Tomorrow, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear a case in which the father of a young girl has opposed the use of “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance.
The Ninth Circuit has said — take it out — it promotes religion.
I think a phrase put in during a moment of anti-Communist fervor should take a bow out.
Through eighth grade, myself and my classmates were required to stand every morning, face the flag, place our hands on our hearts, and pledge our allegiance.
When I became savvy enough to figure out what was going on — I exercised my right to bow out of the ceremony. “Under God” being only one of the reasons.
As a child beginning to understand the pervasive effects of racism and religious fundamentalism — the pledge of allegiance didn’t sit right with me.
‘One nation’ — has anyone ever been to the inner city?
‘Under God’ — what if you don’t subscribe to Judeo Christian ideals?
‘with Liberty’ — a nation with a history of slavery?
‘and Justice for All’ — the criminal justice system?
By the time I sat this out — teachers left me alone. They knew that engaging me in a debate about any of this was not the best use of their time.
One day, however, another student in my eighth grade homeroom sat out the pledge. He was an immigrant from eastern Europe, he and his parents were in the process of seeking citizenship.
Although the young man, having personally experience oppressive nationalistic regimes, and giving good reason for sitting out the pledge, he was shamed into standing because any person seeking to become a true American would salute the flag and pledge allegiance to this great nation of ours.
This rant took a long time, the first period bell had rung, and the students waiting to enter this math classroom stood quietly at the door.
Every day after that young man with dark eyes stood solemnly and pledged his allegiance. I was left alone.
March 24, 2004 at 1:08 pm
I totally agree with the author regarding the hypocrisy of the “Pledge of Allegiance.” If I had only been strong enough emotionally during my grammar school years, I would have protested the mandate of reciting the pledge. Particularly as a gay male, I ask today, “Is their liberty and justice for all?” I am not psychotic because I am a man who is attracted to men, only. Just as heterosexuals claim to never have had to make a choice about whom they are attracted - the opposite sex- I too never made a choice to be attracted to the same sex. As I stood reciting the pledge of allegiance as a young boy, I didn’t understand it myself, but I was only emotionally attracted to males. Just as today, I am only attracted to my male partner. I now ask, “Why should I not have the right to marry whom I choose?” The only choice I know is with whom I will marry. The gender, of which I am attracted, has never been a choice. Hence, until we have liberty and justice for all, I say let’s not continue to be hypocrites. The entire pledge should be removed!
March 29, 2004 at 3:14 pm
I, too, agree with the removal of the “under god” clause in the pledge of allegience, simply because I am an atheist. I sat out the pledge beginning sometime in early high school. It does seem that we’re in the minority in opinion on this, though, according to what I’ve read lately. Whatever happened to separation of church and state??