PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE FOLLIES

Check this out...

DENVER -- A recall election is now set for an Estes Park, Colo., trustee who refuses to stand up and recite the Pledge of Allegiance during the Town Board meetings. David Habecker sits while others stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. "I have not been standing for the Pledge of Allegiance due to a conflict I have with the wording of the pledge, specifically the words 'under God,'" Councilman David Habecker said. Habecker said it's a violation of church and state to include the words in the pledge and for that reason, he won't stand.

It is truly amazing to me how many people get so worked up about the Pledge of Allegiance and the so-called separation of church and state.

First, if you haven't done so already, please research the origins of the pledge. You will find it was written by a man (a Christian Socialist) in the 1890s who was engaged in an effort to spread universal public education (the compulsory, government-run public school system we are familiar with today) across the country. As a political tactic he wrote the pledge for a Columbus Day celebration he envisioned being recited by schoolchildren all over America. He wanted the support of patriotic organizations like the Grand Army of the Republic to help sell the concept of universal public education. He got it. Eventually other patriotic organizations came on board and convinced the politicians to make the pledge official. In the early 1950s, facing "godless communism", the Knights of Columbus convinced Congress to add the words "under God" to the pledge. My bottom line? The pledge is not a sacred patriotic rite. It wasn't created by the Founders of the Republic and is not essential to the survival of the Republic.

Second, regarding the separation of church and state, please read Thomas Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptist Association, from which the phrase was lifted. Jefferson was responding to a congratulatory letter from the association after winning a second term as President. Along with their congratulations, the Connecticut Baptists were hoping to get public support from Jefferson for the movement to dis-establish the established religion of Connecticut at the time (Congregationalism). Baptists saw themselves as an oppressed minority which, in many ways, they were. Jefferson simply agreed with them that states should not have state-sanctioned "established" religious denominations, although he also indicated he had no power as the Chief Magistrate of the land to force those states to change their ways, other than through reasoned persuasion. My bottom line? The Supreme Court has taken Jefferson's words and used them to, wittingly or not, sow confusion as to the proper relationship between organized religion and the states in the USA. In my view, Jefferson would never have agreed that organized religion should be driven from the public square, only that Congress and the state legislatures should not be allowed to establish an official religion either for their state, or the country as a whole.