Righting the Course
Yesterday a federal judge handed down a ruling claiming the addition of the phrase “under God,” added to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954, violates the constitutional protection from the government’s ability to establish religious preference.
This judge, serving on the federal bench in California, determined that the inclusion of the invocation of a deity equates to a constitutional violation. This same pledge, recited by millions of school children, designed not to establish a religion so much as to celebrate the same spirit under which this nation was founded, finds itself under an all out assault by liberal special interests.
These are the same voices that argue that religious symbology – such as the Ten Commandments – deserves no place in the public square. Even the Supreme Court of The United States has determined that there are situations where religious symbols, displayed in a proper context, have a place in public.
Without an analysis of the complainant and the merit (or lack thereof) of the individual facts of this case, I am sick and tired of the will of a disaffected, disgruntled loner backed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) carrying the day with a liberal judiciary to the detriment of our nation and its citizens.
As an ode to the ACLU and any radical wingnut who feels that a flag, a pledge, or a piece of statuary threatens their ability to function in their daily life, I have crafted the following politically correct affirmation for inclusion in any forum where the Pledge of Allegiance might possibly offend anyone.
I make a promise, conditioned on my desire and ability to fulfill it,
To the flag, preferably woven from a natural, biodegradable material
Of the Union of multi-cultural and diverse States,
And to the gathering of voices, for which it might be representative,
Multiple special interests, under the possibility of the existence of a higher power, or more likely not,
Divisible only when convenient, with freedom to do just about what everyone might ever want to do.
The U.S. Senate cannot possibly confirm President Bush’s choice of Judge John Roberts as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of The United States quickly enough. Soon-to-be Chief Justice Roberts will fill the void left by the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist, and would more than likely defend the Pledge of Allegiance from this latest radical assault.
I’m trying to imagine how we explain to little children who have carefully learned how to recite this pledge, this solemn promise to our nation. “Johnny, some father in California felt that making his child say Under God forced them to acknowledge the existence of God.” Or maybe this: “Sally, our nation is strong and free because one person can force everyone else to do things the way they want them done.”
We’re headed in the wrong direction as a country, and this latest decision is merely further proof of the decline.
The course must be righted.