Thread: Presidential speech to our children.

Originally Posted by Wildtim

What about it?

That was a nice piece of brainwashing they tried to impart on the kids
a) swearing to the flag/ being indivisible.
b) foisting 'God' on the people.

a) is psy-ops tactics and meant to silence / discourage dissenters. People who disagree with the flag bearer are automatically unpatriotic.
b) the US government is supposed to insure -freedom- of religion, not to foist it on people.

Originally Posted by Wildtim

Yes conservative kids. A major topic of discussion on the bus was who they would vote for, of course their opinion was based on their parent but thats beside the point.

The school system was deliberately passing out campaign literature favoring one candidate during an election. Had the school put a commercial on television with the same wording as the coloring book it would have been illegal. But because it was a "educational project" the school got to endorse a candidate and campaign for him with no repercussions.

The George Washington example is completely irrelevant, as he was not campaigning for the office at the time. Thats my problem with this, not that there were pictures colored and reports written, but that they were one sided, politically motivated and during an election.

Do these elementary students vote in the elections?

Do you think they won't ever see people/organizations passing out literature favoring a particular candidate when they're actually eligible to vote? It happens on college campuses every election.

I think you're confusing the historic nature of Obama's campaign with a political agenda. Does this school have a history of promoting only the Democratic candidates in previous elections? If this past election had been John Kerry vs. Colin Powell or Condoleeza Rice, whose picture do you think they'd be coloring in? My bet would be on Powell or Rice, and not because they're Republicans.

I've read this thread with a lot of interest. And, like many of you, I'm stunned that there are people that are offended that the President of the United States would dare address the young people of this country to try to inspire them to work hard and be successful. There comes a point where people have to get past their personaly biases and realize that, like him or not, he's doing what a President is supposed to do: trying to lead this country to greatness.

Irrespective of if you agree with him or not, like him or not, trust him or not, an objective person should be able to appreciate the message being delivered to our children from a product of poverty that (through hard work and education) ascended to the highest office in the land despite being named Barack Hussein Obama (not to mention being an African American). I remember being disgusted when the Dems were being so hateful to Bush, and I find it equally distasteful the way that Obama is being treated.

Originally Posted by Bruno

A government wanting its subjects to declare themselves subjects of 'God' is not acting out its defined role. It tries to foist religion on the people.

Yes, that's true. It isn't a secular nation. But it isn't foisting religion either.

It's a nation founded on the principle that government should protect our God-given rights. People can reject God and the government will still protect their God-given rights.

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

the principle that government should protect our God-given rights. People can reject God and the government will still protect their God-given rights.

This made me think of how things are in my place of work. The union protects the rights of all staff, even for those staff who choose to reject union membership.

In that way it seems quite a socialist philosophy.

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

Yes, that's true. It isn't a secular nation. But it isn't foisting religion either.

It's a nation founded on the principle that government should protect our God-given rights. People can reject God and the government will still protect their God-given rights.

I didn't get my rights from any god. That god stuff should be taken out of the pledge of allegiance, too. "Separation of church and state" is evident, which is good, but as a proud American who does not believe in a God, I find it particularly insulting that this "man in the sky" stuff is shoved down people's throats as kids. Where's all that talk about encouraging critical thinking now?

IMO, we should treat religion like political affiliation. Either you're one way or the other. There shouldn't be "brainwashing" of our children.

Originally Posted by Oglethorpe

as a proud American who does not believe in a God, I find it particularly insulting that this "man in the sky" stuff is shoved down people's throats as kids.

Well, without getting into a religious discussion, I can still say that I pulled what I said from the declaration of independence. Exactly how the pledge of allegiance includes the words "under God" I cannot say for sure.

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

Well, without getting into a religious discussion, I can still say that I pulled what I said from the declaration of independence. Exactly how the pledge of allegiance includes the words "under God" I cannot say for sure.

At least it's the declaration of independence and not the constitution.

Fun pledge of allegiance facts:

The addition of the phrase "under God" in 1954 was championed primarily by the Knights of Columbus.

The pledge was written in 1892 by Francis Bellamy, notable socialist.

This is how schoolchildren used to salute the flag during the pledge:

Originally Posted by northpaw

Fun pledge of allegiance facts:

The addition of the phrase "under God" in 1954 was championed primarily by the Knights of Columbus.

The pledge was written in 1892 by Francis Bellamy, notable socialist.

This is how schoolchildren used to salute the flag during the pledge:

Hah! No one has further nailed one of my posts home than you, sir. Thanks!