FredTalk Discussion Forum Fredericksburg.com
Mon, Dec. 01, 2008 | make us your homepage
ADVERTISE - Alerts - Mobile - Closings - Contact
    YOUR COMMUNITY:  Caroline | Culpeper | King George | Fredericksburg | Orange | Spotsylvania | Stafford | Westmoreland

advertisement

advertisement

 

 



'I badger allegiance'

Make a post about this story on FredTalk. Get a printer-friendly version of this page. E-mail this story to a friend.
Del. Mark Cole's Pledge of Allegiance bill is a badgering attempt to compel conformity

Date published: 1/13/2005

Mark Cole's Pledge bill would boost conformity at the expense of conscience

IF A SPOTSYLVANIA public school student were being com- pelled by his teacher, as part of a class exercise, to read aloud from a work of modern fiction that contained curse words, and such utterances violated the student's reli- gious code regarding blasphemy, what would Del. Mark Cole say? It's a good bet, based on Mr. Cole's own beliefs and legislative history, that he would strongly defend the child's right to opt out of the readings.

And rightly so. The Constitution's First Amendment--that is, the addition to the document the Founders thought most critical--protects individuals' conscience from the coercions of government officials, including those who stand in front of a class, even when those coercions serve a good end. An appreciation for the truths found in contemporary literature, for example. Or the inculcation of patriotism.

In the latter case, alas, Mr. Cole would inculcate away with little sympathy for individual conviction. In reaction to a Ni River seventh-grader's refusal to stand during the Pledge of Allegiance, and the Spotsylvania School Board's recent policy change acknowledging that the boy's conduct is permitted by state law, Mr. Cole, a Spotsylvania Republican, would change that law. In a bill filed Jan. 10, he would direct school authorities at least to notify the parents of any child who spurned the pledging ritual (as though such information couldn't be shared during a routine parent-teacher conference); school boards could also require parental consent before allowing a child to sit out the Pledge, or, standing, to remain mute.

In seeking these governmental impediments to free expression, Mr. Cole displays a fickle affection for the fruits of the First Amendment, which shields both speech and religion. The two liberties are so related, in fact, that the U.S. Supreme Court in 1943, midway through World War II, voided state laws requiring students to recite the Pledge, based on a suit brought by the parents of three Jehovah's Witnesses children. (Witnesses, whom, incidentally, the Nazis persecuted almost as ardently as they did the Jews, believe that glorifying earthly symbols constitutes idolatry, a sin inviting hellfire.)


1  2  Next Page  

Date published: 1/13/2005