It's that very irony that appears to have so many of us tied in knots over the recent lawsuit brought by an anonymous New Jersey family against the Matawan-Abderdeen Regional School District that seeks to have the state requirement that students recite the Pledge of Allegiance every morning declared unconstitutional because it features the words "under God."
The suit, which was filed in Monmouth County Superior Court by the American Humanist Association, alleges that the mere presence of the phrase discriminates against atheists by disparaging a child's belief (or lack thereof), calling their patriotism into question, and turning them into second-class citizens.
And let's be frank: they're absolutely right. Unequivocally so, to my law-degreeless mind, and I'm shocked that the federal courts, aside from the occasional rogue judge, haven't cited the First Amendment and sought to have the words removed already.
This suit doesn't challenge it on those grounds. It just seeks to have the current practice declared a violation of New Jersey's constitution, and it'll let the courts work out a solution.
But it's an important question, especially because the controversy is shrouded with misinformation. Although most folks think that "under God" is a throwback to the fervent Christianity of our eighteenth century forbears, it was actually inserted in 1954 in an attempt to distinguish our noble nation from the godless Communists who sat on the other side of the Cold War trenches.
Then there's the fact that the phrase simply isn't true. In reality, the Founding Fathers, those brilliant children of the Enlightenment, were not a particularly religious bunch, and a number of them could more easily be described as deists rather than pious Christians. This nation wasn't founded - nor does it remain - "under" a deity whose existence can never be proven. No, it was formed by men. Who (or what) inspired those men is certainly up for debate, but the time to reflect on that particular subject is not the middle of the pledge.
What is not up for debate is that this nation was founded on the unequivocal separation of church and state, and having students of all colors and creeds recite the words "under God" every morning in a publicly funded school doesn't mesh well with my personal notion of what it means for the state to not push religion on its people.
But I'll take it one step further, and offer a simple solution to the conundrum: how about we ditch the pledge altogether?
After all, there's nothing inspiring or inherently patriotic about that collection of words. Unlike our national anthem, it isn't written about a stirring moment in our history or a point of national pride, and it serves little purpose other than drilling into the heads of the children that we're supposed to be loyal to the state ... no matter what.
As a child, I thought the solemn morning recital was a just a little creepy and cultish, and now, as an adult, it reminds me more than a little of something that might be found in Orwell's "1984."
This country is a republic, true, and the ideas it was founded on are some of the finest that humanity has ever conceived of, but was it really necessary for me to affirm that before starting my daily routine? Would it make the government sleep a little easier if I had continued that tradition after I graduated, just in case I forgot where I was born and who I was loyal to?
The whole thing has never sounded very "American" to me, especially in a nation created upon the very idea that allegiance must be earned, not given. It's time to end this practice and let the classrooms be what they were intended to be: a bastion of unceasing inquiry and education - not indoctrination.
Email: janoski@northjersey.com
- See more at: http://www.northjersey.com/news/education/time-to-ditch-the-pledge-of-allegiance-1.1006199#sthash.8ZGbMM0p.dpuf
No comments:
Post a Comment