In my 38 years of teaching, every day, regardless of the baseless memes and statements to the contrary, we said the Pledge of Allegiance.

It was largely a meaningless and empty ritual that was mumbled through because, well, gee, it was just part of the opening of the day as was the moment of silence that had replaced the daily prayer, and neither really had meaning to the students.

Quite often I was asked by older students if they had to recite it.

Sometimes this was asked because of religious considerations, sometimes because the student and family had some political objection to it, and sometimes it was just a kid’s way of seeing if there would be some controversy they could exploit. And, of course, sometimes it was asked just out of curiosity.

My response was consistent.

The Pledge of Allegiance is not a mandatory ritual based on a governmental document, but a traditional one. There is no law that it must be said, or else.

Because of that, they could not be compelled, and were fee to exercise their freedom of speech, and freedom not to speak.

If they chose to not say the Pledge for whatever reason, they could not compete with it either. They could not do anything that would create an undue distraction as that could be viewed as a form of competitive speech, a form of argumentation. Their choices were to stand and say the Pledge, stand and not say the Pledge, or sit quietly. It would be problematic if they decided on performing some action, like going through their book bags, wandering around the room, humming, or reciting something else loud enough to be heard.

As a Gay man and a teacher, when the pledge was recited, I would stand, place my hand over my heart, and remain silent while the teachers and student body pledged allegiance to the flag, but more importantly the republic for which it stands, a republic that had liberty and justice for all, except people like me, and would quietly mumble the word “whenever” at the end.

I never questioned a student’s reason for non-participation as that was not my business and could possibly result in a confrontation that was totally unnecessary. It could also place the student in the awkward and unfair position of having to explain their reason in front of their peers which could then meet the judgment, objection, and the resulting treatment because of possible religious or politically based harassment.

During the moment of silence there was no way to guarantee the students were praying according to their beliefs and no requirement for the students to reveal if they had even prayed, so the student’s reason for not saying the pledge should be as respected and they should be left to themselves, again, unless they made themselves a non-dismissable distraction.

A teacher singling out a student to tell them to recite the pledge, or demand they explain themselves, is not only an invasion, but it guarantees confrontation, and, as I have seen it done, is merely an excuse for the teacher to actively espouse their own politics and beliefs. Whatever conflict begins is the responsibility of the teacher, and the teacher must be held responsible for having initiated the confrontation and for any length to which it goes

Two recent events concerning the pledge illustrate the problem with mandatory insistence on ritual, and how a confrontation could have been avoided if a person’s reasons were respected, and if forced to explain themselves, accepted, not argued.

In North Carolina, a ten year old White child, the necessity of this descriptive will become clear later, took a knee during the Pledge of Allegiance when it was recited at a recent Durham City Council meeting.

His father had taken a picture of the moment, and when the 10 year old was asked about the reaction to his move, he responded,

“No one saw it. Except the people that were watching. And the mayor noticed and he thanked me.”

He was also asked why he did it and he explained,

“What I did was took a knee against racial discrimination, which is basically what (sic) people are mean to other people of different colors.”

Although he had told his father about his planned action, and his father had originally had some reservations, he was proud of his son when he acted.

No one said anything at the time, although people had opinions after it was reported on the news and his father’s picture got posted on the internet, but the meeting went on as if nothing had happened.
That is true with buying viagra levitra viagra medication online. They can ensure that the body creates an enticing environment for diseases, illnesses, lowering the immune purchase cheap cialis system and reproductive functions. I would not mind shelling a few extra for such a scope. cialis levitra Precautions: In cases a person is allergic to sildenafil citrate, or angina pectoris, then he must not think to intake it. sildenafil generic
And from the perspective of most people in attendance, nothing had.

When an 11 year old Black child did not stand for the Pledge at the beginning of school during the same week as the Durham meeting, the substitute teacher demanded he explain himself.

So he did.

He explained he thought the Pledge and the National Anthem were racist against Black people.

That should have ended it, and actually the question should never have been asked, but the substitute teacher went on to create a confrontation.

She asked, “Why if it was so bad here he did not go to another place to live.”

The student replied, “They brought me here.”

And in response the Sub suggested the student “can always go back.”

The confrontation escalated until the student allegedly threatened the teacher, and as she “did not want to continue dealing with him” the substitute teacher called for school security who took the child to the office where police charged him with disrupting a school function and resisting arrest without violence.

His remaining seated was not the disruption. That was instigated by a teacher asking an inappropriate and invasive question, and then using the situation to express personal opinions.

The student was unfairly treated and his attitude toward school and “patriotism” may have been negatively affected, and the students who watched all unfold will certainly see the recital of the Pledge differently now than they had before.

The substitute teacher has been barred from teaching in any county school especially in light of the statement by Kyle Kennedy of Polk County Public Schools.

“To be clear, students are not required to participate in the Pledge of Allegiance.”

Now to the irony of this.

A White 10 year old and a Black 11 year old both took an action during the Pledge. One was to kneel, an action that was obviously done to be noticed and was photographed, and the other stayed seated which required no action or movement.

They were both motivated by  the same thing, their objection to racial disparity.

The reaction to the White kid was “meh”.

The Black kid was confronted, insulted, and arrested.

They are correct.

Their point was made.