Tuesday, June 28, 2011

Is the Pledge of Allegiance the same as the Communist Manifesto?

Today I want to talk about something that will get great support from some of my readers and will be scoffed at by others.

I want to talk about the Pledge of Allegiance.

I want to talk about the meaning of words...the reason for the Pledge, and then to look at the stupidity that reigns in some quarters in this country.

The Pledge of Allegiance was written in 1892 by a Baptist minister, Francis Bellamy. It quickly became part of the fabric of America as school children recited it every morning (with their hands across their heart). The original Pledge did not contain the words "under God"> These were added by an act of Congress in 1952 at the behest of the Knights of Columbus and other groups. Since 1954, "under God" is a part of the Pledge. Story over.

Various groups have condemned the Pledge, arguing that it amounts to the U.s. Government establishing a religion in violation of the First Amendment of the Constitution. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that the Pledge of Allegiance (including the words "under God") does NOT violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

So...we have the Pledge written in 1892, modified in 1954 to include the words "under God". Its Constitutional validity was questioned but upheld by Federal court.


End of story!

So, why do we see so many challenges to its use?

The latest act of stupidity can be found in the small town of Eugene, Oregon. This paragon of liberal acceptance and all-inclusiveness has stepped out of bounds and shown the world the nature of the inclusivity that its liberal citizens endorse.

Such inclusivity apparently does not include the recital of the Pledge of Allegiance at City Council meetings.

The back story is simple.

Councilman Mike Clark thought that in this city of diversity and acceptance, it would be a good thing if his conservative constituents could be shown that the more traditional conservative values could be supported even within this progressive leaning city. He proposed that the Pledge of Allegiance be VOLUNTARILY recited before every Council meeting. Nothing in the proposal REQUIRED either Council members or members of the public to participate, but rather provided an opportunity for those who wished to participate, to do so.

I think there is nothing wrong with this. In my humble opinion, the recital of the Pledge of Allegiance could indeed remind Council members of what they should be striving for, and in every way is uniting in a common purpose, rather than the individual agenda that politicians continually pursue. I can see nothing bad coming form this proposal.

But of course, it could not pass. The end result was that a measure was passed allowing the Pledge of Allegiance to be recited prior to Council meetings on just 4 occasions per year. The Council Meetings held closest to 4th of July, Memorial Day, Veterans Day and Flag Day could all include the Pledge of Allegiance, but no others.

More shocking were the comments coming from the Council members who voted against this measure:-

Councilman George Brown voted against the compromise, saying the Pledge of Allegiance had no place at City Hall. “People can say it in their front yard or backyard,” Brown says. “It really doesn’t help move the city business forward. It does not unite us.” 

Councilwoman Betty Taylor compared saying the Pledge of Allegiance to reading from "The Communist Manifesto." 

So, this city of diversity, this city that prides itself on being non-judgmental, this city that welcomes folks of all sexual persuasions, is so anti-conservative that it denies the truth of the Pledge of Allegiance.

To you clowns of the Council in the City of Eugene, Oregon, I can only say that you are a sad bunch of ignorant and pathetic tools of the progressive movement.

Since you clearly do not understand what the Pledge of Allegiance is all about, and since you are total idiots and clowns, the only way I can think of to help you is to get one of the greatest comedians of all time to explain it to you. I promise he does not use big words...but if you clowns listen closely, you will hear the wisdom behind his words.


Just 4 minutes and 20 seconds of your life...to understand that words have meanings, and that those meanings do not change no matter how much you want them to mean something else.

After hearing this do you still think the Pledge of Allegiance is akin to the Communist Manifesto?

Stupid is as stupid says!



  1. are you offended when it is left out? It was left out for about 60 years, and everything was fine.
    Is this an important issue one way or another?

  2. Conor,

    this post was not about whether "under God" should be included or not. It was about the stupidity of comparing the Pledge to the Communist Manifesto, and the stupidity of people getting upset by the Pledge. As it happens, it took 60 years for the Pledge to include "under God"...and as you suggest, it makes no difference except for the fact that IT IS NOW a part of the Pledge.

    Are you in favor of leaving out parts of any document or written statement because you want to? It took an act of Congress to include those words. They are now a part of the Pledge. If you do not include them, you are not saying the Pledge. End of story.

    If the American people want the Pledge changed, then get it changed through Congress as it should be, not unilaterally by mob rule which is exactly what the progressives are trying to do. They make a mockery of the Republic...they want a democracy ...and that is NOT what this country is.