It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Arizona bill AZ HB2467 requires graduating high school students to take an oath

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 11:08 PM
I took an oath very similar to this. Twice. Each time, however, it was my choice. While I applaud those willing to affirm their allegiance to our nation, forcing them to do so and holding their diploma hostage unless they do is a little unnerving.

On one hand, I support a citizen's right to express dissent with the United States, and to refuse to say the Pledge of Allegiance, since allegiance that is compelled is by definition not given freely, and therefore worthless. If, one day, I don't feel like saying the Pledge along with everyone else, that's my right and my choice. Hasn't happened yet, but you never know.

On the other hand, I do expect a foreign national to take a similar oath as part of the citizenship and naturalization process. So, I'm a little torn in regards to my feelings about this particular piece of legislation, even though it comes from a different state than mine.

I lean toward supporting a citizen's right to express themself, verbally or otherwise, as they see fit, without labeling them as threating or seditious.

posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 11:16 PM
it is most telling not in what it says, but in what it does not say, which due to the direct comparison, makes the statement more obvious:

and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.


I will Not obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

This is a very subtle declaration of War, through the framework of loyalty, and it bears such close resemblance to the current oath of loyalty that the average person would believe it was promoting the military obedience to the Executive branch, when in reality, it is pledging the opposite by virtue of omission. It appears to be a direct statement about the 2nd amendment or possibly the 1st. It radiates Civil War in Embryo.

posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 11:42 PM
reply to post by Maluhia

So sorry me apologies thought I was just responding
to the post...

Cheers Ektar

posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 01:58 AM

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to post by WhiteAlice

Let's call it the American Citizens Oath....and suggest everybody take it (and those in uniform, police and military, renew their oaths with the understanding that the Constitution is under attack from within).

Not a bad idea, really. Then there is the fact that the country is paying for that education. I would bet most protesting would be doing so because they are illegals, children of illegals, anti-religious types, etc. The only issue I see is that the children don't have a choice about attending school, in most cases. An oath for a diploma (from a public school) would be alright, if the public school was optional. Does anyone know how this would affect private schools?

posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 04:03 AM

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
reply to post by WhiteAlice

Although I certainly appreciate the sentiment behind this bill, it won't stand and if it passes it will be struck down by the Arizona Supreme Court. You can not make someone say "so help me God". Even if this did pass does it really matter?? Our politicians and law enforcement take this oath and it doesn't seem to matter, so why would it make a difference if a private citizen did??

Two wrongs don't make a right.

Not to mention this is a poor argument and that we should be demanding our politicians abide by their oath.

posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 04:11 AM
Why should my highschooler take that 'oath' if my gobermint won't abide by it?
BTW, my oath in the military was slightly different.

Congrats on your first thread!

posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 04:16 AM
If they want all that graduate to take this oath to do so, they better have a version of it ready in Spanish.
I can hear the ethnic studies fanatics screaming already; "Wheres the oath to Mexico?"

It would be nice if the public schools around here actually taught more about the Constitution though.
I had to mostly learn for myself.

posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 04:30 AM
I agree with Jude.

That said, i found this little piece too, that is in the bill:

And all students in first through 12th grades would have to say the pledge of allegiance each day if House Bill 2284, sponsored by Rep. Steve Smith, R-Maricopa, passes. Under current law, schools must set aside time for the pledge each day, but students may choose whether to participate.


Although they cannot force anyone to say anything or pledge anything, but they can by threat or coercion.

This is truly scary, requiring kids to not only take an oath to graduate, but requiring them to say the pledge of allegiance every day. As an aside, they are pledging allegiance to a flag, a freakin' symbol, and not to anything of true substance.

I know people throw this comparison around a lot, but in this case i think it's more than accurate: this is some crazy fascist, big brother stuff. Children lined up, required to pledge and take oaths..

I definitely see this as either not passing or being challenged and overturned, but the people who write these things into these bills, that kind of thinking.... *shakes head*

Scary stuff, that we elect these people.
edit on 26-1-2013 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 04:59 AM
get rid of the so help me flying spaghetti monster and it would be better,
also it states right in the oath they are not forced to yet if its required
to graduate then it kinda is? strangeness.

On another note why swear to god? an imaginary being that has morals
equal to a vicious dictator, why not pick someone, you know, decent?

posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 07:55 AM

Originally posted by sdcigarpig
6% of the population of Arizona, technically are dual citizens, being that they are Native Americans, and live on the reservations. They would not think of or even consider taking such an oath.

But the biggest problem is what if the child or family is not a Christian?

Or if they're not even American at all?
Foreign exchange students, children of foreign diplomats etc...
Hard to understand why they should be required to take an oath to defend the USA.

posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 09:11 AM
I just moved to AZ from Chicago 2 years ago, so I understand how this state has slowly been trying to gain back an identity. The illegal immigrant issue doesn't want to be discussed anywhere else, but in AZ they are embracing it and trying various ideas to fix it.
The schools in the "illegal immigrant" areas didn't teach American history, they taught mexican studies and how the US stole CA, AZ, NM and TX from Mexico. The finally got rid of that last year, since they deemed it racist....but it was really bad the crap they taught these kids.

I don't agree with everything they do here, as I'm a conservative that doesn't follow any religion, so they could loose the " So help me God" part of it. But if that is the worst of it and if they have the kids say this pledge, rather then teaching them to hate the US....then I'm for it.

posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 10:40 AM
reply to post by WhiteAlice

I guess this is what Americans call freedom eh?

posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 11:01 AM
Just say it and ignore it like all of the politicians do.

Seems they just want to train the next wave of politicians who will ignore the constitution, only when not destroying it.

posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 11:28 AM
reply to post by WhiteAlice

Well, being Arizona, I'm mildly surprised the oath wasn't about defending the NRA. In fact, I'm surprised when anything the state government does is not accompanied with shooting and drunken yelling.

Yippy ki yay.

posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 11:59 AM
Actually, they cant do it.
if they try it will be shot down.
"that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion"
They are not taking this oath freely. they are being blackmailed into it by holding their diploma hostage.

Can a 17 year old take that oath legaly? I really dont know. but being that they are not a legal adult it raises some questions
edit on 26-1-2013 by oubliette because: adding to statement

posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 12:10 PM
What if the student is muslim, or a buddhist or atheist? He has to render lip service to get his diploma?


posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 12:20 PM
The only problem i have with this is....

This part....

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic

.....kind of gets confusing when it comes to this part...

and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States

What do you do? Obey the President, or the constitution?

Seems to be it's one or the other at the moment.

Another thing, what happens when the leaders of a country become the "enemy", or at least someone you have to defend yourself against?

I'd like to see someone graduate, then get refused their diploma.....then sue the ass off of the school or whoever is behind this.


posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 01:03 PM
I do not feel that this oath should be necessary to graduate, but I would be suspicious of anyone who did not support our Constitution, or who would not defend it if it is threatened. Anyone who would not take this oath should probably leave America, because they obviously care nothing for our freedoms, or the people who died to make that document a reality. Every citizen should take this oath. This oath would mean that one is against a government that tries to alter the Constitution, or abolish it or any of its parts.

posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 01:10 PM
reply to post by Tw0Sides

Actually "I do so affirm" can be used in place of "so help me God" on the oath.

posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 01:12 PM
reply to post by CX

I asked my commander that once. "what if the President's orders are against the Constitution"?

His reply was "the President's orders are never agaisnt the Constitution".

Scarey day and one of the major reasons I decided to retire.

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in