American National Anthem: "Nuestro Himno"
 

Listen here: "Nuestro Himno"

Is nothing sacred? Do you go to someone's house and tell them how to arrange their furniture? Can you not accept graciously what the host provides and does not provide?

I think that this is overstepping the line. When I was in the Philippines before the last movie played in a theater they play their national anthem. I didn't want to stand up for it, but it was suggested that I do so lest I get an ass beating. The same was for when living in Singapore, I sat respectfully and quietly as I would expect someone else to do so for my national anthem.

It annoys me, but I'm not going to do anything about it.

Frankly it seems like the massive demonstrations should be like a great time to round up everyone who can't prove citizenship and ship them back to Mexico. It would be like shooting fish in a barrel.

I'm torn on the immigration issue, but there's one thing I'm not torn on...if someone moves here, they should learn English. If they want to sing the anthem, sing it in English, the way it was meant to be.

Ok, just to get this out, America does NOT have a national language. English is not the national language, despite what you may have been led to believe.

The founding fathers left out assigning a national language for a reason, because America is and always has been a "melting pot" of different cultures.

There is nothing disrespectful or harmful about translating the national anthem into another language, however, changing the lyrics to make it more "contemporary" is somewhat disrespectful. If they want the National Anthem in spanish, they should translate it into spanish, not take artistic liberties. However, changing things in the U.S. to benifit illegal immigrants is wrong. There is a reason they are "illegal" immigrants as opposed to "legal" immigrants. It means they broke the law to be in this country. If they want to be an American, they need to go about it in a legal manner.

Sorry bout this but...

It's not the anthem, so relax.

Until people start singing this before sporting events, and on national holidays, there is nothing you can do about it. An artist has the right to arrange any song they want to into anything as long as they dont make an exact replica and call it thier own. And until this is adopted as our national anthem, you'll just be making a big deal out of nothing, so stop wasting your time.

I don't think this is going to win much support for their cause, but other than that I don't particularly care. It is essentially the same song and I don't see translating it into another language as being offensive or disrespectful.

As was said above, our country has no official language and we have citizens from many backgrounds who speak many languages, I don't see why Spanish should be considered less American than English.

The decision to create this "anthem" seems politically inadvisable. Why would you do something you know will offend a large portion of Americans? This sort of thing reinforces the perception that immigrants want to change America rather than assimilating into it.

Personally, I think the entire concept at work here is stupid. It makes me mildly annoyed that the song is being changed, but not nearly enough to prompt me to actually do anything about it.

Doesn't bother me in the least. Doesn't effect me in the least. Kind of reminds me of the "War On Chrismas" nonsense that so many insisted on actually making an issue.

If they actually translated the anthem into Spanish, I wouldn't have a problem.

However, if they are calling that song the same thing, then I am offended.

They have a great start on an anthem for a new country. I'm not sure we want them to create it here. It is flattering that they think enough of our anthem to model theirs after it though.

I agree with djtestudo. That wasn't the anthum sung in spanish. That was something like the Jimi Hendrix version of it. At least Hendrix had the same tune.

I think there should be French, Italian, Russian, Japanese, Chinese(mandarin), Arabic, and what ever language people speak. But, in the US, the English version should be the one played.

Wikipedia

It would be nice if people would quit trying to say that since the U.S. does not have an official language it's wrong to ask people to speak the majority language. Especially those who get angry that most American Citizens don't speak the language of many illegal immigrants. Why should we have to cater to people who are breaking our laws??

According to a poll done in 2000 -
82.105% of families in the U.S. speak English in their home.
10.710% speak Spanish at home.
There are other languages spoken in the home but these are the most common.

I have no problem with the National Anthem being interpreted so that people in other nations or speaking other languages can understand what it says and means. To do it in order to encourage people to stay in the U.S. (especially those who are here illegally) is just wrong. You come to the U.S. You either learn the majority language or function without it but don't expect the majority to cater to you. It just isn't feasible.

Here is the problem with messing with anthems: anthems are not simply national songs. They're nationalistic (used for lack of a better word, no negative connotative value intended) rituals whose performance and the observance of certain ritualized actions during the performance carry a great deal more weight than whatever happens to be in lyrics of the song. Anthems are a participatory part of national identity, in contrast to basically all other parts of that indentity, which is part of what makes them so powerful.

National anthems are common currency, and it should be no surprise that people ought to be allowed to do with them as they choose. Their right to do what they did to the song is unquestionabled.

That being said, I dislike what they've done to the song and I dislike what they're trying to say with it. The Spanish lyrics do not mean the same thing as the English lyrics and the intent of the song is intentionally subversive to the concept of national unity, which is also one of the functions of an anthem.

MacGuyver, you're right, it's not officially the anthem, but they want to use it like one. It'd be one thing for a bunch of musicians to cover it and sing it in Spanish at a concert, ala Hendrix. It's quite another to decide to represent a (mis)translated version of the song as "The United States National Anthem for People Who Can't Understand the English Version."

While english may not be the "official" language of the whole country, you ARE required to learn it enough to communicate in it to become naturalized- which means this translation is nonsense.

Bottom line is, if you're coming to live in america and be a citizen, you HAVE to learn english to become naturalized... and i'd think one of the FIRST things you should learn IN ENGLISH is the National Anthem. I mean COME ON.

I had to pull this out - you expect others to respect your anthem but you couldn't respect theirs enough to stand up without the threat of violence?

When I was expatriated to Singapore it was clearly stated (I'm doublechecking this now) that we do not stand for other country's anthems but sit respectfully and quietly. It could be construed that you are pledging allegiance to a foreign country instead of your own.

Since I am Filipino in heritage but born and raised in the US, a local Filipino would not know that I was not disrespecting their anthem but remaining seated.

As far as your statement of respecting my own, where did I state that I expect them to do anything but just leave it alone? I do not ask them to stand, I do not ask them to do anything.

I do not take the Mexican Anthem, reword it, rearrange the music.

here's what I found in the interim:

I'm mostly offended that Wyclef Jean was involved.

How silly is to think this half-assed gesture is going to do anything about anything at all other than the "I've got a hankerin' to listen to some really crappy Wyclef Jean" malaise...

This is the most absurd thing I have heard. There is no reason why the national anthem shoudl ever be in spanish. Do we sing the mexican anthen in english and the psanish anthem. Hell nw they would definitly have somethign to say about that. This is crazy and I for one am going to at least try and do soemthign about it. This is crap

Actually, you said: "When I was in the Philippines before the last movie played in a theater they play their national anthem. I didn't want to stand up for it, but it was suggested that I do so lest I get an ass beating. The same was for when living in Singapore, I stood respectfully and quietly as I would expect someone else to do so for my national anthem."

So, from this statement, you sure are expecting them to stand, yet you resisted standing yourself.

IMO, you stand for a national anthem - I'm not American but if I go to a sporting event in the US, for example, and they play the anthem, I sure as heck stand. It's a sign of respect. I might not hold my hand over my heart or salute the flag, as these are gestures for American citizens, but I will stand for the anthem.

sorry, I see where the error is, I *SAT* is the correct words and action. my apologies.

I do not stand for some other country's anthem.

It's not mine to stand for. From what I can recall, if you are in a foreign country and you are consistently seen as saluting another nation's flag/anthem, then your citizenship can be questioned and possibly revoked.

And to answer your original question,


No, nothing is sacred.

I for one think that we should sing the anthem exactly as Francis Scott Key wrote it, note for note.

Wait, Francis Scott Key wrote a poem, not a song? And someone else set it to words?

And the way its sung varies singer to singer (i.e. Whitney Houston vs. Roseanne)? And sometimes there aren't even any words at all?

Sorry, but this is a non-issue. It's a song. If this were the Georgia state song, then there would be something to discuss since that song is officiall "'Georgia On My Mind' as sung by Ray Charles". There is no "official" version of the National Anthem, so if you're mad that someone changed the words, you should also be mad at all those boy scouts who do the exact same thing to make it more entertaining (being a former boy scout myself, I've done the same thing).

If you don't like this version, don't buy it. It's the artists' First Amendment right to change it as they see fit, and I don't see how it's disrespectful at all. If it helps someone understand the lyrics describing a relatively unimportant event in a fairly minor war, then all the better.

Perhaps they should also redesign our flag to be more easily understood.
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/i...upsidedown.jpg
Whittier area students from Pioneer, California and Whittier high schools walked out of classes to protest the proposed federal immigration bill March 27, 2006. The protestors put up the Mexican flag over the American flag flying upside down at Montebello High. (Leo Jarzomb/Staff photo)

"Whose broad stripes and bright stars, thro' the perilous fight,
O'er the ramparts we watch'd, were so gallantly streaming"

What the fuck?

If I saw someone raising a foreign flag over the US flag, they would be in for a severe ass beating. What the fuck do some bitch ass high school students think they know that allows them to do that? They haven't earned any right to open their mouths about something like that. Most of them probably have never even paid taxes yet.

Thank you for the clarification.

I have no idea what the laws are elsewhere, however my Canadian citizenship cannot be revoked for standing for another nation's customs and traditions when you are in that country. I imagine the same is true in the U.S., but an American would know better.

This happens all the time - if I go to a hockey game between the Montreal Canadiens and the Boston Bruins, they play both anthems. And pretty well, all the people stand for both. I have not been to a game in the US, but having seen them on TV, again, people stand for both anthems. At the Olympics, if the games are in Torino, Italy as they were this winter, and a German won an event, everyone stood and honoured the anthem be they German, Italian, American, Canadian or other.

Welcome to the First Amendment and free speech, which is apparently what these "bitch ass" kids know all about. You may not like the message, but that doesn't give them any less right to spout it off. If they're citizens, they certainly have earned "the right to open their mouths". You're presupposing that none of these kids are US citizens, which almost certainly NOT the case. Citizens and legal residents have every right to make this kind of statement, just like you have every right to be offended by it.


Diminishing their rights diminishes yours at the same time.

Who the fuck said anything about denying them their right to do that? I just said they'd be in for an ass beating. And where exactly did I presuppose that those kids aren't US citizens?

They haven't earned shit. They have those rights because they were born into them. They have been given those rights, but they have not fucking earned them. Those kids can spend some time in the military or in public service, and then they will have earned something. Until then, they should be more respectful to those who fought and died for that flag.

I suspect that many immigrants illegal and otherwise are interested in more than just a new national anthem.
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/images/aztlan005.jpg
Billboard in Los Angeles.
http://media.michellemalkin.com/arch...Mexico_sm1.jpg
I know the LA billboard is just advertising but it is funny considering the recent demonstrations.

So someone who hasn't served doesn't deserve rights? How about if they spend time helping the homeless (public service)? How about if they lost a father or a brother in action? Can you tell me exactly how an American citizen earns rights?

As far as who mentioned denying their rights, I think that was you when you mentioned "beating their asses". Beating a black man because he would dare exercise his right to vote is denying him his right. Just because you aren't acting as a government agent doesn't mean that you're denying the right to make the statement.

Look, I don't like flag burning or hanging the flag upside down, but I also think that soldiers die for more than a scrap of cloth. They die for the ideas that that scrap represents, and one of those ideas happens to be free speach, which is an inalienable right regardless of whatever your notion who has "earned" that right or not. I fully support your right to be pissed off up to the point that you start "beating ass" - that's when I support the guys beating your ass.

I know the flag salute in German. Who cares? If people want to show their appreciation for the US, let them. I support anyone who loves their country and wants to sing about it.

Actually, I don't think anyone who has not done any type of public service has really earned their rights. Those rights were earned for them by the people who did do public service. Sure they deserve them, but have they earned them simply because they were born here? Not in my opinion. How can you earn something by doing nothing? Doesn't mean I think that people should not be allowed to exercise their rights though.

In any case, my original post had nothing to do with the Bill of Rights. When I said, "They haven't earned any right to open their mouths about something like that" I meant more along the lines of me having no right to walk up to a Gunny and telling him what to do. Sure, freedom of speech has accorded me the right to run my mouth, but I have no right to tell someone better than me what to do.

And furthermore, it actually is against the law for a foreign flag to be raised above the US flag.

and
Blah blah blah... Burning a flag or hanging it upside down is more than just burning a scrap of cloth. Burning a flag represents a disrespect and disregard for the ideas that the flag stands for. Military personnel go through a lot of trouble raising and lowering the flag each day and playing colors. Do they do all that for a scrap of cloth? No, they do it because the flag is a symbol.

And like I said before, it is illegal to hang a foreign flag above the US flag, so they don't even have that right.

I guess that means we're at war now?

The problem is, then it is no longer the same song.

That is like saying a Weird Al version of a song is the same as the original.

I don't believe that people SHOULDN'T be allowed to change words or parts of the tune (I was in the scouts as well :D), but that it shouldn't be considered in any way an equivilent substitute.

A Spanish version of the National Anthem would look more like this (from Google Language Tools, so it's probably butchered to all hell...):

¿O,por ejemplo, puede usted ver, por la luz temprana del amanecer, qué nosotros granizó tan orgulloso en destellar pasado del crepúsculo?

¿De quién amplias rayas y estrellas brillantes, con la lucha peligrosa, sobre los terraplenes miramos, tan gallantly fluíamos?

Y el fulgor rojo de los cohetes, las bombas que estallaban en aire, dio la prueba con la noche que nuestra bandera todavía estaba allí.

¿O,por ejemplo, esa bandera estrella-star-spangled todavía agita sobre la tierra del libre y el hogar del valiente?

In other words, a (more or less) direct translation.

I think it's a nonissue. Why should i care if someone takes an overly sentimental exercise in nationalism and rewrites it a bit? I think the national anthem should be updated. They should throw in a few verses about the cold war, brinksmanship, proxy wars, massive self deception, conditional support for the spread of democracy, oil based foreign policy, etc. You get the point, there really is so much more to america than is actually said in the national anthem.

I kinda find it funny that people think you can make a "perfect" translation of a song. The re-translation seems to be at least along the right lines. You might not be able to translate it any more literally...

I think this is a storm in a teacup - it is *not* the national anthem but just a different interpretation of a well known tune.

If they translate "Advance Australia Fair" then I'll be pissed! no, not really. I couldn't give a flying #$%^

I gather from this that a student can be required to stand for the Mexican anthem, but it was established in California that a student is NOT be required to stand for the pledge of allegiance.

How logical.

Carno-

WTF are you talking about? First of all, the PROTESTORS did this as a symbol of the disrespect Mexican Americans are showing. Flying Mexico flag above ours is a statement that either, a) They are declaring a war of sorts (political) or b) they think they are the new wave of Americans (social). Also, flying the American flag upside down (and most national flags as I understand it) is a sign of distress. This is not a disrespectful device. In this instance it is showing distress of the US due to Mexican influences. As a soldier in the United States Army, I respect and applaud this well designed protest. It is well within the guidelines of international understanding and is not disrespectful to our country (it is, realistically, QUITE disrespectful to Mexico, however).

Also, the burning of a flag is not only a protest option, but also the PROPER way to give a flag it's last salute. The destruction of a US Flag, either due to age and wear or because it has touched the ground, is to burn and bury it. This is how the military disposes of it's flags. Government offices usually give their flags over to the local VFW chapter to do the same. I applaud your patriotism 100%... I just think you should know the facts.

I guess I misunderstood the point of the flag thing then. I assumed it was making the opposite point. Thanks for the post, because I completely misunderstood what the point they were trying to make was.

Umm, I know the facts, thanks.

What I was referring to when I said flag burning was not the respectful disposal of an old flag, but the burning of the flag by foreigners.

I've been trying to figure out how to respond for a while now, and hopefully I can do it without being a jerk.

In the US, rights by their very definition are not "earned". Rights are inalienable and every citizen enjoys them regardless of military service. The word "earn" does not appear anywhere in the Constitution. Your military service does not give you any special privledges beyond those customary to active duty personnel, nor should it. I can't follow your logic where you think that people "deserve" their rights but haven't "earned" them. There's no distiction that I can come up with that would apply to all citizens. Frankly, your whole statement strikes me as bizarre, but that's me.

You don't have the right to tell off a gunny because of the Military Code of Conduct, not because of some notion of earned or unearned rights. The military has a separate hierarchy from the rest of society for very good reasons, and there's very little overlap. If you're not on base and out of uniform, you can express your views (if I remember the CoC correctly), but this is apples and oranges. Civilians are not and should not be held to the same standards as military personnel, and that's one of the rights that you're serving to protect. For instance, I have the right to go up to a gunny on the street and tell him that I think that all gunnies are closet communists (not that I do, just making a point). That's my right to express my opinion. If he hits me, he's the one guilty of assault, and I've made a statement that's protected by the 1st Amendment. If you say the same thing on base, not only will you get the beatdown, but you'll probably be up on charges.

Actually, the law that you referrenced is for "official display" and there are no penalties associated with it. If I, as a private citizen, want to display the flag in a non-proscribed manner, I'm allowed. If I want to do it as a government employee on government property, I'm not. I can go home right now and hang my flag on my front porch upside down with the Soviet flag above it, and no one can make me take it down. I won't do that because it's not a statement that I want to make, but it's perfectly legal for me to do so. As far as the flag being a symbol, that's the whole point here. As a civilian, I'm allowed to make statements using that symbol, and it's a 1st Amendment right of mine to do so. I choose not to do so because of my personal beliefs, but if I change my mind, YOU are fighting for MY right to. You don't have to like it, but that's the way the system works. Sorry if you don't like it, but it's the world (and country) we live in.

Yes, America is currently more complicated than the anthem depicts. I personally look at the national anthem of our beginnings, of what our country was intended to be in the first place and what it should STILL be. It's not supposed to describe our country but it's supposed to inspire a pride, and service to our country. Just my 2 cents.