What's wrong with "indivisible"? I think the Civil War settled that argument, didn't it?
...any 'ceremony' which, by sheer volume of repetition, becomes meaningless. How many times did you actually think about those words when you were a child? How often even now?
Actually, perhaps I was a precocious child, or perhaps it's a result of my 3rd grade teacher, who explained the pledge and its purpose to us quite well, but I understood what I was saying. I've also tried to explain it to my classes.
BTW, since you brought it up, do you use the 'whole-language' method of teaching reading? Do you use the math textbook recommended by your local school board? Do you rock the boat at all, or are you content to work within a system which is corrupt at its core?
Not that this has anything to do with the subject of the thread, but I don't teach elementary school. I teach environmental science, but I supplement the information given in our "politically correct" textbooks with information from the "other side".
To me, part of the value of the Pledge of Allegiance is that it helps teach children that there are other priorities besides themselves - citizenship and country are also important.
I think the Civil War settled that argument, didn't it?
Hardly. According to the original document agreed to, any state (or collection of states) had every right to withdraw their assocation. The resentment against an overbearing, power-grabbing federal gummint is still very much a reality.
I understood what I was saying. I've also tried to explain it to my classes.
Cognizance/comprehension was not the thrust of my question. How often did you actually think about those words, that affirmation, as you were saying them? How often was it actually a positive affirmation as opposed to rote recitation?