Blog Against Theocracy Posted by peter ramus, 09 Apr 2007 03:25 am
O say can you see? No, but thanks for asking.
[A WAAGNFNP Special - Blog Against Theocracy Week: Expanded Edition!]
In the United Sates the policy of openly worshipping Undergod in public schools has a long and troubling history.
Oh, of course for the politicians this is a red meat issue, presumed to stir the deepest feelings of the fervid masses of believers and set them marching in droves with their pitchforks and staves and torches down to the nearest polling booth at election time to give a big boost up to the candidate most loudly trumpeting the right, —no, the solemn duty — of each and every otherwise ignorant child to voice allegiance to both the nation and to Undergod in the self-same breath on a daily basis as a regular part of the curriculum.
Only a few years back one tike’s father, appalled by the insistent reference to said deity his innocent child was being subjected to by the standard school pledge of allegiance, won a preliminary judgement in Federal Court that Undergod be stricken from the pledge, and sparked a most curious and heated uproar, as I recall.
Purely out of comity I rarely refer in public to the disturbing tenets of my own so-called “religious” beliefs, and even more rarely do I take advantage of the opportunity so often presented in this day and age to join in the heated discussion of others’. However, as the contentions surrounding Undergod don’t seem likely to dissipate soon, and as in the midst of even the most fractious debate a moderating word must eventually be spoken, I offer up my view on this matter for whatever calming effect it may provide.
The famous First Commandment of that well-known book, The Bible, hallows an insult, the ordinal, founding insult required of all the initiates of all the bewildering variety of groups claiming to adhere to that book’s strictures in some sense or other, an insult offered up as the core necessary and sufficient first nugget of the testament of true faith, pithily given in one exclusionary statement: I spurn your god. Oh, do I ever. Words to that effect, you see.
To my mind this is brisk and direct and useful in establishing the groundrules for further religious conversation, and I have no qualms at all following at least this far along the proposed path of proper religion sketched out there by the Bible. I spurn your god in a most thoroughgoing and adamantine way, — I do. Your god is as nothing to me, I swear, and I’m happy to acknowledge we’re on the same page as far as this goes. But all this pledging faith to Undergod in schools? A step too far, is what I’m saying. I won’t go there.
Blog for Religious Freedom graphic by Liz.
Trackbacks
Responses to “O say can you see? No, but thanks for asking.”
-
on 09 Apr 2007 at 6:59 am 1. Jams said …
I think characterizing the first commandment as an insult is being pretty generous. As I understand it, the bible recommends death as a punishment for anyone who breaks any of the the ten commandments. This dislodges the first commandment as an insult, and promotes directly up to genocidal threat.
-
on 09 Apr 2007 at 8:16 am 2. spyder said …
Here’s a start on the morning maniac music:
Goodling is only one of 150 graduates of Regent University currently serving in this administration, as Regent’s Web site proclaims proudly, a huge number for a 29-year-old school. Regent estimates that “approximately one out of every six Regent alumni is employed in some form of government work.” And that’s precisely what its founder desired. The school’s motto is “Christian Leadership To Change the World,” and the world seems to be changing apace. Former Attorney General John Ashcroft teaches at Regent, and graduates have achieved senior positions in the Bush administration. The express goal is not only to tear down the wall between church and state in America (a “lie of the left,” according to Robertson) but also to enmesh the two.
-
on 09 Apr 2007 at 8:27 am 3. christian h. said …
Jams, I think that at the time the ten commandments were formulated, Judaism was monolatrist, not monotheist (although that seems to be subject to considerable debate). In any event, the admonition to not worship another god seems clearly directed only at Jews. Hence, threat - yes; genocidal - not as I see it. (I’m not saying genocide is never promoted in the Bible, because it definitely is - just not by the first commandment).
I admit that the whole pledge of allegiance - with or without undergod (great picture, by the way, peter) - seems incredibly nationalistic to me. I mean, forcing your kids every day to pledge allegiance to a flag - is that normal?
-
on 09 Apr 2007 at 9:14 am 4. JP Stormcrow said …
The Pledge itself has become a palimpsest from which one can read (or not read) many of the hopes and fears of the American experience. The “under god” is merely the latest in a string of modifications. (And if you want an illustration of where early 21st-century consensus political reality is on the subject, note that after the decision that peter alludes to, the Senate and House both voted to “reaffirm” the words “under God” with 0 and 3 dissenting votes respectively.) A few highlights gleaned from here and here.
Bellamy (a Socialist) considered including “equality”, but he knew that the state superintendents of education on his committee were against equality for women and African Americans
“My flag” changed to ‘Flag of the United States of America” in early ’20s on fears of immigration (concerned their reference to “my flag” was somethng different.)
In the 1950s came “undergod”, basically to differentiate our pledge from what a communist nation would be comfortable with.
So there you have it: equality for all groups,immigration fears, fear of communism, and religion in politics (and to Christian’s point why even have it?) all rolled into one neat package. Not one of the high points of what MB once called our Civic Nationalism.
It will surely change again, what do people predict will be the next version? Undergod save us if it is the version some pro-lifers are pushing: with liberty and justice for all, born and unborn.
My bet: “with liberty, security and justice for all”, and undergod will be with us through my lifetime. But not to worry, I am getting old!
-
on 09 Apr 2007 at 11:09 am 5. spyder said …
Because the Ed Code, in CA states that the act of saying the Pledge is regarded as an expression of patriot comportment, most feel it is compulsary. It is not, as Jehovah’s Witnesses and others know quite well. Nor is the pledge all that necessary. The wording of the Ed Code, as i have pointed out to numerous teachers in training, says it is the patriot act that matters, and that the pledge is the most relevant example. I always taught teachers, who had issues with the pledge itself, to substitue the Preamble of the Constitution. It rocks.
And now for theocracy’s scourge on the intellectuals. Let’s say that of those 150 Regent University graduates in high places in Bushco inc., several are in the DHS. Would it be reasonable, given the 33 year old Gooding’s rank, to think that some of her fellow alums might be involved in the vetting and assigning of people to the No-Fly List??? Over at Balkin today, we have this tragic and senseless story.
I am posting the below with the permission of Professor Walter F. Murphy, emeritus of Princeton University. For those who do not know, Professor Murphy is easily the most distinguished scholar of public law in political science. His works on both constitutional theory and judicial behavior are classics in the field. Bluntly, legal scholarship that does not engage many themes in his book, briefly noted below, Constitutional Democracy, may be legal, but cannot be said to be scholarship. As interesting, for present purposes, readers of the book will discover that Murphy is hardly a conventional political or legal liberal. While he holds some opinions, most notably on welfare, similar to opinions held on the political left, he is a sharp critic of ROE V. WADE, and supported the Alito nomination. Apparently these credentials and others noted below are no longer sufficient to prevent one from becoming an enemy of the people.
“On 1 March 07, I was scheduled to fly on American Airlines to Newark, NJ, to attend an academic conference at Princeton University, designed to focus on my latest scholarly book, Constitutional Democracy, published by Johns Hopkins University Press this past Thanksgiving.”
“When I tried to use the curb-side check in at the Sunport, I was denied a boarding pass because I was on the Terrorist Watch list. I was instructed to go inside and talk to a clerk. At this point, I should note that I am not only the McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence (emeritus) but also a retired Marine colonel.
yaba daba dooo…
-
on 09 Apr 2007 at 2:34 pm 6. JP Stormcrow said …
Just to let you know, I read this through several times before I got the “undergod” reference. I sometimes have these big mental blind spots, I recall horrifying my mother in my early teens by saying to her: “Oh, I get it, Kanga and Roo, it makes kangaroo.” This after having heard and read Winnie-the-Pooh dozens of times.
-
on 09 Apr 2007 at 2:38 pm 7. christian h. said …
JP: me, too. And just like you, I sometimes “get” the joke years late - leading people to question my sanity…
-
on 09 Apr 2007 at 2:40 pm 8. christian h. said …
As far as Murphy and the no-fly list is concerned - I think the more likely explanation is his not-so-uncommon Irish name. Probably also in use by some IRA person.
-
on 09 Apr 2007 at 3:07 pm 9. Oaktown Girl said …
I think I may have been among the last generation of school kids (at least in the West Coast urban areas) to have had to say the Pledge every morning in class. That lasted up until about 1973/4 when I was in 4th grade, and after that it was rather spotty and random.
In Kindergarten it seemed the main purpose was to teach us kids our right hand from our left hand, and that worked pretty well so I was happy about that. Then about 2nd grade I remember beginning to actually hear and think about the words I was saying, and it made me uncomfortable because clearly me and my family’s American Experience was very different than that of White folks - even poor White folks. (Note to make MOOAD Minister spyder proud: I had already written an anti-Nixon song a few years earlier in protest of the bombing of Cambodia).
But it was only within the last decade or so that I learned the “under God” part was a new piece added during the height of the Cold War to distinguish us (euphemism for “propaganda”) from the Commies. So I was extra outraged a few years ago about all those folks crying and screaming about the destroying of “tradition” if “under God” were removed from the Pledge, as if it had been there from the start.
Great post, peter, and an awesome photo.
-
on 09 Apr 2007 at 5:18 pm 10. James Killus said …
But if we get rid of Undergod, what will happen to Richard Stands?
-
on 10 Apr 2007 at 6:16 am 11. Amanda French said …
I rented “Supersize Me” a couple of weeks ago, and in the DVD extras, there was footage of the filmmaker trying to get two women and a kid of about ten or twelve to recite the Pledge of Allegiance. They kept getting it wrong. Then he asked them to recite the classic Big Mac McDonald’s jingle: “Two all-beef patties special sauce cheese lettuce onions on a sesame seed bun.” They nailed it on the first try. (Like me.)
-
on 10 Apr 2007 at 6:50 am 12. jimmiraybob said …
Ha. I had to read the post a couple of times too (and a comment or two) before I realized the Undergod & pledge connection. I thought someone was trying to slip in another deity. What would the FS Monster have thunk? Well, as my momma used to say, not so swiftus is as not so swiftus does…or something.
Like Oaktown Girl I remember it as a solid aid in learning how to tell my left from my right and come to think of it, it’s still a pretty good guide.
Isn’t the Code of Hammurabi a more thorough legal code than the Ten Commandments? Shouldn’t we be mobilizing to have that posted on every schoolhouse and courtroom wall in the land? Weren’t the Ten Commanments and the Old Testament built on a Hammurabian/Babylonian ethic?
False witness
3. If any one bring an accusation of any crime before the elders, and does not prove what he has charged, he shall, if it be a capital offense charged, be put to death.Eye for an eye
196. If a man put out the eye of another man, his eye shall be put out.etc, etc, etc.
-
on 10 Apr 2007 at 10:22 am 13. James Killus said …
“I pledge our Legions to the Flag, of the United Stakes of America. And Toothery Public for Richard Stands, one Nation, Undergod, Indy visible, with liver tea and just us, for all.”
