On the Pledge of Allegiance
---
It began as an intensive communing with salient points of our national history, from the Declaration of Independence onwards; with the makings of the Constitution...with the meaning of the Civil War; with the aspiration of the people...
--Pledge of Allegiance author Francis Bellamy
A federal trial judge in California has held that mandatory recitals of the Pledge of Allegiance in schools, even when offset by an "opt-out" provision available to students, violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The decision is available here (PDF - 30 pages).
I of course think the decision is correct. God is God, public schools are public schools, and the First Amendment is the First Amendment. It's really not that difficult, at least for those who bother to be intellectually honest and who have no ulterior motives.
Here are some quick facts about the Pledge and the current state of the law:
--The Pledge was written by a Baptist minister.
--A Baptist minister who, incidentally, was a Socialist. His cousin, Edward Bellamy, wrote the famous socialist utopian novel "Looking Backward."
--The words "under God" were not added to the Pledge until 1954, as a manifestation of the Cold War, which has now been replaced by a war against, ironically, monotheistic religious fanatics.
--Article VI of the Constitution clearly states that no religious test shall ever be required for public office. While schoolchildren are obviously not running for office each morning, what might that prohibition tell us about the "original intent" of the Framers about religious oaths generally?
--Anyone who claims that it is not an undue burden to expect a child to assert his First Amendment rights by a positive act of remaining silent, or seated, only to face the repercussions of taunts from fellow students and perhaps discrimination from teachers, is delusional. See Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577 (1992).
--The judge in this case did not find that "the Pledge is unconstitutional." Instead, he found that coerced recital of the Pledge is unconstitutional. This distinction is all-important. Given the Supreme Court's recent Ten Commandments jurisprudence, an assertion that the Pledge itself is unconstitutional would (unfortunately) be specious at best.
--If the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirms the trial judge's decision, then there will be a split among the circuits (the Fourth Circuit has held that "opt-out" pledge recital policies are constitutional). Hence an eventual grant of certiorari by the Supreme Court is practically a given.
Stay tuned...
FUN FACT: In the parochial school I attended for Kindergarten and First Grade, we sang "My Country 'Tis of Thee" instead of reciting the Pledge. Isn't that so much easier? Not a single deity reference to be found.
Other thoughts at De Novo, Cranky B, Colby Cosh.
Suggested Reading:
--Pledge of Allegiance author Francis Bellamy
A federal trial judge in California has held that mandatory recitals of the Pledge of Allegiance in schools, even when offset by an "opt-out" provision available to students, violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The decision is available here (PDF - 30 pages).
I of course think the decision is correct. God is God, public schools are public schools, and the First Amendment is the First Amendment. It's really not that difficult, at least for those who bother to be intellectually honest and who have no ulterior motives.
Here are some quick facts about the Pledge and the current state of the law:
--The Pledge was written by a Baptist minister.
--A Baptist minister who, incidentally, was a Socialist. His cousin, Edward Bellamy, wrote the famous socialist utopian novel "Looking Backward."
--The words "under God" were not added to the Pledge until 1954, as a manifestation of the Cold War, which has now been replaced by a war against, ironically, monotheistic religious fanatics.
--Article VI of the Constitution clearly states that no religious test shall ever be required for public office. While schoolchildren are obviously not running for office each morning, what might that prohibition tell us about the "original intent" of the Framers about religious oaths generally?
--Anyone who claims that it is not an undue burden to expect a child to assert his First Amendment rights by a positive act of remaining silent, or seated, only to face the repercussions of taunts from fellow students and perhaps discrimination from teachers, is delusional. See Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577 (1992).
--The judge in this case did not find that "the Pledge is unconstitutional." Instead, he found that coerced recital of the Pledge is unconstitutional. This distinction is all-important. Given the Supreme Court's recent Ten Commandments jurisprudence, an assertion that the Pledge itself is unconstitutional would (unfortunately) be specious at best.
--If the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirms the trial judge's decision, then there will be a split among the circuits (the Fourth Circuit has held that "opt-out" pledge recital policies are constitutional). Hence an eventual grant of certiorari by the Supreme Court is practically a given.
Stay tuned...
FUN FACT: In the parochial school I attended for Kindergarten and First Grade, we sang "My Country 'Tis of Thee" instead of reciting the Pledge. Isn't that so much easier? Not a single deity reference to be found.
Other thoughts at De Novo, Cranky B, Colby Cosh.
Suggested Reading:
All Related Posts (on one page) | Some Related Posts:
Posted by KipEsquire on
14 September 2005
To comment on this post, please visit the new blogsite.