The Pledge on the 4th of July

July 4, 2005

The Washington Post had an interesting item yesterday to honor the 4th by revisiting the Pledge of Allegiance.

So few words, so many arguments. Yet the Pledge of Allegiance has never been static. On this July 4 weekend, Outlook offers 19 variations on the theme.

Like John Cole, I think Christopher Buckley’s submission was by far the most entertaining, but the Post’s item touched on another interesting point — the changes made to the Pledge since its inception.

1892 version: I pledge allegiance to my Flag, and the Republic for which it stands: one Nation indivisible, With Liberty and Justice for all.

1923 version: I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States, and to the Republic for which it stands: one Nation indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all.

1924 version: I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands: one nation indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all.

1954 version: I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Seeing the progression got me thinking a bit.

My parents’ generation, and their parents’ generation, recited a secular Pledge. Everyone who fought in both World Wars and survived the Great Depression managed to be patriotic and religious without reciting the words “under God.”

In fact, it’s probably worth mentioning that the Rev. Francis Bellamy wrote the original Pledge — and Bellamy was both a Baptist minister and a socialist. (He was vice president of the Society of Christian Socialists and frequently lectured on “Jesus the Socialist.” But I digress…)

When the Pledge was changed to its current language, it was at the height of “red scare” and Congress added “under God” to stick it to the commies. Introducing the resolution in the Senate, Sen. Homer Ferguson (R-Minn.) said, “I believe this modification of the Pledge is important because it highlights one of the real fundamental differences between the free world and the communist world, namely belief in God.”

Fair enough. But if that’s the case, and we added “under God” at the height of the Cold War because our enemies were godless communists, should we take the phrase out now because our enemies are religious fanatics?

When the Pledge was added, the nation’s primary scourge were people who were professed atheists. (There’s plenty of debate about just how “godless” the Russians really were at the time, but that’s another story for another day.) The Knights of Columbus, which led the campaign to change the Pledge in 1954, saw this is a symbolic gesture to remind communists that Americans, in general, are a religious bunch.

That was then. The new enemies America faced aren’t atheists; just the opposite. They’re deeply religious people who believe their efforts are guided by God. Indeed, they attack and slaughter because of their faith.

If the Pledge is a rhetorical tool to send symbolic messages to our international foes, as the government said it was in the ’50s, then perhaps we should revisit the wording to send a new message?

After all, if the 1954 precedent is right, we should be going out of our way to distance ourselves from the ways of the enemy and “highlight the fundamental differences” between us and them. With that in mind, if fundamentalist terrorists desperately want religion and government to be merged in a theocracy, the U.S., in turn, should be doing everything possible to embrace church-state separation and make patriotic oaths like the Pledge of Allegiance completely secular.

Right?

Another way the pledge was changed in order to “highlight fundamental differences between us and them” was that the flag salute, given while pledging, was changed in 1942 from one that looked very much like the Nazi “heil” salute to the current hand-over-heart thing.

So, yes, you’re right. But it ain’t gonna happen, and you know why.

  • Aside from the “under God” nonsense that will never
    be removed, I’ve always wondered about the first
    clause. Why are we pledging allegiance to a FLAG?
    And then almost as an afterthought, to the republic
    for which it stands?

    Ironically, the pledge would seem to vindicate the
    position of the flag burning amendment zealots.

  • Ha, ha.

    Surely you know that this isn’t an era where appealing to logic will get anything done? No, what we need to do is build a rationale that demonstrates that it is disloyal to God and/or country to have them both in the same phrase. A kind of “Give unto Caesar what is his…”

    Nah. The only thing that would work is a liberal Court. And we’re not likely to see that any time soon.

  • Yes, you’re right. The answer to religious fanatacism is not more religion. As long as that “under God” is in there, the “indivisible” part ain’t gonna happen. As if it would anyway… Actually the indivisible part should not be in there either for some very positive reasons I think.

    Thanks for the info about the motive for including “under God” in the 1950. I hadn’t thought of the godless Communists angle to that before.

  • I’ve never been uncomfortable with the “under God” bit, and not just because it is inconsistent with the spirit of the Founding Fathers.

    If you think about it, it’s actually a very clever way to put non-Christians (or non-monotheists) into a position of disloyalty to the State. Either they remain true to their beliefs and refuse to say the pledge, thus incriminating themselves as disloyal, or they recite the pledge and dishonor their consciences. Ironically, Rome put Christians in the same predicament when the Emperors were considered divine. I’m sure the Robertsons and Falwells would come up with something fine-sounding to justify the hypocrisy.

  • Knowing this bunch, it seems more likely they’d take the opportunity to differentiate “our” God from “their” God.

    He’s a uniter, not a divider, donchaknow?

  • I have a mostly off topic question. What is your favorite patriotic music? For me Ray Charles’ “America” probably tops the list. It brings tears to my eyes and not only because of how beautifully he sang it.

    The reason I ask is because I just got off the phone with my parents, who had just attended a Marine Corps. Band concert. They were thrilled by it. When my republican father asked me if I had heard any patriotic music today, I said only on TV. He said, “Well, you can always whistle Dixie”. Yes, I’m from and they live in the south. I called him on it as did my mother, but that’s where the republican party is in the south.

    BTW, my father was approached by the first Bush administration about a district court appointment. I’m glad he declined.

    Sorry, I had to get that off my chest.

    Back to the original question: what is your favorite patriotic music?

  • As I read this thread, I am listening to the “1812 Overture”. Absolutely the best for the Fourth!!
    Happy Birthday, America!!!!

  • There has hardly been a time when i disagreed with you, however You say it is because of their “faith” is why they attacked. I disagree to some extent in that they attacked us because of US foreign policy: policies that hurt their economies, policies that heavily favour Israel without giving much if any regard to the plights of the Palestinian people, policies that imprison people indefinitely only for being “suspected” of without being charged with, policies that deny access to courts, policies that inflict torture and abuse … so on and so forth.

    When we pledge allegiance to our flag — we pledge allegiance to what our flag symbolizes: freedom, liberty and justice to ALL — the cornerstones of the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights. This nation is indivisible based on those precepts. But where we seem to be divided is whether people should be incarcerated based on suspicion only without being given the same right as [most] Americans are given to prove otherwise. Therefore it is hypocritical to pledge allegiance to the flag when our country does not afford all world citizens those same rights. Either we believe in our Constitution or we don’t.

    As long as we fail to extend liberty and justice across the globe and continue endorsing policies that do not extend mutual respect & trust to other countries then the merits and values pale theretofore fostering Anti-Americanism for its hypocrisy in action. I love this country for what it has stood for. What i find fault with is when it only applies to Americans and when our policies harm others. Until we uphold what we say we stand for with actions can we honourably salute the US flag. IMHO

  • “What is your favorite patriotic music?”

    I’m pretty flexible: as long as it isn’t Whitney Houston’s version of the Star Spangled Banner. Gawd, that song took forever–I wanted to stuff a plunger down her throat just to end the torment. I remember when every softball game I played led off with that song. I just wanted to die.

    I like the 1812 Overture too, though I always think of the Battle of Borodino and the Russians whipping some Frenchies than Fort McHenry when I hear that song.

  • I’ve never been uncomfortable with the “under God” bit, and not just because it is inconsistent with the spirit of the Founding Fathers.

    Me neither. That’s why, whenever I say the pledge, I simply don’t say those two words. As Mark Twain said, “Loyalty to the country always, but loyalty to the government only when it deserves loyalty.”

  • Thanks for the information regarding the dates and changes to the pledge. The liberal side of my family has been arguing with the conservative side about exactly when “under God” was added and now we have the definitive answer. Thanks also to Jay Denari for the Mark Twain quote, which I’m sure I’ll be frequently repeating.

    As for favorite patriotic music, nothing even comes close to Marvin Gaye’s rendition of “The Star-Spangled Banner.” I don’t know what year it was, but he performed it before an NBA All-Star game in LA. Still gives me goose bumps when I hear it! (And Whitney should be ashamed of herself!)

  • This flag-worship– only slightly less noxious than the god-worship– is bullshit IMHO.

    I’ll pledge allegiance to the *constitution* of the USA, perhaps. Like the oath (or affirmation) that the preznit himself, members of congress and senate, and (IIRC) military officers take.

    I will not regard a scrap of cloth as any more holy than any other scrap of cloth; neither will I regard any book as any more holy than any other book (all books are a bit holy in my view– I love reading).

    I think it’s worth noting that when the colonists declared independence, and later when they drafted the current constitution, the flag was an afterthought.

    Mad props to the commenter who finally traced the weird habit of flag-worship in this country back to a couple generations’ worth of reciting that damnable pledge. It’s hypnosis– generations of schoolchildren have been brainwashed into worshipping a fucking rag, and as a result they get a sense of religious veneration for both the rag itself and the pledge of worshipping it.

    • Comments are closed.