Someone on FB asked for comments on this link. In that article… it’s not worth reading but feel free… Healy spends most of the article discussing the history of of the author of the original pledge.  Even bringing his cousin into it and managing to circle in a reference to Uncle Tom’s Cabin.  He forgot to mention that the authors great, great, great, nephew’s step brother was a pedophile but otherwise does a good job of proving that the pledge is a Socialist’s wet dream.

This resulted in everything from avowed atheists proclaiming that “Under God” is unconstitutional to people claiming that it’s a nationalist genuflection to the state.  I call hockey pucks.

Here’s what the pledge of allegiance means to me, personally.

I pledge allegiance

A most solemn promise to ally with, protect and defend.

to the flag of the United States of America,

A flag under which I have personally seen the blood of Americans spilled in your defense. If they could die for it (and for you) then I can pledge my intent to ally with it against all comers. I know what the colors used in my flag mean and I understand the symbolism of the shapes.

and to the republic for which it stands,

The whole republic. Fifty states covering most of a content and more. Nowhere in this pledge do I kneel before the Government of this nation or any state thereof. I pledge allegiance to the republic. That is, all states, all citizens.

I took another oath, that one to the Constitution, and by extension the republic for which IT stands. 

I swore to support and defend it against all enemies,  foreign and domestic. I swore that I would bear true faith and allegiance to the same. I finished that oath with the words, So Help Me God.

When I said those words I knew what they meant. Every damned one of them.  I probably understood more about them than anyone else in the room.  If that domestic enemy is the State or any state thereof and it attempts to destroy this republic I will defend the republic.

Against anyone.

Even you.

one nation under God,

Knowing full well that this was added by acclamation in 1954 and knowing in my heart that no man, and by extension, no country can stand without the blessing of God. Whether you believe in God or not, I do and since I do this nation suffers his benevolence. 

indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

I have sworn my allegiance to the flag and to the republic for which it stands.  I have sworn my allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America. To allow that republic to become divided is a crime against those oaths.

Simple as that.

I may not agree with the folks on the other coast but I won’t let them divide the country.  I may think that Texas would make a great country all on its onesy but I won’t let them divide the nation either.

So Help Me God.

So there it is.  Jinksto’s take on the state religion.  Delivered in succinct easily digestible sentences.  Reckon all that time genuflecting to the State in Mrs LeBleu’s First Grade School Room really did a number on me. 

What say you?


(Thanks Matthew :0)


Thank you GreyBeard, I had never seen this but it’s fantastic.


Under God

6 thoughts on “Under God

  • March 3, 2010 at 3:48 am

    Amen, brother.
    And there’s nothing quite like standing at attention, in uniform, in a military theater, listening to the National Anthem being played while the flag on the screen flaps in the breeze before the film starts, knowing you could shed YOUR blood for all that symbol signifies.
    I’m sure you’ve seen this:

    But it can’t hurt to make sure you and others have.

  • March 3, 2010 at 11:02 pm

    Jinksto –

    Never wore the uniform of the United States military but I have sworn to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. It’s something I take seriously.

    So, I’m right there with you.


  • March 29, 2010 at 7:02 pm

    I agree with most of what you said but at what point does serving the republic and serving the constitution become two separate things?

    To me, forcing states that once that joined a union willfully but now see that the union has become corrupt and evil (as the founding fathers foretold would happen) and wish to leave the union as peacefully as they once joined it is no way serving the constitution.

    Can a government of the people, by the people and for the people FORCE the people to stay in a house they feel enslaved by and still claim to be free?

    If we revolt against Obama, are you really being patriotic to force us into subservience to his will even though his “America” defies the constitution?

    When I look upon old films of Tiananmen square, I always felt the true patriot was the one who stood in front of the tank, not the one driving the tank. I hate to think of my soul brother jinksto being the tank driver.


  • March 29, 2010 at 8:31 pm

    What would you do with a severed arm? Let it go or attempt to reattach it? It’s not a great example but I can’t imagine this nation separated. You’ve caught me in a tight spot. I don’t want to be flippant in my answer to your question, I want to answer it and at the same time, I really really don’t.

    I have seen nations at war… real war… and I want no part of it. I have seen guerrilla’s and seen the harm it causes. Twenty years from now I don’t want to see pock marks on the side of a building an know that they came from rifle fire.

    Battle isn’t a glorious endeavor. It’s dirty, bloody, messy affair that takes decades to recover from. It’s something that makes you hate worse than you’ve ever hated anything in your life. It makes you vomit and cry. At the same time. It’s not something that I want to see at 5th and Main.

    They say that no one hates war more than a soldier. That’s probably true. The corollary to that though is that no one loves more than those who have never seen it.

    That said though, once you commit, the only way to live is to win.

    So in answer to your question, “at what point does serving the republic and serving the constitution become two separate things” I say, “never”.

    This nation has a constitutional rule of law. It specified ways in which grievance can be raised against the State and rectified. It provides a method for changing governments and it allows those governments to change laws. It even provides States with the ability to stand up and tell the government that they can take the recent Healthcare bill and shove it. We can vote them out and repeal. If we fail in that then it’s the will of the people.

    I’m sicked by it. I watch this going on and at the same time I see people ranting about American Idol on Facebook and other places. I want to scream at them.

  • March 29, 2010 at 10:17 pm

    Ah, my friend, I no way want to be flippant either.

    “This nation has a constitutional rule of law. It specified ways in which grievance can be raised against the State and rectified.”

    So I ask this question in all seriousness- where is is written that once you decide to join this union you may never, never leave again?

    When the Lone Star Republic petitioned to join the Union (twice- it was rejected the first time) I feel quite sure no one ever said, “OK but if you join us then you can NEVER leave. It strikes me a a very un-American concept. 🙁

    The state of (X) is not the property of the federal government; they were willing partners that joined an alliance (a union) by the free will of the people of that state.

    Where did the founding fathers ever say, “If you try to leave us we will kill you.”?

    I think this is a very important question.

  • March 29, 2010 at 11:49 pm

    Texas is actually a good example because the only precedence about this comes from Texas v. White … by taking on the case the Court indicated that although the State of Texas had declared it self seceded from the union it remained a part of the United States. This was just after the war of northern aggression.

    The original articles of confederation declared the United States a “permanent union”. The constitution declared them a more perfect union. Justice Salmon writing for the majority in Texas V. White said, the following:

    “The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation. By these, the Union was solemnly declared to “be perpetual.” And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained “to form a more perfect Union.” It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not?”

    I agree with him. This union is the most perfect condition. It’s sick right now but bailing out instead of bailing water won’t keep the ship afloat.

    Sorry for the mixed metaphor there… I just invented that one.

    In the end, you are correct that the constitution doesn’t say this in particular so one has to judge the intentions of the framers. I think the court nailed it in Texas V. White (and I reckon I might have to turn in my southern by the grace of God sleeveless t-shirt over it)


Please feel free to comment. I love hearing from you!