On the Pledge

A recent U.S. Ninth District Court ruling states that the Pledge of Allegiance may not be said in schools because of the term “under God.”

Thank God.

In a sickening response to the ruling, many lawmakers in Washington, D.C., newspaper editorials and common Americans have been in an uproar about the ruling because it takes God away from them. No, it doesn’t. It just puts God in a proper context—which isn’t in public schools, or any other government-sponsored forum, for that matter.

If I hear one more idiot say, “Whoever says God shouldn’t be in schools isn’t there on test days,” I think I might go insane. I could care less about the kid praying to him- or herself, hoping to pass a math test. That’s a personal choice for the child.

What bothers me is the state-sponsored endorsement of religion, any religion. It doesn’t matter that God could be Buddha or Vishnu or Allah. It matters that God is invoked at all. By using such terms as “under God,” schools are alienating those children who do not believe in God. Isn’t that what the separation of church and state was meant for? So the church would in no way become a part of the state?

Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn) said the day of the ruling that if the court’s ruling isn’t overturned, he and other senators should join together to change the Constitution of the United States to allow for such loaded terms as “under God” in government-sponsored literature and activities. Now, I understand that Lieberman is religious, which is wonderful for him, and I am glad he is. However, changing the Constitution to allow religion and government to come together is a dangerous step and one that should not be considered.

Many people are concerned that other God references will be ruled unconstitutional as well. I once again pray to God that they are. When officials are sworn in, the ending statement “so help me God” is divisive. How can an atheist feel his rights, which are constitutionally protected, are being respected when each and every politician must ask God for help?

I do not believe that politicians need to stop believing, or even invoking God, such as the singing of “God Bless America” on Sept. 11. Again, that’s an individual’s choice. I have no issue with that. But forcing the non-religious to be in an area where religion is used as an expression of unity is exclusionary and wrong.

Despite what one senator said June 26, the founding fathers are not spinning in their graves. They were spinning in their graves in 1954 when Congress added the term “under God” as an unconstitutional and paranoid response to “godless communism.”

While the majority of America is religious, the Constitution wasn’t written to protect the majority. It was structured to make sure all people were protected equally. Finally, someone has realized this and done the right thing. I congratulate the two members of the court that realized what most Americans cannot realize.

If Congress had any understanding of the Constitution, which they have proven over the years that they don’t, they would strike “under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance and move on. Children all over America could still come together in unity every morning—even more so than now, because everyone would be included.

Gabriel Doss is the RN&R’s editorial assistant.