Wednesday, June 01, 2005

An old Chicago controversy

I did a google search on Chicago's City Council and I found this article about a vote on the recital of the Pledge of Allegiance back in 2000. The controversy wasn't over the usage of the word under God. The controversy was over America's racial history. There was some opposition from several black aldermen. The opponents cited these reasons...

Opponents said the nation's history of racial discrimination made the pledge ring hollow, particularly the phrase, "liberty and justice for all."

This proposal is to start every council meeting with the pledge.

Chicago City Council passes proposal to recite Pledge of Allegiance

1 comment:

The Peter Files Blog of Comedy said...

I guess there are two ways of looking at it, if the council does not say the pledge, then the importance/dream of liberty and justice "For All" is lost. Because as people, humans, sinners, we often fail to live up to our ideals, does that mean that one who has believed in them should just give up on the 10 commandments and lose all sense of morality because he sees another person or persons failing to meet those standards? No. We must always start by defining the standards by which we will be known.

On the other hand, I can see the opposing alderperson's point.

Why support a pledge that you feel is hollow?

Still, I think the best approach would be to remind Americans that/how we may be failing to meet the standard of the pledge first by making sure that the relevant parts of the pledge are heard clearly and on a regular basis.

Perhaps it is not the pledge, but the mumbling of the pledge, and the lack of attention to the text of the pledge and what it means that is part of today's solution. True - 100 years ago it would have meant nothing. All would have meant "All white men", but today all means all to nearly all. Enough to make a difference, and embarrass the rest into action.

Perhaps I am naive. If so, I am well meaning.

My thought would be to help bring the pledge alive at every meeting by making sure the words are said with meaning, that is, with emphasis on key words.

for example:

... with liberty, and justice FOR ALL!!!

Since the Supreme Court ruling persons no longer can be required to stand during the pledge any longer, perhaps the Alderpersons in question might choose to sit, or stand (but practically and metaphorically, perhaps sitting is better) as the last phrase is said and punctuated verbally in a very, very lively manner along the lines described above.

How better a way to keep this important message alive, every day, in a forum available every day across the nation? The pledge that is.

I bet it would not take too long for this to be picked up on the national news.

And the only resolution they need to begin - is their own.

Just a thought.


Post a Comment

Comments are now moderated because one random commenter chose to get comment happy. What doesn't get published is up to my discretion. Of course moderating policy is subject to change. Thanks!