More on the state’s oath of obedience

Email Print

HL writes with some valid points, although I’m not sure I completely agree:

“Under God” & “Liberty & Justice for All” are the only parts of the government loyalty oath that don’t offend me. “Under God” in particular hints that the state may not, despite their wishes, be the final arbiter of justice & moral good. There’s someone or something else whose laws take precedent. It acknowledges an authority higher than the state.

Obviously the best move would be to scrap the whole offensive pledge. But barring that, I wouldn’t celebrate removing the only part where they concede that they’re not all-powerful.
On a side note, “under God” may be the only thing keeping the pledge controversial. With its removal, when would anyone talk about whether kids should be forced to say it every day?

It’s a valid point, although historically speaking, the intent of inserting “under God” was to imply that the American state is supported by God in its allegedly divine mission against godless communism. Unlike HL’s interpretation of the phrase, the intellectually lazy(and therefore more common) interpretation is to assume that “under God” means that the American state enjoys a sort of Mandate of Heaven.

Nevertheless, I like the idea of leaving in “under God” to act as a poison pill to get the whole pledge scrapped. Let those whiny atheists have their way, and we can just forget about the pledge for good.

10:56 am on November 30, 2008