![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/images\/american-flag.jpg\" "\\"American")
<\/div>\nSo … back in January, a teacher got in trouble at a middle school in Maryland because he berated a student for not participating in the Pledge of Allegiance on one day, and then when the kid declined to participate the next day, called school security to escort the dangerous felon to the office<\/a>.<\/p>\n The incident began Jan. 27, when the girl did not stand for the Pledge of Allegiance during her first-period class. The teacher demanded that she stand, and when she did not, he ordered her to leave the classroom and stand in the hallway. He threatened to give her detention and sent her to the counselor’s office, where she stayed for the entire first period ….<\/p>\n The next day, the girl again refused to stand for the pledge. The teacher asked a school security officer to escort her to the counselor’s office, according to the letter. Students in the class mocked the girl ….<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Not surprisingly, the kid’s parents were less than thrilled about this, and the ACLU<\/a> took on the case, noting that the Supreme Court ruled in 1943<\/em> that students (or teachers, for that matter) could not be compelled to participate in the Pledge — a ruling supported by state law and referenced in the school system’s student handbook.<\/p>\n The district did precisely the right thing (well, at minimum):\u00a0 it recognized the law and took action:<\/p>\n A Montgomery County schools spokesman confirmed that the issue is being resolved. The middle school’s acting principal sent a letter home with students<\/a> Wednesday that explains the situation and how the school is addressing it.<\/p>\n In addition to an apology, the mother of the girl was told that the teacher, who has not been identified by either side, and school administrators plan to lead the girl’s class in a discussion about the incident and their constitutional rights ….<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Well, frankly, I hope the teacher in question gets a bit more than a slap on the wrist over this, but I applaud the principal and district for taking prompt action.<\/p>\n The situation has provoked outrage.\u00a0 But some of that outrage is … well … outrageous. E.g., that of the Family Research Council, whose apoplexy over the event is almost too cute for words<\/a>.<\/p>\n by Robert Morrison Is it an actual “invasion” if the student was represented by the “ACLU of Maryland”?\u00a0 Wouldn’t that be more of a Fifth Column action?<\/p>\n The ACLU is at it again. This time, they are demanding an apology from a Montgomery County, Maryland, public school teacher. Behind this demand is, as always with this federally-funded outfit, the bludgeon-like threat of a huge lawsuit.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Because money talks, and jail (or, let us say, detention and public humiliation) is inappropriate in this case.<\/p>\n What was the teacher\u2019s offense? Apparently, the teacher threatened a student with detention if she refused\u2014as she repeatedly did\u2014to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. The teacher sent the student to the counselor\u2019s office for her refusal to stand.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Well, not just a threat with detention, but calling security to escort her there.\u00a0 Nice.<\/p>\n The ACLU immediately invoked the Supreme Court\u2019s ruling in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, <\/em>319 U.S. 624 (1943). That case is often cited as a hallmark of American civil liberties, especially remarkable because it was handed down while the United States was engaged in a world war to defend democracy.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Remarkable, that even in the middle of war, some personal liberties were protected more vigorously than social displays of patriotism. That actually makes me feel really good about my country.<\/p>\n But the Court in 1943 said that students cannot be required to salute the flag or recite the Pledge. That was quite right.<\/p>\n <\/span>If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein. If there are any circumstances which permit an exception, they do not now occur to us. <\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n <\/em><\/p>\n The Court did not say that students could not be required to stand quietly while other <\/em>students recited the Pledge of Allegiance.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Wait … what? Dude is seriously arguing that SCOTUS only said kids couldn’t be forced to speak <\/em>or salute<\/em>, but could still be forced to stand? <\/em><\/p>\n What part of “by word or act<\/em>” does Mr Morrison not understand?\u00a0 Requiring someone to stand for the Pledge, even if not reciting it, would certainly seem to qualify as “prescribing” an “act” of “orthodox nationalism.”\u00a0 And I’m not a lawyer.<\/p>\n If we stop for a moment, we can all readily agree that it would be wrong to require, for instance, the children of legal resident aliens to pledge their allegiance to our flag. In the famed 1943 case, the parents of the children who declined to take part in the flag salute and pledge were Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses. These people had a religious conviction that led them to regard pledging allegiance to the flag as a violation of the Commandment against making graven images. We should not force these students to violate their consciences.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Right, because it’s an overtly religious thing for them, and religion must, for the FRC, trump all other societal or legal obligations.<\/p>\n We are constantly told by liberals that the purpose of education is to prepare young people to take part in today\u2019s complex and multi-cultural society. Does it? Surely, anyone attending a baseball game at Baltimore\u2019s Camden Yards between a Canadian team and the home team is familiar with the two national anthems that are played. O Canada <\/em>and The Star-Spangled Banner <\/em>are both sung. What are Americans expected to do during the playing of the Canadian national anthem? Just stand silently and to show respect. It\u2019s the civil and neighborly thing to do.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Right.\u00a0 It”s civil and neighborly.\u00a0 But it’s not legally required or coerced by the authorities the way this student was coerced by her teacher.\u00a0 It’s not “neighborly” when you’re forced to do it.<\/p>\n And hearing that having everyone jump up in lockstep for the Pledge is somehow in keeping for a “complex and multi-cultural” society seems a bit … um … backward.<\/p>\n There\u2019s rich historical irony in this, too. For the words of United States\u2019 national anthem were composed at nearby Ft. McHenry during the War of 1812. Those \u201crockets\u2019 red glare\u201d and \u201cbombs bursting in air\u201d were weapons of our British enemies. And the Canadians\u2019 national anthem contains this line: \u201cO Canada, we stand on guard for thee.\u201d<\/p>\n Against whom exactly were the Canadians standing guard? Hint: It wasn\u2019t moose or polar bears. It was us. <\/em>The Americans repeatedly had failed repeatedly to invade and conquer Canada when it was a British colony. But now, Americans and Canadians are the best of friends. We stand politely for each other\u2019s national anthems, which may be the only two such anthems in the world that are actually written against <\/em>each other.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n That’s actually an amusing bit of historic trivia.\u00a0 I’ll need to research that to see if it’s actually, y’know, true<\/em>.<\/p>\n So is Morrison’s argument that while a student cannot be compelled to recite the Pledge, she can <\/em>be compelled to stand for it because it’s “civil and neighborly”? Really?<\/p>\n I would agree that she can be compelled to be non-disruptive\u00a0 — no talking or making noises or goofing around during the Pledge.\u00a0 But that’s more than a bit different.<\/p>\n Is the Montgomery County school case too trivial to merit national attention? No.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n I agree, though for reasons other than I suspect Mr Morrison.<\/p>\n It illustrates how classroom discipline and American patriotism are under constant assault by the ACLU.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Or by people who compel displays of American patriotism, believed-in or not.<\/p>\n Our tax dollars are funding this radical outfit.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n This one gave me pause.\u00a0 Our tax dollars fund the ACLU?\u00a0 I had to look that up.<\/p>\n And, lo and behold, it turns out (if you can believe a petition<\/a> asking Congress to STOP FUNDING THIS RADICAL OUTFIT):<\/p>\n Congress, roughly thirty years ago, passed a provision in United States Code section 1988 that requires taxpayers to pay attorneys in civil rights cases.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n
ACLU invades Montgomery County<\/h2>\n
\nFebruary 25, 2010<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n