Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:
Section 1. Title 15, chapter 7, article 1, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 15-701.03, to read:
START_STATUTE15-701.03. Graduation requirement; constitutional oath
Beginning in the 2013-2014 school year, In addition to fulfilling the course of study and assessment requirements prescribed in this chapter, before a pupil is allowed to graduate from a public high school in this state, the principal or head teacher of the school shall verify in writing that the pupil has recited the following oath:
I, _________, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge these duties; So help me God.
43 comments
Not exactly taking the obligation freely if it's a coerced requirement of education. What of students who live abroad or plan to find work in other countries?
Fundies think math, science, and tolerance/awareness initiatives are some kind of symbolic indoctrination? This is straight up enforced worship of the state.
"that I take this obligation freely"
Really? Its a precondition to graduating, you wankers, and insists on athiests or polytheists denying their own beliefs.
before a pupil is allowed to graduate
I take this obligation freely
Not only is it unconstitutional, it's not even consistent.
Yeeeeah, that's going right to court.
PROTIP to these political hacks: You can't do something 'freely' if it's a condition for something.
*FOOM* Aw, damnit. There's another irony meter gone. ><
So, basically you want them to recite the same oath that military members take when they enlist? And how can you make these students say "I take this obligation freely" if they're forced to recite it so they can get their diploma?
I guess years of indoctrination using the Pledge of Allegiance wasn't enough, now they have to force nationalism onto our young people using a loyalty oath.
I, _________, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge these duties; So help me Allah/Thor/Kali/Ra/Marduk/Flying Spaghetti Monster/Invisible Pink Unicorn/Pelor.
@ Nerikull_Murakami
"Yeeeeah, that's going right to court."
- And when it gets shot down we'll be hearing about "activist judges thwarting the will of 'we the people'" for months. Insane bills like this are a win-win proposition for the extreme right. That's why they keep introducing them.
@Dr. Shrinker:
Such bills are referred to as "showboats" among Congressional staffers. They are bills that have absolutely no chance whatsoever of passing, and are only issued to appeal to voters back home.
And this bill is a classic example.
I have a better oath.
I, pete, do solemnly swear to spend each day doing my small part to fight rabid nationalism, tyranny, jingoism, bigotry, and religious bullshit. If you want me to swear to uphold your values then I must insist you take your oath, fold it four ways so the corners stick out, light it on fire, and ram it up your southern orifice.
The problem with this is who gets to define who is an "enemy"?
Because, right now, I see Arizona Representatives Thorpe, Borrelli, Seel, Shope, Smith: Dial, Livingston, Senator Crandell as enemies of the U.S. Constitution.
Aside from the "So help me God" part, which can easily be modified depending on the religion someone follows, I don't see how this is fundie. If more people actually upheld the Constitution then the religious right would be SOL for ever getting any of their agenda done.
Okay, nevermind. I just realized (I'm a bit slow today) that they're forcing them to take an oath while making them say they're doing it freely. Which also ironically violates the right to free speech.
*update*
The Secular Coalition for Arizona reports that they've convinced lawmakers to remove the "under God" from the oath and change the law to where the oath isn't mandatory to receive a diploma, but they haven't gotten rid of the oath completely. It's still frightening that these people think they need to indoctrinate children into being loyal citizens.
Source: http://www.secularaz.org/news/media/sc-arizona-engages-legislators-new-bills-constitutional-oath
You know as well as I do how this will go. Any student who doesn't want to take the oath will be ostracized and ridiculed by the other students. It's rabid nationalism at its worst.
Well, for starters, any public school requiring somebody to say "So help me God" is violating that person's First Amendment rights. So you get a no-go there.
Secondly, as others have stated, one can't "take this obligation freely" if you're required by law to take it in order to get your HS diploma.
Graduation requirement; constitutional oath
I wonder how many international high school exchange students will be graduating from Arizona schools in the future?
I can't imagine that the education level is very high in Arizona, so those students will be doing at least another year or two when they get back home, but still ...
@farpadokly
What is the point of this?
Perhaps so they can deliver the mail during school vacation. ;-)
I have to wonder about the point of this bill. There's no way they can make this out to be legally binding, and it's not like someone's going to have a life-changing event saying a few words before graduation.
Oaths are a bit like apologies: freely offered, they can be meaningful and powerful, but forced, they're just words.
That's what the military says while swearing in to enter a job to possibly die for their country. Unless you are on a bus to basic training and putting on the cool clothes you don't get to say that. Hell, even swearing in for the military they gave us the option to leave out "So help me g-d". As soon as my 20 years is up I am giving up my citizenship and moving to Ireland.
Not only is this oath unconstitutional, it is also squarely against Biblical principles. As I recall, a certain Rabbi once sugested that his followers never take an oath of any kind. "Let your yes be yes, and your no be no."
Yeah, about that "defending the Constitution against domestic enemies" part, what say we begin with politicians who abuse their position to try to undermine parts of the Constitution? (like, for example, the First Amendment) I hear some particularly repugnant ones among these maggots even try to take the education and future of kids hostage to further their un-American agenda.
Such bills are referred to as "showboats" among Congressional staffers. They are bills that have absolutely no chance whatsoever of passing, and are only issued to appeal to voters back home.
And this bill is a classic example.
And it is probably too much to hope that there is a way to have these people punished for wasting the time and ressources of the Congress with such blatantly self-serving stunts, isn't it? Could a case be made that pushing such clearly unconstitutional pieces of legislation constitutes treason? Or at least a violation of their oath of office?
[I hope I have purged mt earlier stupidity by some contemplation in the desert. As I have no wish to offend. if my presence here bothers anyone, I'll cut out again]
"Ich schwöre bei Gott diesen heiligen Eid, daß ich dem Führer des Arizonen Reiches und Volkes, Thorpe, Borelli etc. der Oberbefehlshaber der Regierung Arizonas, unbedingten Gehorsam leisten und als hoch schule graduierter bereit sein will, jederzeit für diesen Eid mein Leben einzusetzen." (With apologies to Adolf)
As no student from another country could honestly make such a declaration, it would cut off all extra revenue such students might bring.
At first i was like "not too bad. I wouldn't mind swearing that oath." then the under god part made the rest of the bullshit flow freely.
Should be freely given and only for the us citizens. Plus minus the under god part.
This is the basic Oath of Citizenship given at citizenship ceremonies, deleting the part about "I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, State, or sovereignty" and adding the God part. Is this guy trying to create a law saying that someone must be a US citizen in order to graduate from an Arizona school?
Have you read that oath, reps? How can you be forced by the principal to recite a text that includes "I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion"? What about separation of Church and State?
A freshman in law school can tear this apart without straining their brain.
But then, it takes someone with no brain whatsoever, and clearly has never read the Constitution, to come up with this load of legislational crap.
And crap gets flushed away. Along with the paper this isn't fit to be written on. The skidmark left on it is more relevant than the words, frankly.
Jimmy Carter is a devout Southern Baptist, yet he's used the pre-1954 Pledge of Allegiance, sans 'Under God'.
Your call.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
