My post on the pledge decision.

I said I'd post it, and I meant it.

I don't like this ruling. Not because I disagree with it (I think the actual decision was correct, he does NOT have the right to bring a case for his daughter when she is not the one with the grievance), but because they completely avoided answering the question at hand. And, of course, some people are going nuts over this:

In a written statement, Attorney General John Ashcroft praised the ruling, saying it "ensures that school children in every corner of America can start their day by voluntarily reciting the Pledge of Allegiance."

1. Sorry, Jonny, but it doesn't do that. It just put off the case for another few years. Despite what some people ignorantly believe, this case not only has come by before, but it will come by again. And again. And again.

2. *cracks up* Why the fuck can't these school children voluntarily recite the PoA at home, then? If it's so important to their parents, wouldn't their parents make them pledge every day before leaving the house? Why don't you expect adults to do this? I'm not even bringing up the question of voluntarily, because that's a lie. Even when people know they're allowed not to say it, the pressure is from all angles to fit in. That's not voluntary.

Somebody commented on my last post that she had no choice but to say the pledge.

This was fine with her (I think her, at least, sorry if you're a him), so there's no issue, but unless she grew up during or prior to the Second World War, she is mistaken.

The first case the Supreme Court heard about this issue was in 1940. It was brought by a family of Jehovah's Witnesses, who maintained that it is a violation of the first commandment, and therefore violated their right to religious freedom. They lost their case. However, this decision was overturned three years later. Since that time, it has been illegal to compel students to say the Pledge of Allegience. It has always been unethical, I think, and certainly unconstitutional... unless you think the writers of the Constitution of the United States believed that the government should be able to compel others to take oaths.

Anyway, that's all I have to say. It is very interesting to note that many people today, especially children, do not realize that they can NOT, legally, be compelled to recite the pledge, or even stand for it, so long as they maintain a respectful silence.

This has come up a few times on the support board...

So I thought I'd mention it here.

You can always see your own friends-locked posts. So, if somebody lists you as a friend, but you don't list them as a friend, your public posts will show up on their friends page. We all know this. What some people don't realize is that if you visit this non-mutual-friend's friends page, you'll see any posts that you made friends-locked, or even private. Quite a few people try to see if their filters actually work by checking out the friends pages of various people, and then freak when they see their friends locked, filtered, or private posts. THe freaking out is entirely unwarrented, because you can always see your own friends-locked posts, but non-friends can't.

This make sense to everybody? Please say it does, I know I'm not good at explaining it, but it seems to cause such stress that I really don't want my friends to go through it.

First new monk episode!

( Cutted for spoilery! )

So, don't click if 1. you haven't seen this episode of Monk and 2. you want to.

In other news, the first season is out on DVD! Now, who do I know with a DVD pla- OH RIGHT! I have one! *does the cool laptop dance*

And, finally, I'm using the Daniel icon because I don't have a Monk one.