread title.

I say "people have the right to stay seated if they want, however, i do find it disrespectful if they stay seated simply because they cant be bothered to stand."

...And somehow that translates to me defending kicking a chair from under a student. Interesting lol.