“‘Nancy Skinner, who, of course, hails from Berkeley, California — or, as we like to call it, ‘Berzerkeley’ because that’s the Christopher Columbus myth-free zone,’ Fleischman reports. ‘That’s how much they love America over there in Berkeley… on the Bay. And then, the other legislator was Tom Ammiano.'”


“‘Tom [Ammiano] hails from downtown San Francisco, and he makes Nancy Pelosi look like a conservative … if that tells you anything about those guys,’ the FlashReport publisher contends. ‘So, the Bay Area is not weighing on the pro-God team this week, and fortunately, that’s not the case all across America. But it shouldn’t surprise you.'”

Progression of a secular state and the subtraction of “under god” from the pledge of allegiance is “anti-American” and “liberal” according to this fine genius, who is obviously so mired with indoctrination and dogmatic discernment he cannot possibly independently form an opinion of reasonable and rational merit. The commenter, Jon Fleischman, champions the inclusion of god into the pledge and yet remains ignorant over the history of its inclusion. I am most certain Mr. Fleischman was not present when it was inserted by legislature. The sole propriety of “under God” championed by Christians violates the separation of church and state in an astounding manner. They tout it, flaunt it, emphasize it, and idolize it with exacting fervor and passion present during those benevolent days of the Inquisition, Crusades and Witch Hunts. Alas, the ignorance of Christians flays everyone who are dissenting, “ignobly” atheist, with the intent to exploit them to their will which is “god’s will”.

The “Under God” addition to “The Pledge of Allegiance” was made in circles of the Knights of Columbus in the 1950’s, argued by some to be the words taken from the Gettysburg Address made by then President Lincoln even though some transcripts did not include it. In the era of McCarthyism, when Communists became Witches in a kind of Witch Hunt, the religious nature of Americans served as direct opposition of Communist “ungodliness” or “atheistic” nature (Religion is the opiate of the people). The underbelly of religious fervor rolled to the surface in the death roll of religion grappling the atheist “Commies” in is craw. “Commies” were called out all over America, often in delusional, paranoid misbegotten accusations. Thus, “Under God” was added and followed by a salute, evolving into one’s hand over one’s heart. However, in the progressive nature of evolving ideas and mental alignment, the irregular idea of pledging allegiance to a piece of cloth has become erroneous, if not impractical.

The flag of the United States, inspiring the National Anthem and pledge, is no longer viewed as a symbol worthy of such devotion yet it is considered to be a viable symbol of patriotism and unity of all people. It remains, at its realistic base, a piece of cloth, though; something many religious people are unable to understand. An idol, if you will, is a physical representation of a god, goddess, or other religious symbol and holds great value to the people who subscribe to such faith. The faithful identify themselves with idolatry in the form of crucifixes in churches, adorning churches, and as jewelry. The same exact identification, learned through indoctrination and dogmatic principle, is afforded to the flag as habitually acceptable when so many symbolically important religious items are afforded such luxury. The affordable designation of the flag’s importance is alien to many as it is actually only a piece of cloth. The definition of country is much more minutely designated than by the symbolism and idolatry of a flag. Failure to think of the flag as an significant symbolic representation of one’s patriotism is often misconstrued by those that lend it importance that is undue. I consider the flag to be symbolic and a substantial symbol of my affection for my country, but I have no indignation concerning anyone choosing to set the flag ablaze. Such an action is meaningless as I do not believe the flag to be religiously important or idolized by love of freedom and the American pride. I fail to view the flag as having a mystical power that makes it an insult when some idiot burns it during a protest. The ridiculousness and irrationality of such a notion does not logically reduce as reasonable to me. I do not view this failure as intrinsic to my ability to love my country, nor do I view it as unnecessary. I fail to pledge allegiance to a flag because it is a ridiculous action, irrationally motivated, and in error.

With this in mind, the “under God” inclusion is also equally redundant. The pledge, which I stopped saying in elementary school, is devotional to symbol and is performed more out of faithful habit as a child’s nightly prayer before bed. It is akin to reciting the “dua” of Islam, the “Hail Mary” for Catholics, the “Lord’s Prayer” for other denominations; a habitual oration tended to please others that I am not a Communist, Socialist, or undesirable. I do not have to prove anything to anyone especially on a scale that requires me to prove my devotion with a salad of words and dressing of manufactured passion. It is a recitation that is bred by the devotion to religious orations that are useless, promote complacency, and ineffectual. Why then, gauging it against logic and rationality, would I pledge to an inanimate object my undying allegiance “Under God” whom I know fails to exist in any calculation of logical probability? There are people who have the need for machination and aerobic ritual when ceremoniously genuflecting love such as weddings, praise of god, and devotion because indoctrination equating abuse as a child into forming religious habitual testimony. Absurd at is very core, ridiculous on its face, and abhorrent in practice.