Pledge of allegiance at UConn games | Page 5 | The Boneyard

Pledge of allegiance at UConn games

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Aug 31, 2011
Messages
92
Reaction Score
78
As I said I do not believe that. Why do you insist that I do? I believe they would not be out of line to say something to the person about being disrespectful. (I personally probably would not. You usually don't get very far with jerks/disrespectful people.) But shouting would be disrespectful. I am against being disrespectful, unlike you who seems to believe it's ok sometimes.

Again, why do you insist on someone who is being disrespectful, be given respect? And that it is ok for this person to be disrespectful but not another?)

You're operating on two very different definitions of disrespect. To delve any deeper into debate with questions like "Again, why do you insist on someone who is being disrespectful, be given respect?" is completely fruitless if you haven't established a common meaning of disrespect, and from what I can tell your definitions of disrespect are too far apart for that to happen.
 

meyers7

You Talkin’ To Me?
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
23,499
Reaction Score
60,789
You're operating on two very different definitions of disrespect. To delve any deeper into debate with questions like "Again, why do you insist on someone who is being disrespectful, be given respect?" is completely fruitless if you haven't established a common meaning of disrespect, and from what I can tell your definitions of disrespect are too far apart for that to happen.

I agree, we do seem to have different views on respect/disrespect. ( I think I stated that didn't I??)
 

RoyDodger

Retired in the Southwest
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
574
Reaction Score
434
I was going to let this go but it's been bothering me so here goes...

I am dismayed that someone would think it's OK to harass and intimidate a person who has a different belief or who thinks differently than they do - and call it patriotism. I dislike bullies in any venue, whether it's at a basketball game or on the Boneyard, and that includes verbal bullies.

How have we gotten to the point where we respect, some to the point of revering, a flag more than other human beings and how is this in any way OK? It's not patriotism, it's abusing the flag by wrapping oneself in it in order to justify bad behavior.

Nan, absolutely wonderful response. Thank you.
 

Kibitzer

Sky Soldier
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
5,676
Reaction Score
24,714
I have never been more proud to be a Boneyarder as I watched this thread develop and watched people with widely divergent views express themselves candidly but always respectfully and courteously (even when it hurt a bit) to those who most certainly held an opposing perspective.

Please, if we disagree, let's continue to avoid being disagreeable.
 

UConnCat

Wise Woman
Joined
Aug 23, 2011
Messages
13,900
Reaction Score
87,060
As we expected, the media was all over the pledge issue tonight. John A's latest reports that indeed reciting the pledge before UConn sporting events is the brainchild of AD Pendergast. Geno weighed in with his typical humor but a surprising lack of historical knowledge on the pledge. Geno, a history buff, clearly has some reading to do on the subject. No Geno, Thomas Jefferson did not write the pledge of allegiance; nor did any of the other founding fathers.

Bria Hartley thinks it's okay; she knows the words. Thanks John.

http://www.courant.com/sports/uconn...ce-before-every-game-20111130,0,5830556.story
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
4,416
Reaction Score
12,824
It wasn't meant to be a serious comment - you'll see that when his postgame presser is put online.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
76
Reaction Score
138
It started at the early games at Gampel. I think it started at Veteran's Day because they had Vets doing it. It has nothing to do with sponsorship that I know of.
 

Icebear

Andlig Ledare
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
18,784
Reaction Score
19,227
Interesting to learn the origin of its use and how Pendergast's involvement came about. My most regular use has been in a similar context at our Lion's Club meetings where we open with it and My Country Tis of Thee.
 

Phil

Stats Geek
Joined
Aug 25, 2011
Messages
4,449
Reaction Score
5,780
I have never been more proud to be a Boneyarder as I watched this thread develop and watched people with widely divergent views express themselves candidly but always respectfully and courteously (even when it hurt a bit) to those who most certainly held an opposing perspective.

Please, if we disagree, let's continue to avoid being disagreeable.

Good point. I cringed a bit when I saw the subject, thinking it would generate some strong repsonses. And it has, but it hasn't (yet) degenerated.
 
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
673
Reaction Score
1,018
I'm a veteran, but are they going to pass out american flags to wave during the game next? SHEESH!
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
2,156
Reaction Score
1,694
Only. In. Connecticut.

It's "freedom of religion" not "freedom from religion."

Don't like it? Do what UConn fans of all sports are famous for, and casually arrive after tipoff.

I bet Texas A&M's players will gladly participate next week.

Last week at start of Manchester Road Race I was pleasantly surprised when crowd of runners/fans joined in with the anthem. For a second I thought I wasn't in CT anymore. Sadly, this reminds me I am.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
1,987
Reaction Score
5,364
Only. In. Connecticut.

It's "freedom of religion" not "freedom from religion."

Don't like it? Do what UConn fans of all sports are famous for, and casually arrive after tipoff.

I bet Texas A&M's players will gladly participate next week.

Last week at start of Manchester Road Race I was pleasantly surprised when crowd of runners/fans joined in with the anthem. For a second I thought I wasn't in CT anymore. Sadly, this reminds me I am.

actually not "only in connecticut", because in mass. we also appreciate freedom FROM mention of god at our athletic contests. except maybe when yelling at referees.
 

meyers7

You Talkin’ To Me?
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
23,499
Reaction Score
60,789
actually not "only in connecticut", because in mass. we also appreciate freedom FROM mention of god at our athletic contests. except maybe when yelling at referees.

Oh the horrors, someone mentioned God. geez some people.
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
2,156
Reaction Score
1,694
Way too much energy/time expended on this issue because folks are set in their beliefs. IMO dont think pledge=prayer, nor does paying cash (In God We Trust).
One of the many divisive issues between blue/red states. It's too bad.
 

mr006

.
Joined
Sep 6, 2011
Messages
318
Reaction Score
240
Way too much energy/time expended on this issue because folks are set in their beliefs. IMO dont think pledge=prayer, nor does paying cash (In God We Trust). One of the many divisive issues between blue/red states. It's too bad.

a) Do you think that both sides have spent too much time on and energy on it?
b) I don't think that "Only. In. Connecticut" is fair. After all, we ARE Connecticut. This is how we are. Shouldn't have to apologize for it. There's 49 other states (and a multitude of other nations) with other options.
c) I also am very pleasantly surprised and pleased that this thread has made it this far without having to be locked. Good job!
d) @Boonton: "We also appreciate freedom FROM mention of god at our athletic contests. except maybe when yelling at referees." Great line! :)
 
Joined
Aug 31, 2011
Messages
92
Reaction Score
78
It's "freedom of religion" not "freedom from religion."

This would matter, if there weren't such a thing as separation of church and state...
And before anyone mentions that the phrase "separation of church and state" isn't actually found in the constitution, neither is "freedom of religion".
 

Icebear

Andlig Ledare
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
18,784
Reaction Score
19,227
Oh the horrors, someone mentioned God. geez some people.
It is not empty "horrors" at the mention of God for many but the casual "enslavement" or "attachment" of God to nationalistic ritual and "endorsement" of casual athletic activities or to slogans on money. President Theodore Roosevelt considered it sacrilege in that manner.

In many ways it is the use of God's name in a trivialized manner. Israel and many Jews to this day held and hold God's name as so inviolate as to never speak or write its representation. In contrast we speak as if it is such a trivial manner as not even to be worthy of notice or bother when we toss it into the midst of a public ceremony.
 

Icebear

Andlig Ledare
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
18,784
Reaction Score
19,227
This would matter, if there weren't such a thing as separation of church and state...
And before anyone mentions that the phrase "separation of church and state" isn't actually found in the constitution, neither is "freedom of religion".

As you said,
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

No mention of either the terms freedom of or from religion.

It's "freedom of religion" not "freedom from religion.

Sorry, but you are wrong, it is freedom from a government establishment of religion held in tension with a promise of the right of free exercise. The reasons were well debated among the founding fathers. Madison, particularly, gave light to the concerns in Federalist #10 which discusses factionalism including religion, as well as, the tension between democracy and a republic and the needs to protect all from the forces of factions and their attempts to power and force of action or compliance by use of government compulsion.

It is commonly referred to as "the establishment" clause.
 

meyers7

You Talkin’ To Me?
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
23,499
Reaction Score
60,789
It is not empty "horrors" at the mention of God for many but the casual "enslavement" or "attachment" of God to nationalistic ritual and "endorsement" of casual athletic activities or to slogans on money. President Theodore Roosevelt considered it sacrilege in that manner.

In many ways it is the use of God's name in a trivialized manner. Israel and many Jews to this day held and hold God's name as so inviolate as to never speak or write its representation. In contrast we speak as if it is such a trivial manner as not even to be worthy of notice or bother when we toss it into the midst of a public ceremony.

Good points.
 

meyers7

You Talkin’ To Me?
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
23,499
Reaction Score
60,789
As you said,
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

No mention of either the terms freedom of or from religion.

thereof gets pretty close. And gets the point being made.

Sorry, but you are wrong,

Nope he's (she's) right on this one.
 

Icebear

Andlig Ledare
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
18,784
Reaction Score
19,227
thereof gets pretty close. And gets the point being made.

Nope he's (she's) right on this one.

"and the freedom of exercise thereof" is indeed close as a personal right but not as a governmental right. The government should not take actions involving these things but it is reserved to you and me. The Lemon test provides the legal measure of all these things. The event of Nebraska and PSU at their game were protected but the authority of the school to organize daily prayer is not.
 

SubbaBub

Your stupidity is ruining my country.
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
32,163
Reaction Score
25,040
Coming at it from another angle...anyone here recite their marriage pledge before an athletic activity?

Pledges outside the context of the legal system of any sort are silly exercises only meant to satisfy the ego of people you need to hear such things.

I would ask the person offended by someone not submitting to removing their hat this, "Why is your sensibility more important than the other persons?" I would think it falls directly under the banner of mind your own business.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk
 

RoyDodger

Retired in the Southwest
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
574
Reaction Score
434
As you said,
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

No mention of either the terms freedom of or from religion.

Sorry, but you are wrong, it is freedom from a government establishment of religion held in tension with a promise of the right of free exercise. The reasons were well debated among the founding fathers. Madison, particularly, gave light to the concerns in Federalist #10 which discusses factionalism including religion, as well as, the tension between democracy and a republic and the needs to protect all from the forces of factions and their attempts to power and force of action or compliance by use of government compulsion.

It is commonly referred to as "the establishment" clause.

Since the days I was in school in NYC (I graduated from HS in 1961) and was once accused by a teacher of being disloyal to the US because I refused to say the pledge of allegiance and wouldn't sing a song that included references to "God" (this was pre-Abington School District vs. Schempp-1963), I am keenly aware of the dangers that come from the government forcing particular views about religion on the public. The use of the term "under God" in the pledge of allegiance was a rather sad result of the McCarthy era when a very weak Congress had to prove to itself that they weren't Communists.

Although I suspect the courts would find that the saying of the pledge at a UConn home basketball game was not a violation of the first amendment because no one is forced to attend, it's my opinion that public institutions (of which UConn is certainly one) have no business imposing religious or political views on anyone at any university sponsored event. As I've said before, it is accepted practice to sing and/or stand for the national anthem. I have no problem with that. But when the government starts to impose any form of religion (and references to "God" are a form of religion) on an audience that was simply attending to see a sporting event, it has gone too far because it offends those who disagree and creates an atmosphere of hostility which is reflected somewhat in the thankfully civil comments on this board.

Ruskin argued that it is freedom of religion, not freedom "from" religion. Well, Ruskin, sorry it's both. The freedom "of" religion, includes the choice of not having religion. And the right to attend a government sponsored event without religious views being forced down one's throat.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
335
Guests online
2,793
Total visitors
3,128

Forum statistics

Threads
159,271
Messages
4,186,450
Members
10,058
Latest member
Huskie BB


.
Top Bottom