Reality informs us that the Pledge of Allegiance did not originally contain the words, "under God" and that phrase was officially added, after intense lobbying by the Catholic Knights of Columbus, in 1954 during the McCarthy red scare days. But in Fox News' alternate reality, it was there when Jesus gave the Pledge to the Founders when he was helping them with the Constitution. As such, any attempt to remove the phrase is seen as a treasonous affront to this Christian nation. So as the flagship show for persecuted Christians, persecuted patriots, and persecuted Christian patriots, Fox & Friends, on Friday highlighted the case of a New Jersey student who is fighting the good fight to keep the sacred words "under God" in the Pledge. And according to Constitutional scholar Elisabeth Hasselbeck, it's a "right" so screw u atheists and non-believers!!!!
At the beginning of the patented "Fight for Faith" segment, Jesus BFF and wall of genius Elisabeth Hasselbeck reported that a NJ teen is fighting Jesus' atheist enemies in order to keep the phrase "under God" in the sacred Pledge of Allegiance. Hasselbeck mentioned that, last April, the American Humanist Association filed a lawsuit to have those sacred words removed. (She didn't mention that the suit pertains to just one school district.) She played part of the Fox & Friends segment in which a representative of the humanist group spoke of the dilemma for those who do not wish to use the words. (During the same piece, Hasselbeck, "as a mom," just couldn't wrap her pretty head around why folks object to the "under God.") In introducing her guest, Samantha Jones, she noted that Jones "disagrees" with the position of the humanists.
As the chyron framed the issue of an embattled pledege, "Under God, NJ Teens Fights To Save Pledge of Allegiance," Hasselbeck further defined the issue: "This is a big deal, you want to be able to be able to say the Pledge of Allegiance - but it's also your right." (Uh, nobody is preventing Jones from saying the Pledge). Jones, a perfect Fox News youth if there ever was one, said that "this is about protecting our freedoms as Americans" and disclosed that she is working with the Becket Fund, a right wing group that specializes in persecuted Christians and which was the driving force behind the Hobby Lobby case.(She didn't mention that the Catholic Knights of Columbus are also included in her suit) In keeping with the patented Fox "battle" metaphor, in cases involving persecuted Christians and persecuted Christian patriots, the chyron read "Samantha Jones, Battling to Keep "Under God" in Pledge."
Jones recounted how she has been saying the Pledge since pre-school and loves it because "it sums up the history the values that make our country great." She claimed that the Pledge acknowledges "that our rights do not come from the government but from a higher power" - a bogus trope popular with the Christian right who refuse to acknowledge that the concept of rights, as defined by the Deistic Founders, is straight out of the secular Enlightenment and English common law. The chyron reinforced the agitprop: "Silencing My Rights, Why Under God In Pledge Matters."
Hasselbeck dramatically asked what Jones thought when the bad humanists wanted OMG to remove "under God" from the Pledge. Jones said that she would feel "silenced" if she wasn't able to say "under God." Just to make sure you know that the evil atheists are behind this outrage the chyron read "Taking Offense, AHA, Pledge Violates Atheists Rights." Jones made the ludicrous claim that because our rights "come from a higher power" the rights, which we didn't create (?), they can't be taken away. (So slavery shouldn't have been abolished because that right came from God?)
Constitutional scholar Hasselbeck said this isn't about "feelings" and, in a moment of irony, cited the 1st Amendment's Establishment Clause which is totally ignored when the pals are excoriating those who use it to oppose Christian intrusions into the public square. After Jones admitted that saying the Pledge is voluntary, Hasselbeck asked the scripted question of whether Jones feels her rights are violated if "under God" is removed. Naturally, Jones agreed. Hasselbeck praised Jones who is "willing to bear the cross and walk with it." (Establishment of religion much?) Jones, who is "speaking for the Beckett Fund" said that while people "have the right to remain silent, they don't have the right to silence anyone else." Hasselbeck told Jones she is "impressive" and wished her "well in your fight."
Notice that Hasselbeck didn't mention the history of the "under God" phrase. But seriously folks, this is the show which, while defending 1st Amendment rights for Christians, seems to think that those same rights don't protect atheists who put up billboards. And BTW, if "under God" is removed (and I don't think that's likely) Jones will still be able to interject the phrase. So WTF??? Oh, right, free face time on Fox News. Team America, f**k yeah!
Prior to the American Revolution, the US was ruled by England whose monarch (at the time, George III, but this applied to his predecessors back to William III and Mary II), while constrained partially by Parliament, was still considered to be on the throne “through the Grace of God.” While Cromwell and his co-horts in the middle of the 17th century had removed the English monarch’s “Divine Right” status (which still largely applied to the kings and queens “on the Continent”), the monarch remained on the throne through a “divine” connection (the English monarch was also the “Defender of the Faith” as head of the Church of England). In other words, the American revolutionaries (including the Founding Fathers) believed that ALL humans had rights simply because they were human beings (that’s part of the “inalienable” deal) and while they used deistic (not “Christian,” much less this modern right-wing PCism, “Judeo-Christian”) terms to ascribe the origin of these rights, that was simply a reflection of the era (even the evil “evolutionist” Charles Darwin was a devout Christian), that was simply to point out that kings were not really any better than their subjects. Most Europeans living under the rule of monarchs truly believed that their kings were “better” than they were because God put those kings on their thrones and that the common people’s very lives were subject to the king’s whims. The Founding Fathers said, "That’s false. We’re all equal. Kings are no better than their subjects. (It should also be noted that, in Europe, the STATE-SANCTIONED/SUPPORTED CHURCH reinforced this opinion on their flocks. That’s another reason the Founding Fathers put the kibosh on any “official” church—despite the best efforts of right-wingers such as the “cafeteria Christians” at FoxNoise.)
There are many like myself who do or want to believe in an afterlife, but don’t belong to any church or religious organization and don’t feel we have to devote time convincing others that our beliefs are those a higher being would approve.
Atheists that I know or have known never “preach” their non-beliefs on me, while I’ve dealt with many zealots who not only can be nauseating, but their religious beliefs can be an obsession to the point where it becomes unhealthy and a mental illness.