Here's Where I Start Pissing (Right-Leaning) People Off

(Hat Tip: Instapundit)

Undermining 'Under God'

Eugene Volokh -- The House of Representatives just passed a bill that says: "No court created by Act of Congress shall have any jurisdiction, and the Supreme Court shall have no appellate jurisdiction, to hear or decide any question pertaining to the interpretation of, or the validity under the Constitution of, the Pledge of Allegiance . . . or its recitation."

The trouble is that the proposed law might have the perverse effect of jeopardizing the "under God" rather than preserving it.

Ready for the "getting pissed" part? Take a deep breath and plunge ahead bunky...

The "trouble" is not that this sillyass move could remove "... under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance. The trouble is that "... under God" was ever added at all. The fellow who originally wrote the Pledge (in 1892) was a guy by the name of Francis Bellamy. He was a Baptist Pastor (as well as a Socialist, but that's neither here-nor-there) and he didn't write "...under God" into the Pledge. Sort of odd, what with him being a Pastor and all. "... under God" was added later, in the 1950s.

America was not founded as a Christian Nation, nor as a JuedoChristian Nation. It was founded as a nation of freedom. While we're at it, save the "under God doesn't mean the God of the Bible" argument. The Knights of Columbus were the driving force behind the changing of the Pledge. If Jews and Christians refered to the Divine as YHWH or Jehovah or Jesus, then I might buy that argument.

Changing the Pledge, like changing the National Motto from the far more applicable E Pluribus Unum to In God We Trust took place long after the time of the Founding Fathers. Now, there is a pile of FF quotes supporting both sides of the argument. Been there, done that. But two things written in the days of the FFs, by the FFs themselves lend themselves to undermine the "US was founded as a Christian Nation" argument.

The first is the First Amendment. The First Amendment and the First Commandment simply do not jive up. If the FFs were founding a JuedoChristian nation, would they list the freedom of religion at the top of the Bill of Rights?

The second is the Treaty of Tripoli, specifically, Article 11...

As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,--as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen,--and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

Unlike the changes to the Pledge and the Motto, which took place in the 1950s, the Treaty of Tripoli was first sketched out under Washington's second term, and ratified under Adams's first term. It was read aloud before the Congress and printed in the papers of the time, without uproar.

The "...under God" in the Pledge is isn't about some age-old tradition that's getting the business, it's about a recent tradition that never should have happened in the first place.

That said, I totally support the right of everyone, Christian and Non-Christian alike, to worship (or not worship) as they choose. One of the things about the Right that really drives me up the walls is that they feel the freedom of religion only applies to Christians. Of course, the Left's belief that the freedom of religion only applies to Non-Christians is equally as annoying.

The way I see it is, you believe as you choose and I'll believe as I choose. I'm not going to try and shove (overtly or subtly) my religous beliefs down your throat. Don't go trying to shove yours (overtly or subtly) down mine. "...under God" should be removed from the Pledge. E Pluribus Unum should once again be the national motto.

[/rant]