I remember even as a kid thinking it was weird, but my logical hangup was not understanding why you would be loyal to a flag instead of the country the flag represents (putting aside the question of whether one should be unconditionally and arbitrarily loyal to any one country in the first place).  As an adult I have the language to see the Pledge and the pressure on children to say it as indocrination.  I haven't researched the origins of the Pledge itself, but I have read that most other countries do not have a similar custom.  Thoughts?

http://www.ushistory.org/document...

I don't find it weird but then again we did it in school every morning at the beginning of class all the way through high school, public and private catholic schools. In hindsight it is kind of weird showing allegiance to a flag instead of the people. That should give you a good idea how well the indoctrination has worked, I haven't even second guessed why I say it, I just do. Some of it isn't even that applicable anymore, "one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all", I dont think we are all that United at this point and haven't been for at least a decade.

It's always been steeped in controversy. And it hasn't always had the same words. Under God was added in 1954, about fifty years after the original was created.

Oh, and one of the creators suggested this salute.

Man, all of those responses were fascinating, thank you.

And to the republic for which it stands.

Not just the flag.

Having children that don't comprehend the meaning do it seems wrong. It's like having a child sign a contract they don't understand.

Oh, right.  That is a good point that I was overlooking (that the republic is mentioned).  Doesn't change my feelings on the flag part of it, or the idea of pledging allegiance in general, but definitely worth pointing out.
 

The idea of pledging allegiance doesn't bother me if the person doing so understands completely and isn't forced. I'm sure it's done ignorantly more often than not. 

It's like at the end of braveheart. He wouldn't pledge allegiance.

I mean if you want to pledge allegiance to the flag or a fork or whatever go right ahead. 

I never understood it and when I went into high school I was able to refuse to say it because of the whole "god" part since I don't have a religion. I still had to stand for the pledge though.

I miss when TV channels signed off for the night with the National Anthem

And it is no coincidence that the Bellamy salute was officially 'banned' sometimes during the WW2, and the hand to heart salute became the official way to pledge allegiance to the US in public event.

It made more sense to pledge allegiance when America was not the dominant superpower and its existence among other competing nations depended on the American people sticking together for the strength.

Nowadays the world is becoming more globalized. Regulations, standards, and institutional norms are getting pretty homogeneous among all westernized nations. So it may seem odd to be pledging allegiance to any one western country when we all seem to stand for the same things more or less

I dont find it weird at all. America is awesome!

I don't think you should be obligated to stand for anything so yeah it's weird.

It's no different than playing the National Anthem before a Baseball game. Doesn't bother me at all.

Do people screaming things during the national anthem bother you?

I mean if it's a national team it makes sense because you're playing for the country. But i don't see why it should be played at domestic baseball (either). It seems weird and irrelevant to have it there and not even in a political sense for/against but just in and of itself.

 

He's talking about O's fans well and pretty much anyone that likes sports in Baltimore 

Baseball was considered USA's national sport, so it makes sense the national anthem is played before a national sports game. Whether folks consider baseball that still is up for debate (it's prob football now). It's probably still done now for tradition.

In America we only have the luxury of freedom to choose not to stand today because of the people who stood together (figuratively, not literally) and fought the American revolution for their freedoms.

Its funny though, many of the things that they fought the revolution for are slowly creeping back into society as homegrown issues. Things are still relatively good now, but I can see the potential for a grim future  
 

Brainwashing your population works best when started at the youngest age possible.

If this is brainwashing then it's clearly not working.

Nah you'd probably have that shit either way by now. I mean England seems to be doing pretty ok, no? And after all there was a civil war so clearly not everyone saw eye to eye domestically either. If the South won it there'd be a somewhat different political trajectory and yet still you'd then consider that version legitimate and baked in "freedom" sentiments for whatever cultural system that was in play today.

I think people read into and glamorize these things too much when in reality the connection to present day is probably vague as best. Blacks were slaves and discriminated - now they aren't. This notion that you only have fredom now because "Joe" did whatever-the-fuck-he-did 300 years ago is most likely fictional.

Someone doesn't live in the u.s. racial discrimination is a huge resurging issue. Also, England has brexit, so there's that.

It doesn't have the institutionalized discrimination that's what i'm talking about here. It used to be either juridically legitimate or a legitimized norm wich nowadays, it isn't. What does brexit have to do anything?