Friday, January 21, 2005
Oh boy, more people for me to hate
So here's part 2 of 'I was driving behind a truck and it had a sticker on it and made me angry'. Part 1 by good old david is here. Anywho, this particular truck had a sticker from grassfire.org (I refuse to link on the grounds that google might count it as a real link) that said, "50 years under God... Let's keep it that way!" I'll give you one guess as to what kind of truck it was. If you guessed a pick-up truck, you were right! I'll also give you one guess as to what demographic the driver fell into... if you guessed white male, age 18-49, then... well, I didn't get to see the driver. But stereotypes serve me well. Ok, and the other two bloggers on this site are also in that demographic. Shut up, you get my point. He was probably also drinking a beer and looking at nude pictures of his cousin. There.
Anyway, for those not in the know, 'under God' was added to the pledge of allegiance about 50 years ago during the McCarthyism era. I guess he thought it would weed out the communists, who apparently were physically unable to say 'under God' without then adding "the biggest bitch of them all!" And recently a court ruled (correctly, I might add) that the clause establishes religion.
I don't really find the pledge to be that annoying. God knows (ha!) I've said it hundreds of times and don't find it that offensive. What I find offensive is that OTHER people would get so worked up about it that they would try so hard to keep it. Yes, perhaps we are a nation under God by most definitions, but that doesn't mean we have to force everyone into it. Why don't we just say "One nation, of Christian white people, with liberty and justice for all"?
At least that way, the guy could put on his bumper sticker, "230 years"!
Anyway, for those not in the know, 'under God' was added to the pledge of allegiance about 50 years ago during the McCarthyism era. I guess he thought it would weed out the communists, who apparently were physically unable to say 'under God' without then adding "the biggest bitch of them all!" And recently a court ruled (correctly, I might add) that the clause establishes religion.
I don't really find the pledge to be that annoying. God knows (ha!) I've said it hundreds of times and don't find it that offensive. What I find offensive is that OTHER people would get so worked up about it that they would try so hard to keep it. Yes, perhaps we are a nation under God by most definitions, but that doesn't mean we have to force everyone into it. Why don't we just say "One nation, of Christian white people, with liberty and justice for all"?
At least that way, the guy could put on his bumper sticker, "230 years"!
# posted by Stuart @ 8:55 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
In the 1950s his sticker would have said "90 years of segregation, let's keep it that way!"
In the 1860s: "Seven thousand years of slavery, let's keep it that way!"
In the 1860s: "Seven thousand years of slavery, let's keep it that way!"
don't you mean "...liberty and justice for them"??
i can't believe you dug up (and remembered) that old post.
i can't believe you dug up (and remembered) that old post.
# posted by 
: 11:19 AM
: 11:19 AM
I think part of the reason alot of people want to keep "Under God" in the pledge is a reason different than wanting to force religion on others. I think it has to do with the fact that alot of people feel this country was started and built up by Christians. And therefore in a large part belongs to Christians. And I think that a lot of these people see the attempts to change the pledge, along with numerous other attempts to weed out Christianity from government, as forms of outsiders trying to change what doesn't belong to them. I think alot of similar debates throughout history stem in part from this.
# posted by : 3:39 PM
: 3:39 PM
I agree that that is certainly a reason why many people are fond of "under god," but that's a pretty insulting reason. "Its ours, and you guys don't have a say about what goes on here."
The country was founded on principles of religious freedom (though worshiping the deity was somewhat a prerequisite, you could just chose your own way). It was also founded by men, so how about throwing that in the pledge, or not letting women have a voice in the public realm, because it isn't "their" country. It was also white men, so those blacks better stop talking about social justice pretty soon, because this country was founded on and by social justice for men who had white skin. It was also founded by landowning white men, so lets get those poor people to stop talking about shelters and soup kitchens. And why stop there - white collar workers, shut up. You don't have any land to your name, just some stock certificates and a cell phone. Now we have "under god, with liberty and justice for all white male landowners, and definitely not those people with the feathers in their hair who "owned" the land before we did."
saying that "under god" should remain because we were founded by god-fearing men (save Franklin) is pretty hypocritical and narrow sighted. (I recognize you were just stating a common position, mr. anonymous, not necessarily supporting it). It is a pledge of patriotism, not religion. Mixing god into the pledge violates exactly what this country stands for - the "wall of separation between church and state," as jefferson said. Further, the argument overlooks the fact that "under god" was absent until one of the most embarrassing periods of our history, as stu pointed out, when it was addedd during a time when the government was doing its best to scare its citizens, and a paranoid congress needed to prove to the country that they too were not godless communists. anywho, that's my little rant for the evening.
The country was founded on principles of religious freedom (though worshiping the deity was somewhat a prerequisite, you could just chose your own way). It was also founded by men, so how about throwing that in the pledge, or not letting women have a voice in the public realm, because it isn't "their" country. It was also white men, so those blacks better stop talking about social justice pretty soon, because this country was founded on and by social justice for men who had white skin. It was also founded by landowning white men, so lets get those poor people to stop talking about shelters and soup kitchens. And why stop there - white collar workers, shut up. You don't have any land to your name, just some stock certificates and a cell phone. Now we have "under god, with liberty and justice for all white male landowners, and definitely not those people with the feathers in their hair who "owned" the land before we did."
saying that "under god" should remain because we were founded by god-fearing men (save Franklin) is pretty hypocritical and narrow sighted. (I recognize you were just stating a common position, mr. anonymous, not necessarily supporting it). It is a pledge of patriotism, not religion. Mixing god into the pledge violates exactly what this country stands for - the "wall of separation between church and state," as jefferson said. Further, the argument overlooks the fact that "under god" was absent until one of the most embarrassing periods of our history, as stu pointed out, when it was addedd during a time when the government was doing its best to scare its citizens, and a paranoid congress needed to prove to the country that they too were not godless communists. anywho, that's my little rant for the evening.
# posted by : 7:15 PM
: 7:15 PM
Is saying "under God" a few times in school really that big of a price to pay for avoiding the fiery pitfires of Hades? I think not, and I think you should all issue retractions lest the right hand of God descend upon your houses.
Post a Comment
# posted by : 11:34 AM
: 11:34 AM << Home
