Pledges of Allegiance

[Paidion]

United States allows dual citizenship also. After my American wife moved to Canada, she became a Canadian citizen. She retained her U.S. citizenship, and so is a dual citizen.

[SteveF]

Steve F, if that is the oath required to become a U.S. citizen, how can the fact be explained that many Canadians have become dual citizens of both countries? Apparently the United States accepts them, though they continue to be citizens of Canada and "bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors..."

Are these pledges meaningless?

I just read this interesting article. It appears to some the oath is meaningless.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/atheist-immigr ... cTrTfmTjoJ

[jriccitelli]

Ah once again its time to celebrate and give thanks for our freedom from big oppressive governments and high taxes!
Celebrate now, because it maybe soon when we will get arrested for believing in freedom, freedom of religion and worship, and in America.

(Will this post cause me to get a tax audit?)

[thrombomodulin]

But isn't it the case that small government and freedom were lost long ago to big government and a high tax burden? I just can't see it as valid to describe our country as being free when government spending exceeds 40% of GDP, and the remaining 60% of private sector activity is highly regulated. Consider the central banks destruction of a persons ability to save, the Federal income tax, regulatory capture, rent seeking, occupational licensing, subsidies to farms and other favored industries, aid to foreign dictators, renditioning, FDR's and LBJ's various government programs that have monotonically grown, the number of citizens who rely on government checks for their sustenance, that virtually all restraints the constitution placed on government, including the bill of rights, are now ignored. Shall I go on? The 4th is a good holiday to remember better days that have long since past into history.

[jriccitelli]

My comment was tongue in cheek, I believe any taxes besides basic civil needs are extortion and robbery.

now i have to grab my lighter and fire extinguisher and go celebrate. God bless you all.

[jriccitelli]

I like your post Thomb and agree with the failure of Govt. I did not mean for anyone to think I was in favor of our current administration (absolutely not); in fact that is why I am even more adamant about Patriotism (I hold rather a return to our foundational principles). I can’t agree with even half of the past decisions put forth by our Govt, nor do I trust Govt as a whole. What I hold to is: the ideal of Freedom, and control by the people. Although a vague concept for the immoral and corrupt, I think it is clear enough and good enough to be a foundation. The semantics of freedom and limited Govt, I believe were well enough defined in the Declaration of Independence;

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes…

I feel the Declaration of Independence is so far the best of our human abilities to form a more perfect Union among men; this is the ideal of Patriotism/Americanism. This is not support of Govt. - this is an ideal foundation for ‘freedom from Govt.’ for people, despite any oppressive Govt.

Just because men will worsen and become corrupt, we cannot give up in the pursuit of what is right. So isn’t patriotism the ideal founded on the opening paragraphs of the Declaration? I do not see how any form of allegiance to this ideal, could be un-Christian or wrong. Much like the oath of marriage, it is not written in scripture, it is only a verbal ideal that we agree best defines Gods best interest for us in this area of life.

We do agree then?

[thrombomodulin]

So isn’t patriotism the ideal founded on the opening paragraphs of the Declaration?

No, I wouldn't say that it is, but perhaps this is just semantics. The dictionary defines patriotism is "Love of and devotion to one's country". The declaration wasn't about loving a government - it was about rejecting a government. I would reserve the use of term patriotism to describe a love of some particular thing which is a positively affirmed, or something which positively exists. I wouldn't use patriotism to describe a love of a negative (that which ought not be, or that which doesn't exist). If you think otherwise, then I would like to ask if would agree with the notion that anarcho-capitialists, who reject all governments altogether, should be considered the most patriotic among us all?

I feel the Declaration of Independence is so far the best of our human abilities to form a more perfect Union among men; this is the ideal of Patriotism/Americanism. .... I do not see how any form of allegiance to this ideal, could be un-Christian or wrong. Much like the oath of marriage, it is not written in scripture, it is only a verbal ideal that we agree best defines Gods best interest for us in this area of life.

It is true that the declaration affirms the objective of securing "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness", but it didn't form a new union, and it did not make any positive statements about what government should do. The problem at hand is that any action government takes in some way infringes upon either private property or personal liberty. Hence my concerns about allegiance are related to the implementation. What particular actions might a true patriot actually do or approve of being done? Can you identify one or more particulars? How do we know that those actions are truly justified? But if no actions are ever to be affirmed by, related to, or derived from the pledge - then what's the point of saying the pledge at all?

[jriccitelli]

The Dictionary probably isn’t the best place for a definition, just as with Bible definitions the context of 'the document' will give the best definition.
The 'founding' document is the Declaration, and subsequent documents define the Govt. not the ideal ("...for which it stands"). The Declaration was written first, and the rest not written till it was deemed necessary, 8-10 years later. I did not mention anything about other countries; I guess I should say American Patriot. (The alternative I guess was Nationalist, something I certainly am not)

I am having a hard time believing there was ‘such’ a different understanding of Patriotism, or what some understand the flag to represent. But this is true with many things, alas.
Me and my own father, and mother, disagreed on a number of US political policies but neither of us ever dissolved to not be in agreement over the devotion to our core value as Americans – freedom – freedom and the necessary agreements that families all share. As much as I love individual freedom, civil society neccesitates “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”. Even in our homes we have freedoms, but we deem necessary certain rules to make living together fair: close the refrigerator door, leave some milk, put out the trash, walk the dog, etc. but none of our disagreements over home management is enough to dissolve our desire to be free citizens in our home, and no one in our home would agree that one adult should oppress or tax the others.

If you think otherwise, then I would like to ask if would agree with the notion that anarcho-capitialists, who reject all governments altogether, should be considered the most patriotic among us all?

So, no. The Declaration says: “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men…” if I didn’t want a Government, I could not be a Patriot (I do not think such a thing as Anarcho-Capitalistism could exist on anything but a pirate ship, but still they too have captains, I guess).

What particular actions might a true patriot actually do or approve of being done?

Although “these truths are (not) self evident” to everyone, anything that would be unfair or dangerous to a member of this union (like a family) should not be approved. Yet in agreement we act, and not as individuals. I agree to compromise for the sake of unity for in other words: the ‘family’ of Americans, so to speak (if it is so bad here, then I will move to another place).

Can you identify one or more particulars?

In no way at all do I agree with same sex marriage, but I will go along if such is agreed. I disagree with much of the political in our Country but I do not see any of it conflicting with my ‘love’ for a country who’s ideal was “that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”. This is still my ideal, and nothing since 1776 can change that.

“… to the Republic for which it stands, one nation (under God), indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

I guess I have to 'emphasis' that I define Americanism/Patriotism as defined by “for which it stands”, that being the foremost document – The Declaration of Independence – a unique document, and a unique country established on “liberty and justice for all”.

I am not even talking about the Constitution, or following documents (yet, I believe they were framed with the Declaration in mind).

How do we know that those actions are truly justified?

Unfortunately it does fall back to personal values, but I think that is what the whole concept protects. We can agree to vote, disagree, or argue, but any actions among our family of citizens must be peaceful and fair, and willing to compromise (… such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate…)

But if no actions are ever to be affirmed by, related to, or derived from the pledge - then what's the point of saying the pledge at all?

To agree that I agree with the following:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness…” (… for which it stands)
And I believe that in it's core value, or most foundationary form, to me the flag stands for 'freedom', despite Govt.
(i.e. If Hitler were to wave around a 'cross' for example, it would not change what I, or my family define the Cross to stand for)
(and Hitler did, I know)

[thrombomodulin]

if I didn't want a Government, I could not be a Patriot

Why not? For is it not the case that you are have defined patriotism solely as adherence to certain ideals about what government should be prohibited from doing?

The declaration of independence affirms the ideal of certain unalienable rights: individual freedom, life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness.

Anarcho-capitalists affirm the ideal of certain unalienable rights: individual freedom, life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness.

Granted archists and anarchists disagree about the means that should be employed to attain these ideals, but the ideals themselves are held in common -- and the Ancap's takes them further. So if I'm understanding your definition of a patriot correctly, then the shoe fits: Ancaps prohibit more government actions than the founding founders, and thus Ancap's are indeed more truly patriots than are minarchists.

What particular actions might a true patriot actually do or approve of being done? Can you identify one or more particulars?

1. anything unfair or dangerous to a member of this union (like a family) should not be approved
2. In no way at all do I agree with ... but I will go along if such is agreed

How do we know that those actions are truly justified?

Unfortunately it does fall back to personal values, but I think that is what the whole concept protects

1. Matthew 20:1-16. A landowner desires to pay employee "A" twice the wage rate that he pays to "B" for the same work. This is unfair. You are affirming government should deprive the landowner of his freedom to use his own money as he sees fit - right?
2. What actions of yours would comprise "going along"? Isn't this diametrically opposed to the idea that "the whole concept" here protects your ability to act upon your personal values?

[jriccitelli]

I don’t think our Founding fathers had much of anything, or nothing, in common with Anarcho-capitalists (??). Our founding fathers set up a Govt I have never seen anything suggesting an 'anti-Govt' gesture among them. I think that is a real stretch to even suggest such an idea.
I think our founding fathers defined what a patriot is, the term which was a rebellious term in Britain, the Americans took the term for themselves.

This is unfair. You are affirming government should deprive the landowner of his freedom to use his own money as he sees fit - right?

How do you get this from my saying we should defend what is right, that means obeying the rules, voting, being a taxpayer, etc...

How do you get this from saying the pledge of allegiance? The worker has the freedom to work for someone else, he can quit, employers are free to pay what they want, etc. just as our founders operated back then. I am neither opposed to unions, yet I believe in the freedom to choose if you don’t want to.

Anyways it is just a pledge, it is not a blood oath, it is not saying you denounce anything as if your committing perjury.
I still perceive that most everyone says the pledge based on what they learned in 4th -6th grade history books about the USA and it's foundation, and nothing there says they will be held to the pledge – or else (or else what?).