|
|
 |
 |
Dr. Michael Newdow
Dr. Michael Newdow is an attorney and medical doctor who advocates for a strong separation of church and state in public institutions. On behalf of his daughter, he argued the Pledge of Allegiance case in the U.S. Supreme Court. Newdow is also an atheist and ordained minister of the Universal Life Church. In 1997, he founded a naturalistic organization called the First Amendmist Church of True Science..
Featured Link http://www.restorethepledge.com/
|
| |
 |
Imagine you’re a Catholic, and—every day in the public schools—your children are asked by their teachers to stand with their fellow students, face the flag of the United States of America, place their hands over their hearts and pledge their allegiance to “one Nation under Protestantism.” Imagine further that you, yourself, were also asked to join in that recitation when you attended the school’s assemblies and ceremonies. Wouldn’t you find that infuriating … especially if, in addition:
- The nation’s motto were “In Protestantism We Trust”
- That motto were printed on every coin and monetary bill
- Both houses of Congress started each of their sessions with specifically Protestant prayers
- The first statement heard each day at the Supreme Court were, “May Protestantism save the United States and this honorable Court”
- The President (and just about every other politician) ended each speech with “May you be blessed by the Protestant faith”
- At each Presidential inauguration, the oath of office as specified in the Constitution was, without any authority, altered to conclude with “in the name of Protestantism”
Certainly you wouldn’t feel yourself to be an equal and full citizen in such a land. That environment surely would not comport with the intent of the “Father of the Constitution,” James Madison. In his famous Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments, Madison wrote that government must avoid any act which “violates that equality which ought to be the basis of every law.” Could you as a Catholic possibly consider it “equality” when the government had, as a general policy, the notion that this nation is Protestant?
Or to take it even further, suppose you’re Jewish, or Buddhist or Hindu, and the nation’s Pledge claimed we are “one Nation under Jesus.” Or, leaving the religious arena, suppose you’re black, and the Pledge’s words were “one Nation under White People.” Would you not find those versions offensive … not only to your own integrity, but to the Constitution under which we all live?
I certainly hope that everyone would be taken aback by such words. The question, then, is how would such governmental activity differ in any significant manner from what is currently in place with “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance? “Our history” is unequivocally as Protestant, Christian, and Caucasian as it is Monotheistic. Certainly, with sufficient usage, “one Nation under Protestantism,” “under Jesus” or “under White People” would become just “ceremonial” as “under God” has become. And the argument would remain that, with strong Free Speech and Free Exercise clauses in effect, no one is required to say the offensive words. Yet these are the justifications used for keeping the Pledge in its current form.
They are, of course, bogus justifications. The real reason people want “under God” to remain is because they want to do exactly as those who created the Establishment Clause predicted. They want the government to reflect and endorse their religious views. What the Framers realized however—with a discovery in which every American should take pride—is that the previously accepted approach to religion in society was totally backward. Up until our Founders came on the scene, the theory was that conflicts between different belief systems could be eliminated by having one established religion. As Madison also wrote:
It was the belief of all sects at one time that the establishment of Religion by law, was right and necessary; that the true religion ought to be established in exclusion of every other; And that the only question to be decided was which was the true religion … We are teaching the world the great truth that … Religion flourishes in greater purity, without than with the aid of Government.
Need we look further than the front pages of our newspapers today to see how brilliant was this realization? Would Sunnis be fighting Shiites in Iraq, Protestants fighting Catholics in Northern Ireland, Christian Serbs fighting Catholic Croats and Muslim Bosnians in former Yugoslavia, Muslims fighting Christians in Sudan, and on and on, were those nations to have been blessed with an Establishment Clause?
“Wait a minute,” you say. “There’s a huge difference between genocide and a simple Pledge of Allegiance.” I don’t disagree. But, again, we can look back to Madison’s Memorial and Remonstrance, wherein he responded to the same argument regarding a small tax to support teachers of Christianity:
Distant as it may be … form from the Inquisition, it differs from it only in degree. The one is the first step, the other the last in the career of intolerance.
People don’t start killing each other out of the blue. They start little by little; first, perhaps, with a Pledge that marginalizes those of a different religious belief system, then maybe—as is the case today in 2006 in eight states—with constitutional provisions denying those citizens the right to hold public office. Progressively, there are more and more encroachments upon personal liberty as the majority sees those “outsiders” as less and less “worthy” of basic liberties.
The controversy over “under God” in the Pledge is not between those who do versus those who don’t believe in a Supreme Being. It’s between those who do or don’t believe in equality. Alternatively stated, it’s between those who want “one Nation indivisible” versus those who are willing to have the nation divided as long as the government espouses their religious belief.
If you still don’t get it, picture the nation a hundred years from now, with Atheists in the majority, and the nation’s children—including your descendents—being asked by their public school teachers to stand up, face the nation’s flag, place their hands over their hearts and pledge to “one Nation that denies God exists.” No one is asking for that version of a Pledge. No one should be asking for the current version, either.
iThe colonists were almost all from England, a Protestant nation where there was intense animosity towards Catholicism and the Pope. It wasn’t until the middle of the 20th century that the pervasive anti-Catholicism in this country diminished to any real degree.
iiColumbus left the shores of Spain “in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ,” the Mayflower Compact was made for “advancement of the Christian Faith,” and the Constitution, itself, was written “in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven.”
iiiAll the Framers were white, four of the first five presidents owned, bought and sold black people, and the Constitution, itself – in Article I, §§ 2 and 9, Article IV and Article V – accepted the institution of slavery.
© Dr. Michael Newdow
|
 |
| |
|
|
Sen. Clinton called on Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to step down in the wake of the firing of several U.S. attorneys -- firings we now know to be political.
Join Hillary in asking Gonzales to resign.
read more
|
|
| Advertise Here |
| |
|
|
|
