http://www.sierratimes.com/edwc082900.htm
RECONSIDERING THE PLEDGE Wayne D. Carlson - Posted: 08.29.00

In a follow-up to last weeks column on the totalitarian nature of
indoctrinating children with loyalty oaths to the secular State, some
salient points need to be added. 

Regarding the origin of our Pledge of Allegiance, it should be noted
that according to Dr. John Baer, who wrote, “The Pledge of Allegiance,
A Centennial History, 1892-1992,” the pledge was written by a Boston
Socialist named Francis Bellamy, who, as a Baptist Minister, was driven
out of his church because of the socialist content of his sermons. His
granddaughter said that in his retirement he stopped attending church
altogether. 

As a Socialist, he joined a movement begun by his cousin, Edward
Bellamy, in which they advocated for the “nationalization” of the
American economy under a “planned economy” directed by the federal
government, all the while lamenting the “evils of capitalism”. Hired as
an assistant editor to the leading family magazine of its day, “The
Youth’s Companion”, and serving as chairman of a committee of state
school superintendents in the National Education Association (NEA),
Bellamy prepared the public school program for Columbus Day on the
occasion of the 400th anniversary of his discovery of America. The
program he devised included a flag raising ceremony, along with his
newly written “Pledge of Allegiance”. It originally read, “I pledge
allegiance to my flag and to the Republic for which it stands, one
nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”

It is worthwhile to note that in the entire world, only the U.S. and
the Philippines have a pledge to their flag. The federal government
eventually passed legislation sanctioning the use of the pledge and
issuing instructions on how it was to be conducted. The first law
passed in June of 1942 under H.J. Res. 303,56 Stat. 377, Chapter 435
reads in Section 7, “That the pledge of allegiance to the flag… be
rendered by standing with the right hand over the heart, extending the
right hand, palm upwards, toward the flag at the words “to the flag”
and holding this position until the end, when the hand drops to the
side. However, civilians (doesn’t this include school children) will
always show full respect to the flag by merely standing at attention,
men removing the headdress. Persons in uniform shall render the
military salute.”

Two things should immediately jump out at us. First, the “salute” was
to be given with the arm fully extended in what we recognize today as
“the Nazi salute”. This salute, coming in the midst of WWII, naturally
came under heated criticism and was officially discontinued by another
Congressional law 6 months later. The military salute was changed in
favor of the hand over the heart. (The words, “under God” were added by
a third and last law in 1954 at the urging of The Knights of Columbus)
Baer notes that with this change, “the pledge was now both a patriotic
oath and a public prayer.” 

The second thing that should have jumped out at you from the way this
law is written is that the salute is required only of military
personnel in uniform. Civilians like our children are only instructed
to “show full respect by merely standing at attention, men removing the
headdress.”

In my readings on these flag resolutions, I came across another
disturbing passage that ought to come under considerable discussion in
our churches today. Considering all the rhetoric regarding the
so-called “separation of church and state,” we should be aware of
Section 3.K, in which the federal government directs that the flag of
the United States “occupy the position of honor” when it is “in the
chancel of a church.” That position is described as on the “clergyman’s
right as he faces the congregation.” The “chancel” is defined as “the
part of a church around the alter, usually reserved for the use of the
clergy and the choir.” Having always noticed the placement of the U.S.
flag on the chancel of my own church, I determined this week to see if
in fact it was given “the place of honor,” as described by law. It was.
The Christian flag is therefore relegated to an inferior position, in
deference to the symbol of the secular State. 

I believe that there are many churches, once fully informed of these
facts, that will reconsider the underlying symbolism they impart in
following the federal government’s guidelines, and immediately consider
a change. If they subscribe to the notion of the sovereignty of God,
the place of honor will go to him. In light of the disavowal by our
government that we are a Christian society, governed under God’s
eternal law, and the promulgation of the idea that a wall of separation
exists between church and State, it would seem prudent to this writer
that the Christian flag stand alone around the alter of our houses of
worship.

I welcome comments at wcarlson@i-plus.net