The Pledge of Disobedience

"One nation under God'' is not only causing a riot among religious groupies and civil libertarians, it's about to cost all of us taxpayers dearly as the United States Supreme Court gears up to hear arguments next year in the matter of the Pledge of Allegiance. Is the patriotic oath, as it stands now, an unconstitutional blending of church and state? And what's truly at stake either way?

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last year that the reference to God made the pledge unconstitutional in public schools. If that decision is allowed to stand, "One nation under God'' would be removed from the pledge, recited by about 9.6 million schoolchildren in California and other western states, alone. And it's a known fact that California often sets the trends that the rest of America eventually follows.

In 1942, at the height of World War II, the phrase ''under God'' was not part of the pledge adopted by Congress as a patriotic tribute. In 1954, with The Big War fading into history and The Cold War emerging, Congress, in all its wisdom (and its fear of god forsaken communism) decided to bolster the pledge with the phrase "under God." It was a Zen like option, a question of poetic brevity, as the phrase, "God better save us now from those red bastards because we finally realize bombs can't do it by themselves" was a bit too wordy and would take too long to rattle off quickly in homeroom.

The Supreme Court has already ruled that schoolchildren cannot be required to recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Not in classrooms, on the football field or at the Junior Prom. Phew. It would be clumsy replacing the prom queen's tiara with a crucifix, or a mezuzah, or God forbid (sorry), a photo of Allah pensively wondering if the prom queen is still a virgin.

So, if we remove "under God" what might replace it? We need something there. Otherwise it ruins the rhythm. As the original home of jazz, America must retain its sense of rhythm. Don't expect any suggestions from Justice Antonin Scalia. He won't take part in the case, apparently because of public remarks he's previously made, critical of the lower court ruling in the pledge case. If the other eight judges deadlock their votes, the lower court decision will stand. Perhaps Judge Scalia, presumably vacationing during those closed-door debates, would consider remaining in the Bahamas, affording the new Democratic President the opportunity of replacing him with a more discreet and less pessimistic individual. But I digress. Surely a Democratic President would mean our country has simply gone to hell in a handbucket and no Pledge could save it anymore.

But just in case, let's consider the options. First of all, it should be easy to memorize. Kids today have enough on their minds already. Let's begin by keeping the word, "under" intact. There's a certain humility attached to being under something, or somebody, and God knows, so to speak, we Americans need to maintain our humility these days.

"Under God" could simply become, "Under Ground" serving as a trifecta of acknowledgement: first, to those who lie dead and buried after defending our country from the threat of weapons of mass destruction, second, America's most beloved dissidents and lastly, to our independent farming community, who, as government subsidies grow for huge corporate farms need all the attention they can get.

Or, we could go with, "Under Goth" as a heartfelt gesture to our German friends, remembering the Goths, who were a Germanic people that overran the Roman Empire in the early centuries of the Christian Era. Many children attending school clad in black would also appreciate the reference.

Or, perhaps "Under Gad" could be appropriate, as Gad was a son of Jacob and the traditional eponymous ancestor of one of the tribes of Israel. "Gad" is also the root of, "Egads!", which is often used in public by Bush administration officials, describing their reactions to yet another Iraqi scandal or when foreigners under attack feel the need to exclaim their continuous wonderment at the democratic process in America.

Speaking of need, wouldn't "Under Gas" be most appropriate? We are, after all, a determined nation of guzzlers.
But, is the phrase, "Under God" the only one, which needs replacing? Supporters of the pledge claim it's more about ceremony and history than about religion, similar to the ''In God We Trust'' stamped on coins and bills. That sure opens up another can of worms. Considering the state of the economy, many people are reduced to trusting God for their welfare, seeing as how they can't trust in a government, which is doing such a good job of ignoring them.

Perhaps we should let our cash rest for now. It's hard enough holding on to it, let alone sending it back for a re-write. Let's first have a nationwide contest to write a new Pledge of Allegiance. And considering the definition of allegiance, "1. the obligation of a feudal vassal to his liege lord 2. the fidelity owed by a subject or citizen to a sovereign or government", and our beloved Constitution, let's first change the title. Here's my entry:

I (must) hedge (my) allegiance to the flag of the United States of America,
and to the principals for which we stand, one nation, under smog,
intolerable, without (sufficient) liberty and justice for all.
(For ALL, not just the upper 10% tax bracket.)