I Pledge Allegiance.... TO SATAN!

An article by Shad

June 23, 2002 Good morning. We will not be reciting the Pledge of Allegiance today. Instead, we will be singing "The Answer Is Blowing In The Wind" because it is the least offensive thing we can find.

Today, the 9th circuit US Court of Appeals ruled that the 1954 act of Congress that placed the phrase 'under God' is unconstitutional and forces students to make an "unacceptable choice between participating and protesting" during classroom pledges. The ruling was the result of an appeal made to a case in Sacramento where the second-grade daughter of an atheist family was required to recite the pledge with her classmates. The father stated that the phrase 'under God' is a "religious idea that certain people don't agree with" and also said during a recent interview "I'm an American citizen. I don't like my rights infringed upon by my government".

The 2-1 ruling by the Court of Appeals came as a shock, re-establishing the need once again for the majority of Americans to force their own values and religious beliefs upon those of us who have different ideas and belief structures. The gray area between what is right and what is wrong is once again clouded, despite the statement during the appeal of one judge that the phrase, which contains the word God, is in fact a religious proclamation and cannot be distinguished as a neutral statement, and can therefore be offensive to those who do no t believe in God. Unfortunately, there are many religious people who maintain the 1950's mentality that put this phrase into law, and nobody could ever have said it better than the 34th President of the United States Dwight D. Eisenhower; "millions of our schoolchildren will daily proclaim in every city and town, every village and rural schoolhouse, the dedication of our nation and our people to the Almighty."

Many people are arguing over the meaning of the phrase even as I write this article. The majority vote so far tells us that many people believe that regardless of religion, most people believe in God and therefore it is the right thing to say, regardless of the fact that there may be some people who do not believe in any organized belief structure. One judge was quoted to say (and I'm assuming that it was the one vote against the appeal) that the phrase 'under God' does not establish religious beliefs nor does it keep anyone from exercising the religion of their choice, "except in the fevered eye of persons who most fervently would like to drive all tincture of religion out of public life." And therein lies the problem.

There are people, albeit a minority, that do not believe in God, in organized religious structures, or in being forced to bear witness to the glory and goodness of it all. These people, while some may be open-minded, may take offense to the requirement put in place by many schools that they must recite a phrase that they do not believe in because of a law passed in 1954. Many people who believe in the law will platform that this country was founded on the same beliefs and faith that put this phrase into practice, and therefore it would be unconstitutional to remove it from the pledge. This is both true and false. Our country was not only based on in treading on other people for their own religious and democratic freedom, but also to escape the government that made it necessary to do so.

Unfortunately, since religion creates such a vicious cycle of offense against defense, the only truly constitutional thing that should be done about the law is to try not to offend people whenever possible. The placement of the word God can be seen by many people as a statement of religious belief, and therefore treads upon the very belief of religious freedom that this country was founded on. On the other hand, the people who built this country were very religious, and this trend continued until the law was passed which put the pledge into schools in the first place.

The fact that religion has been in public life up until this point is not relevant. People have a right to say and do whatever they want (within lawful reason). Children are very impressionable and should be free to learn about religion in their own way, without feeling awkward because they are uncomfortable with the concept of God, or their parents having to worry about other people's beliefs being pressed upon them at school. Instead of the appeal removing the pledge from schools, they should have simply removed that which was deemed unconstitutional - the phrase 'under God'. We cannot preach tolerance and then tolerate only what we choose. This goes both ways. We cannot remove religion from the public eye completely, but perhaps we do need to think about what is required of people in public. There is a mutual respect that is lacking, and someday perhaps we'll get it right. Here's hoping.

Source: MSNBC

Editor's note: Shad was born Roman Catholic and is now no longer practicing. Please direct all inquiries here.