I’ve tried to let the Christians off the hook lately — and it’s not like that’s exactly easy. Living in the Bible Belt, hardly a week goes by when I don’t notice something that drives me completely crazy about religious folks and their various hypocrisies.I can’t just hold it in forever. Especially in light of the recent angst over the Pledge of Allegiance. In case you live in one of those rare underground bunkers that doesn’t receive talk radio, I’ll fill you in on the latest doings of the eternally wild and wacky Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The court ruled that making students recite the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional because the words “under God” appear in it. The court ruled that these words represent a violation of the separation between church and state.
Christians, for the most part, don’t seem to see it that way. Ever since the ruling came down, I’ve heard various diatribes from Christians clearly bedeviled by this decision, so much so that they sometimes even have to take a break from coming up with clever answering machine messages like “We’ll return your call shortly, as long as we haven’t been called home in the Rapture.”
Generally, the Christians’ first point is about how petty such a stupid lawsuit is to begin with. Why does anyone care what is in the Pledge of Allegiance, they wonder in amazement.
I happen to agree with this point. It’s a useless and pointless sort of court case that ultimately accomplishes very little. Christians, however, although they say that the precise contents of the Pledge are unimportant, obviously don’t believe it. Why else would they harp about it continually? If it’s not important that the words “under God” are present, then it’s also not important if the words are gone.
Christians are also fond of making a point, ad nauseum, about the principles on which the United States was founded. This country was founded on the principles of Christianity, and there’s nothing you can do about that, they argue. This has some basis in truth, as most of the founders of this country were Christians. But somehow nothing about Christianity made it into the Bill of Rights. This is because the Founding Fathers thought it more important that we be able to make our own religious choices.
I think Christians are just being silly to take this court ruling as a personal affront. Taking the words “under God” out of the Pledge of Allegiance doesn’t make God any more or less a part of one’s religion, or even of the moral beliefs of the country. Removing those words doesn’t mean that federal judges “hate” God or religion or Christianity. All it means is that government doesn’t have anything to do with the discussion and, in fact, absolutely shouldn’t.
Personally, I’m not a Christian, and I still say the Pledge, “under God” and all, choosing to understand “God” to mean “greater power which could refer to a white-bearded patriarch or to nature itself or to any number of other deities worshipped around the world.” But my personal opinion isn’t really the point when it comes to a decision about whether something is constitutional or not. Neither should the personal opinions of any judge come into play.
When presented with this case, I think the court simply relied on the Constitution, which does actually say something crazy about separation between church and state. This means that the state, or the government, cannot tell the people who, what or how to worship. Inclusion of the words “under God” does actually endorse monotheistic religion as opposed to polytheism or atheism.
Of course, this is a point deemed completely irrelevant by Christians. Nobody worships the gods of Greek mythology anymore, they argue, seemingly unaware that some other world religions are polytheistic. And of course, Christians just don’t care what atheists believe and could give a flip about whether the Pledge of Allegiance applies to such non-believers.
Christians go on and on about how people are trying to take God right out of this country, “just like we took God out of the schools,” which makes me imagine God as some kind of street corner vagrant you might “throw out” of an area. If you believe God is an omnipotent entity, then you must realize that it’s impossible to make God leave some place he doesn’t wish to leave. Anyway, that’s some piss-poor sense of religion you have if it’s weakened simply because you don’t plug the words “under God” into the Pledge of Allegiance.
By the way, the court ruling doesn’t prevent you from saying the words “under God” when reciting the Pledge. You can add anything you want, including words with religious sentiment, such as “under God,” “under Allah” or even “under Satan.” No doubt, Christians would consider the latter two un-American and the first one just good, old-fashioned patriotism. Hmph.
The bottom line is that it will have no effect on my life whatsoever whether they change the Pledge or leave it the same. I think the Christians will find the same when they really stop and think about it. There is a benefit to our country of taking out those two pesky little words, though. Without them, we place the values of our country on the side of diversity and religious freedom, values that are surely as fundamental an aspect of this country as any religious beliefs.
This article appears in Jul 10-16, 2002.
