Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Michael Lind: The Pledge of Allegiance is un-American

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
marmar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 10:56 AM
Original message
Michael Lind: The Pledge of Allegiance is un-American
Edited on Tue Nov-17-09 10:57 AM by marmar
via CommonDreams:



Published on Tuesday, November 17, 2009 by Salon.com

The Pledge of Allegiance is un-American
Shouldn't the government pledge allegiance to the people rather than the other way around?

by Michael Lind


On Monday, Oct. 5, at an elementary school in Washington County, Ark., Will Phillips, a precocious 10-year-old who had been promoted from third to fifth grade, refused to join his class in standing and reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. His parents have gay friends, and Will claimed that the denial of gay marriage means that the U.S. lacks "liberty and justice for all." After refusing to recite the pledge for several days, the boy was sent to the principal's office when he told his teacher, "With all due respect, ma'am, you can go jump off a bridge," a sentiment shared by many 10-year-olds who are not political activists.

Flaps over the Pledge of Allegiance occur with dreary regularity. In 2000 Michael Newdow, an atheist and the parent of a child in California's public schools, filed a lawsuit claiming that the pledge was unconstitutional because of its inclusion of the phrase "under God." He won in federal circuit court, but in 2004 the Supreme Court chickened out and, to avoid addressing the issue, tossed out the case on the argument that as a noncustodial parent he did not have standing to sue. Newdow is a party in a subsequent case that is working its way through the courts. Back in 1940, the Supreme Court ruled that Jehovah's Witnesses could be forced to recite the pledge, and then, in 1943, in the midst of a war against totalitarian states, the court reversed its earlier opinion.

Individuals like Phillips and Newdow who publicly challenge the Pledge of Allegiance can expect to provoke not only harassment by their neighbors but also cyclones of bloviation emanating from elected leaders who, unwilling to fix healthcare or pay for infrastructure, always have time to defend the pledge or the flag. In response to the Newdow case, 150 members of Congress gathered on the steps of the Capitol to recite the pledge, stressing "under God." To show its understanding of the phrase "liberty and justice for all," the Republican-controlled House in 2004 passed a law stripping the federal courts of jurisdiction in cases involving the pledge; the bill died in the Senate, proving that the system of checks and balances sometimes succeeds in its intended function of thwarting mob rule.

Ironically, the Pledge of Allegiance, which today is most fiercely defended by white conservative Southerners whose Confederate ancestors tried to destroy the United States in the 1860s, was written by a Yankee socialist from New York in the 1890s. Francis Bellamy was a progressive Baptist minister and a Christian socialist who composed the pledge for the 400-year Columbus anniversary in 1892 and published it in a youth magazine. His cousin Edward Bellamy, a socialist from Massachusetts (Glenn Beck, are you taking notes?), was the author of the 1888 bestselling utopian novel "Looking Backward: 2007-1887," which described a collectivist America in 2007 in which everyone is drafted in an "industrial army" and dines in public kitchens. (Instead of an industrial army, the United States in 2007 had a reserve army of the unemployed and working poor, and instead of public kitchens we had Starbucks.) ...........(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/11/17-8




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
safeinOhio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 11:10 AM
Response to Original message
1. "With liberty and justice for some".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JonQ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 11:49 AM
Response to Original message
2. That is an interesting thought
our government was created explicitly as servants of the people, not the other way around.

But the pledge doesn't really swear allegiance to any current government, but rather the flag (presumably a metaphor for what our country stands for) and the country as a whole, and the republic. The under god bit has received a lot of attention and frankly I think it's a distraction that we could do without.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Winterblues Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Why should one not renew their oath of office on a daily basis as well
Why do people require one to pledge on a daily basis? Don't they believe you the first time you pledge? IMO if you make a pledge, you make a pledge. You don't have to repeat that pledge every single day or even every single year. If your word is good, it is good...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JonQ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. I think you're making a bit too much out of a harmless tradition
other nations have pledges as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. That metaphor means nothing when political leaders don't honor their oath
to uphold and defend the Constitution; without allegiance to the contract; the flag becomes glorified, macro, gang colors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arugula Latte Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 11:56 AM
Response to Original message
3. Mindless parroting of a silly "patriotic" pledge to a piece of fabric is pathetic, really.
Why don't we use that time to teach kids what the Constitution, instead of teaching them to turn off their brains and recite in unison like robots?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 07:46 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC