This should piss the so-called athiest off.
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- A federal appeals court in San Francisco upheld the use of the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance and "In God We Trust" on U.S. currency, rejecting arguments on Thursday that the phrases violate the separation of church and state.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel rejected two legal challenges by Sacramento atheist Michael Newdow, who claimed the references to God disrespect his religious beliefs.
"The Pledge is constitutional," Judge Carlos Bea wrote for the majority in the 2-1 ruling. "The Pledge of Allegiance serves to unite our vast nation through the proud recitation of some of the ideals upon which our Republic was founded."
The Facts
While I do not consider myself an Atheist, I am far from being a religious man. I question the existence of a GOD or gods, but I do not fault others for their beliefs. I do not concern myself with the mention of GOD on our currency, it bothers me not one whit. However, when it comes to the Pledge of Allegiance, things start to get murky for me. First, I am of the opinion that children should not be saying the Pledge without some sort of discussion as to it's meaning and origins first. Simple recitation of the Pledge rote is, in my mind, nothing short of indoctrination.
Second, the phrase "under GOD" is troublesome to me in this day in age. Consider the diversity of the population in the U.S., the diversity of beliefs, religions. The author of the Pledge, Francis Bellamy, was a Christian Socialist. Fine, I have no problem with that, but he did not include GOD in the Pledge.
The original 1892 version:
I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
In 1923 and 1924, the National Flag Conference, with the urging of the leadership of the American Legion and the DAR, changed the words "my Flag" to "'the Flag of the United States of America," ostensibly for the benefit of new immigrants. Okay, still no problem, Bellamy didn't like it, but what author likes having his or her worked edited? So far so good.
1923 version:
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States and to the republic for which it stands: one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all.
1924-1954 version:
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands; one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all.
Now we come to 1954. Prior to the adoption of the words "under GOD," start sometime in the mid '40s, some groups had started inserting "under GOD" into the Pledge at their meetings. Perhaps the most prominent of these groups was The Knights of Columbus. The Knights of Columbus spearheaded the push to officially ad "under GOD" to the Pledge. Nine years into the Cold War, McCarthyism, partly responsible for people wanting to add GOD to the Pledge. There was a desire to differentiate between Communism, which we all know promotes Atheism, and western Democracies, which were, at least at the time, nominally Christian. Supposedly fifteen resolutions to change the Pledge fell flat. It wasn't until Eisenhower attended church and heard a sermon from Rev. George Docherty that any movement on the idea started. What did Docherty say in his sermon that started the ball rolling?
Apart from the mention of the phrase 'the United States of America,' it could be the pledge of any republic. In fact, I could hear little Muscovites repeat a similar pledge to their hammer-and-sickle flag in Moscow.
Okay, considering the times, I understand that. No problem.
1954 to Present version:
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
But this is the 21st Century. The Cold War is over. The country is much more diverse than it once was. Do we really need "under GOD" in the Pledge? Don't those words make the Pledge not only an oath, but a prayer as well? If it's been changed before, why not again?
Perhaps if we consider Bellamy's recollections of what went through his mind in 1892 as he chose the words for his Pledge:
It began as an intensive communing with salient points of our national history, from the Declaration of Independence onwards; with the makings of the Constitution...with the meaning of the Civil War; with the aspiration of the people...
The true reason for allegiance to the Flag is the 'republic for which it stands.' ...And what does that vast thing, the Republic mean? It is the concise political word for the Nation - the One Nation which the Civil War was fought to prove. To make that One Nation idea clear, we must specify that it is indivisible, as Webster and Lincoln used to repeat in their great speeches. And its future?
Just here arose the temptation of the historic slogan of the French Revolution which meant so much to Jefferson and his friends, 'Liberty, equality, fraternity.' No, that would be too fanciful, too many thousands of years off in realization. But we as a nation do stand square on the doctrine of liberty and justice for all.
I am not saying anyone should abandon their beliefs. What I am saying is, the United States is, today, much more than a Christian nation. It is a nation of Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Taoists, Rastafarians, Atheists, Agnostics, and any other belief system I may be forgetting.
This is going to a whole new level...Now you are beating dead horses on multiple threads.
