Voice of Reason: I am in agreement with pledge ruling
Though I’ll no doubt be called a blankety-blank-blank godless heathen atheist (or some other like term) by scores of people in many Sunday school classes across the county today, I have to go ahead and say it anyway: I agree with the decision of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
For those of you who’ve been unconscious since the middle of last week, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last Wednesday the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional because the words “under God” violate the constitutionally required separation of church and state.
With the exception of two or three people (whom I won’t name as I’m quite sure they would take exception to being lynched), everyone I have talked to about this ruling has voiced their utter dismay the court would render such a “ridiculous” ruling.
And while I can understand the majority’s sentiment, I certainly do not agree with it.
Allow me to quote the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” To me, this is a crystal-clear statement the government must remain neutral in matters of religion, not favoring one over another, or belief over non-belief. Clearly, the phrase “under God” implies government endorsement of first, a god, and second, the Judeo-Christian god.
And while the majority of Americans are Judeo-Christian, there are over 2,000 religions and denominations in this country and millions of Americans who profess no religion at all. To have a government-paid teacher in a government-funded school lead children in making a profession of religious belief goes against everything this country stands for (in theory).
In cases such as this we must respect the rights of the minority, even if it’s just a minority of one (which it isn’t) because when one person’s rights are trampled, no one’s rights are secure.
Now I have no problem with the Pledge of Allegiance in and of itself. When the pledge was written in 1892 by a Baptist preacher it did not contain the words “under God” and it was recited for decades without such a reference. Somehow we managed to get through the Great Depression and win two world wars with that Pledge. Simply amazing.
When Congress unconstitutionally added the phrase to the pledge in 1954, it did so with the intention of differentiating our country, “the bastion of freedom,” with those “godless Communist countries.” What happened, as Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State points out, was it turned a patriotic exercise into a religious ritual in which many Americans cannot in good conscience participate.
“(Wednesday’s court) decision shows respect for freedom of conscience,” said Rev. Lynn. “You can be a patriotic American regardless of your religious beliefs or lack of religion. Our government should not coerce school children – or anyone else – to make a profession of religious belief.”
Further emphasizing this point was Judge Alfred T. Goodwin, who wrote the opinion for the three-judge panel which made Wednesday’s decision.
“A profession that we are a nation ‘under God’ is identical, for Establishment Clause purposes, to a profession that we are a nation ‘under Jesus,’ a nation ‘under Vishnu,’ a nation ‘under Zeus,’ or a nation ‘under no god,’ because none of these professions can be neutral with respect to religion,” Goodwin wrote.
I agree.
(Will Stewart is a reporter for the Standard. He can be reached at 473-2191 or by e-mail at standard@blomand.net.)