In which Lori Alexander attempts to rewrite history...

[Koala]

For someone who's "always learning" she sure is doing a good job of ignoring comments citing historical fact. I guess she's only allowing the comments that pat her on the back and tell her what a smart cookie she is.

Eta~ She's not ignoring so much as she's just flat out not posting them.

[MuseMama]

Do the people who rant about the Founding Fathers and what they taught, with regards to supporting one's self within the economy, not realize that they were living in a pre-industrial revolution economy that was completely different?

[Koala]

Do the people who rant about the Founding Fathers and what they taught, with regards to supporting one's self within the economy, not realize that they were living in a pre-industrial revolution economy that was completely different?

This is so rude, but I've got to ask. There was a lady on the old board (right before the switch) who had just had a baby. I think she had a blog, but I lost track of it. Anyway, I always wondered if she followed us over or not. That wasn't you was it? I think her name was Muse something. :)

[CanadianHippie]

For someone who's "always learning" she sure is doing a good job of ignoring comments citing historical fact. I guess she's only allowing the comments that pat her on the back and tell her what a smart cookie she is.

Eta~ She's not ignoring so much as she's just flat out not posting them.

Nothing from my comment either and all I did was ask her for her sources. But then again, that's frightening question when you are pulling things out of your ass.

[lilwriter85]

For someone who's "always learning" she sure is doing a good job of ignoring comments citing historical fact. I guess she's only allowing the comments that pat her on the back and tell her what a smart cookie she is.

Eta~ She's not ignoring so much as she's just flat out not posting them.

She is probably shitting herself because she knows she got things wrong in her blog. She will never admit to not knowing certain facts. As long as her fangirls continue to praise her, she will be fine. In other postings, she has posted comments from people who disagree with her. But in those incidents, the blog postings were about women attending college and stay at home dads.

[dairyfreelife]

Sorta. It's been precedent since the... 40s, I believe, that they can't compel children to recite the Pledge. Some students don't recite it for religious reasons - either because it's making "an idol" of the flag (Adventists and others), or because they aren't supposed to take oaths (Quakers and others) or because it's not their deity (Atheists and others). Some don't wish to recite it for political reasons, they aren't citizens so it's not their flag OR because they feel one or more of the political things stated in it are untrue (do we really have liberty and justice for ALL?) Some very socially conscious students feel that it's an empty ritual and simply don't want to participate in those. And, of course, some just wish to stand out or be different or be mildly disruptive (though, like crazy hair, it's generally not the *student* who is disrupting the class in those cases....)

They can't make you recite the Pledge, they can't make you stand. They CAN require that it be recited every day and that all students sit or stand respectfully if they are not participating.

Now, that's the law. Whether or not schools actually comply with the law in all areas and instances is another issue altogether. I had a teacher once who took umbrage with my refusal to stand (something I haven't done since I was 12 and was not about to start doing senior year!) and, after calling my mother about it, actually LIED to my FACE about what she said. And he got away with it! Like a fool, I didn't confirm his story with her until many years later! "Like" a fool, I like that. I was an unvarnished idiot in that instance, but it never occurred to me that anybody would be so blatantly dishonest about it!

(We compromised on me coming in "late" every day but not being marked as such, but it should never have come to that. Allowing me to stay in my seat would've been far less disruptive to the class.)

What I meant was that schools are still required to do the pledge. Students are not required to say it, no. It's considered disrespectful to not say it where I'm from...toward the country, that is, not toward Christianity like Lori thinks. I do know people who would purposely skip the "under God" part in high school and still do when it's said. I know I do now on the rare occasion I have to say it. :twisted:

I was intending to mean just schools being required to give it. If they didn't, I'm sure there would be an uproar, so I'm assuming it's still said everyday whether students say it or not. My brother did confirm that they had it everyday, so it's still done. Teenagers are fiesty though, so I'm certain some in every high school refuse to say it. :lol:

[Conuly]

Whether or not it's mandated depends on where you are. Many schools in NYC, when I was growing up, didn't require it. To an extent that changed after 9/11, but I'm pretty sure it's still decided by the individual schools.

Really? I grew up SDA and we always said the pledge of allegiance in the SDA schools... I have never heard of an SDA refusing to say the pledge...

Huh, really? Maybe I mean JW's? Sorry to have confused you with each other!

[dairyfreelife]

Whether or not it's mandated depends on where you are. Many schools in NYC, when I was growing up, didn't require it. To an extent that changed after 9/11, but I'm pretty sure it's still decided by the individual schools.

Huh, really? Maybe I mean JW's? Sorry to have confused you with each other!

Not sure about NYC, but it's usually districts that make policies for schools, so it may be a district thing. Living in the Bible Belt and a school not saying the pledge is like...blasphemy! In primary, we used to sing other patriotic songs as well. I knew them by heart by the time I reached secondary. Not that it helps anything or is important though. I forgot some lines of the Star-Stangled Banner and America, The Beautiful a few weeks ago. :oops: I do remember the pledge by heart after five years out of school...I don't think that'll help me in life. "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, (under god), indivisible with liberty and justice for all" isn't really much and isn't serious enough either way for me to really care. I do think Lori's being overly ridiculous about it. It's like two lines and I didn't understand what it really meant until I was in high school anyway, so she's all upset about children saying it...they don't get it. Memorization does not=comprehension.

[SunnyAndrsn]

People knew that if you didn't work hard, you didn't eat. You were rewarded for hard work, not for doing nothing and expecting others to pay your way in life.

Yes, letting children starve is the American way. Let's revoke child labor laws too--might was well have the little moochers get used to hard work now.

[kb2]

Since you say the pledge every day from early elementary school on, it's not like reciting it is some moment that you have every time you recite it, when you ponder how much you *sniff* love the United States of America. The national anthem gets more respect before a sporting event than the pledge gets every day from wiggling young kids or mumbling teenagers.

[Trynn]

Whether or not it's mandated depends on where you are. Many schools in NYC, when I was growing up, didn't require it. To an extent that changed after 9/11, but I'm pretty sure it's still decided by the individual schools.

Huh, really? Maybe I mean JW's? Sorry to have confused you with each other!

Probably the JWs. No worries, I wasn't offended, I was just curious if maybe you had met the 1 Adventist in 10,000 who thinks the flag is an idol. That would be an interesting story.

[Conuly]

Since you say the pledge every day from early elementary school on, it's not like reciting it is some moment that you have every time you recite it, when you ponder how much you *sniff* love the United States of America. The national anthem gets more respect before a sporting event than the pledge gets every day from wiggling young kids or mumbling teenagers.

Reason number 7 why I dislike it.

Really, if it's so important to these people, why don't they put their money where their mouths are? Hang up a flag at home, line up the family daily, and say the pledge before getting on the bus and after dinner.

[FrauGringa]

I'll just slip this in here...

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-january-5-2010/even-better-than-the-real-thing

[Hane]

Reason number 7 why I dislike it.

Really, if it's so important to these people, why don't they put their money where their mouths are? Hang up a flag at home, line up the family daily, and say the pledge before getting on the bus and after dinner.

Question for people better-informed than I am: Do members of Congress recite the pledge before each session? If they don't, they damn well should.

[alba]

Reason number 7 why I dislike it.

Really, if it's so important to these people, why don't they put their money where their mouths are? Hang up a flag at home, line up the family daily, and say the pledge before getting on the bus and after dinner.

Because it's not important that their families say it, it's important that everyone's families do!

[Conuly]

Because it's not important that their families say it, it's important that everyone's families do!

Or their children, anyway. Grown-ups don't need to assert their loyalty 180 days of the year.

[debrand]

She still hasn't published my comment. Oh well.

[B5SnowDog]

Yes, letting children starve is the American way. Let's revoke child labor laws too--might was well have the little moochers get used to hard work now.

"Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?"

[OnceModestTwiceShy]

I lost my shit over having to recite the pledge when I was a junior in HS. I was a freshly minted atheist (right before a detour into Orthodox Judaism and back into atheism, but that's another story) and took umbrage at the "under God" part, and then started dissecting the whole concept of having to recite a pledge. I wrote a long essay about it and gave it to my history teacher instead of some other assignment we had to do. Luckily he was totally cool with it and even agreed with me. It (my piece) ended up getting mostly positive attention, but I remember that my parents, Soviet immigrants, were slightly freaked out. I overheard them whispering worriedly that I was politically "radical". But they were cool about it too.

Kudos to the point on fundies idealizing pre-idustrial society. They don't understand that many of the things they blame on "feminism" and "liberalism", like the breakup of the extended family, the demise of cottage industry, the independence of working women, etc. are actually outcomes of industrialization and the rise of capitalism - which, by the way, goes hand in hand with the rise of Protestantism. So it's not all so black and white as they like to pretend.

[jenny_islander]

Yes. Factory girls became factory girls because women's income was always vital to family welfare, the cottage industries that mothers could do with their children at their feet had been outcompeted by factory-made goods, and so the income of unmarried daughters was more important than ever. They could become maids, sleep in unheated rooms next to the attic, get up at chicken o'clock and go to bed at oh-dark-thirty, be treated like furniture, and have no recourse against the whims of their employers--or their employers' sons. They could become prostitutes and deal with johns, pimps, madams, cops, and disease. Or they could make good money at the factory.

[Conuly]

Or they could make good money at the factory.

Well, comparatively speaking.

[geniebelle6901]

Lori needs to Google Jamestown and Roanoke. I won't even bother post that on her site, because it would just go way over her pretty little head.

[alba]

Kudos to the point on fundies idealizing pre-idustrial society. They don't understand that many of the things they blame on "feminism" and "liberalism", like the breakup of the extended family, the demise of cottage industry, the independence of working women, etc. are actually outcomes of industrialization and the rise of capitalism - which, by the way, goes hand in hand with the rise of Protestantism. So it's not all so black and white as they like to pretend.

Actually, feminism/liberalism has actually in a way aided the traditional family unit. In the 19th-century, women and children were paid less than men, so in A LOT of urban working class families the mother and older children would work but the father couldn't find employment as factories and the like wouldn't pay men. In some huge percentage of families the father stayed at home and the mother worked. Thanks to us crazy feminist liberals, it's now illegal to hire or not hire someone on the basis of gender or pay them differently (though unfortunately it does still happen), which means fewer women are working because their husbands can't find employment. Sure, they're working for other reasons, like because they want to, because they don't have a husband, or because the family needs two incomes to get by or live to the standard they prefer, but more women, especially mothers, have the choice to stay at home with their children than they did 100 or 150 years ago.

ETA: Of course, nowadays the working woman is actually allowed to keep her money rather than have it become her husband's property.

[OnceModestTwiceShy]

Actually, feminism/liberalism has actually in a way aided the traditional family unit. In the 19th-century, women and children were paid less than men, so in A LOT of urban working class families the mother and older children would work but the father couldn't find employment as factories and the like wouldn't pay men. In some huge percentage of families the father stayed at home and the mother worked. Thanks to us crazy feminist liberals, it's now illegal to hire or not hire someone on the basis of gender or pay them differently (though unfortunately it does still happen), which means fewer women are working because their husbands can't find employment. Sure, they're working for other reasons, like because they want to, because they don't have a husband, or because the family needs two incomes to get by or live to the standard they prefer, but more women, especially mothers, have the choice to stay at home with their children than they did 100 or 150 years ago.

ETA: Of course, nowadays the working woman is actually allowed to keep her money rather than have it become her husband's property.

Great point.

[2xx1xy1JD]

Did the good ole days include the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire of 1911?

http://www.historybuff.com/library/refshirtwaist.html

Immigrant women worked, Lori.