Posted on 10/16/2001 6:27:33 AM PDT by TLBSHOW
MADISON --
The Madison School Board voted early Tuesday to permit schools to offer the Pledge of Allegiance to comply with a state law that requires a daily display of patriotism.
The board voted 6-1 for the proposal after eight hours of testimony from emotional residents about its decision last week to only allow an instrumental version of the national anthem in the Madison Metropolitan School District.
Board members had decided to eliminate the pledge as an option after some parents complained about the "one nation, under God" line. But the board reversed its position Tuesday in voting in favor of schools being permitted to offer the pledge.
"I don' t think the pledge is about religion. I think it is a commitment to our democracy," board member Ray Allen said Tuesday.
The 800-seat auditorium at Madison Memorial High School was overflowing Monday evening and into Tuesday with citizens wanting to express their opinion. The board last week ruled out the pledge as a way for schools to comply with a new student patriotism law.
That law, included in the state budget passed this summer, requires public schools to give students a daily opportunity to say the pledge or hear the national anthem.
The school district initially allowed schools to decide how they wanted to comply, but the board passed a motion last week directing schools to only use an instrumental version of the anthem, ruling out the pledge and the words of the anthem.
Under the new policy the board approved early Tuesday, schools can offer either the pledge or anthem. The recitation or singing of either must be introduced with the following statement: "We live in a nation of freedom. Participation in the pledge is voluntary. Whoever wishes to participate may stand, those who do not may sit."
Board member Bill Keys, who authored the original motion limiting daily displays of patriotism to the instrumental anthem, was the only member of the board to vote against reconsidering that decision and the new policy on the pledge.
Keys said his primary concern was making certain that students of all religions and backgrounds were comfortable in the classroom, something he believed would have been accomplished by playing an instrumental version of the national anthem.
Before the meeting started, the crowd spontaneously began reciting the pledge, with the majority standing as some scattered boos were heard. After finishing the oath, supporters broke into applause, waving American flags.
Keys said the behavior of some adults in the auditorium -- including those who shouted at speakers they disagreed with -- demonstrated that some children would cave in to pressure from classmates or teachers to say the pledge, even if it conflicted with their beliefs.
"You saw it done in this hall tonight, with litmus tests and artificial displays of patriotism," Keys said.
Outside the board meeting, several parents led by former U.S. Rep. Scott Klug, R-Wis., said they intend to seek the recall of some or all of the board members.
"If they didn' t know what they were doing last week," Klug told reporters, "then what other decisions are they making where they don' t have a clue?"
Public testimony started about 5:30 p.m. Monday and ended about 1:30 a.m. Tuesday. District spokesman Ken Syke said 233 people signed up to speak before the board, but 165 actually did. Each had three minutes.
The board also allowed about two dozen students to testify first so that they could get home and do their homework.
"Do I feel a pressure to participate (in reciting the pledge)?" asked Liana Prescott, a senior at Memorial. "Absolutely. Are there others who bow to this pressure? I cannot doubt it."
Board President Calvin Williams, Keys and Carol Carstensen had voted last week in favor of the pledge policy, while Ruth Robarts and Shwaw Vang voted against it. Members Juan Jose Lopez and Allen were absent from that vote.
The district has received more than 20,000 phone calls and e-mails over the last week, many from out of state. Almost all of them have denounced the decision.
Vang, who is originally from Laos, said he and his family received threatening calls and e-mails last week following his initial vote in favor of eliminating the pledge as an option.
"I've never been so scared for my wife or my kids in all the years I've been here since 1978, " he said.
but ya gots to wonder why there is a law regarding this in the first place
Why do I have to put my son in a private school but we're supposed to bend over backwards to make every oddball kook comfortable in our classrooms?
Many of the notable leaders of this nation including Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln, to name just two, had a deep and abiding personal faith in God, but were not associated with any particular religious denomination. These days, it seems you have to be "all or nothing" with characters like these in Madison.
Can one not aver a faith "in God," without establishing a religion? The founders seemed to think so, for their writings including their public pronouncements, bills introduced to become law, etc., are REPLETE with references to "God." It was always understood that, our nation being a pluralistic society and established primarily by those who came here to worship as they pleased, "God" was a personal definition. The only common factor was the belief in some sort of divine creator, a power greater than ourselves. The form and function of God might be in dispute, but the reality of God never was.
Now, however, we have the "state religion" that has been illegally established: Atheism. And atheism is the most intolerant of all "religious" beliefs because, being founded upon the principle of the great and eternal "nothing," it can't abide any and all who believe in "something."
That's really what this dispute was all about: "nothing" vs. "something." Patriotism vs. antagonistic indifference. The force greater than man vs. man's insufferable hubris.
Well, I'm glad to know that the principles espoused by the creators of this nation were once again acknowledged, even if reluctantly, by this arrogant school board.
Looks like their still is hope for this country yet!(:^>
BTW ... I also sent e-mails and called!
For two reasons:
1. The law is and always has been a great teacher. Most laws of this kind don't specify a PENALTY for disobedience. They instead codify the expections of the community. Note that there is no requirement in this law to participate, merely a mandate that certain principles be taught, in this case by modeling behavior.
2. Unfortunately, politics abhors a vacuum. The godless and atheistic among us have taken advantage of this, to aver that where the Constitution requires that no religion (that is, specific denomination) be ESTABLISHED, it must perforce mean that no religious sentiment might even be accomodated. Laws like the "Religious Freeom Protection Act," which in former times would have been glaringly unnecessary, have become obligatory because the forces of evil seek to fill the void left by the lapse in personal faith.
I have NO problem in mandating that standards like this be established. I just think it is profoundly sad that it's even necessary.
8 hour meeting! LOL
Maybe you need to make up a protest thread here and they need a good FReeping there. In fact now is the time to stand up to these fools and commies. When ever you see or hear of idiots talk, freep em good. We need emails and phone numbers and lots of FReepers to do it, but it can be done. If it can be done in Commie MAdison Wis.
IMHO, this statement is a cop out. I still feel it is disrespectful to sit during an official display of the Flag, and saying the Pledge at the start of each day would be considered *official* in my book. Stand up, take off your damn hat, and be quiet, if you can't find it in your heart to Pledge Allegiance to the symbol of the country that gave you the right to be a jerk!
I better go get some coffee, I'm getting all worked up.
These people are so sad. What part of "and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands" do they have so much trouble with?
It has been said over and over that we are a REPUBLIC and not a democracy but they just don't get it. The differences are not trivial. It is the republican (small 'r') form of government that protects minorities of all types against the tyranny of the mob.
We can't expect the schools to teach this without being forced. If more people understood this, the liberals would be in even more trouble politically than they are.
Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LoanPalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)
What would be a genuine display of patriotism??? No doubt in my mind this fella knows and cares nothing about patriotism...He may be Islamic...Wonder if anyone checked...
I know the phrase "and the republic for which it stands" is part of the pledge.
Can anyone show me where the founders of this nation, the men who fought for independence, would have wanted forced loyalty pledges ? I see parallels with the 2nd Admendment here: it is (or should be my right to have personal arms IF I CHOOSE but you may not FORCE me to have them if I don't wish to;likewise, I may CHOOSE to publicly recite pledges OR NOT, and you have no right to FORCE me.Neither may I or you stop one who DOES wish to pledge (or own a gun or any of the other rights.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.