Are Atheists UnAmerican?
The Bradenton Herald quotes some reactions from Junior ROTC cadets at Lakewood Ranch High School to the recent Pledge of Allegiance decision:
Freshman Brianna Capps fully believes “under God” should remain part of the pledge, and she’s willing to fight for it. “My opinion is that our nation was created from religious beliefs and ‘under God’ should stay in the Pledge of Allegiance. People came to our country so that they could worship their God in any way that they please to. Just because Michael Newdow doesn’t have any religious beliefs at all doesn’t mean that the rest of the people in the nation who do have religious beliefs can’t express them, too. So if he’s going to fight for this, I know I’ll fight back,” Capps wrote in her essay.
I guess the fact that no one is prevented from saying “under God” or from expressing their religious beliefs doesn’t matter to Brianna Capps. For some reason, she doesn’t think it’s a problem when the government endorses the religious beliefs of some citizens, privileging them over the religious beliefs of other citizens. I suspect that some people would think that privileging one religion over another is unAmerican, but Brianna Capps apparently disagrees.
Senior David Scott wrote that he believes the pledge is part of the country’s core value system. “The Pledge of Allegiance is part of our culture and country. One person cannot change this. I know there is the right of freedom of speech, but come on, this is an outrage,” Scott said in his essay.
So, freedom of speech should only be valued unless minorities use it to express things that are outrageous to the majority? I wonder what the point of the freedom of speech really is, then.
Junior Jenn Fultz wrote that she feels a rush as she recites the pledge each morning. She can’t imagine removing the words “under God” from her daily routine. “I feel that if people do not want to say “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance, then they should not be in America. I feel so blessed every morning to say the Pledge of Allegiance. It’s part of our freedom of speech. It represents our good country,” Fultz wrote in her essay.
Jenn Fultz is the most offensive of all the quoted reactions. According to Jenn Fultz, people who do not want to say “under God” (which includes not only atheists, but also many religious theists) shouldn’t be in America. Does she believe that they should be forcibly removed, or does she merely think that it is bad manners of them to stick around and remind people like her that alternative viewpoints exist?
Either way, she must be very insecure in her beliefs — a secure person wouldn’t mind the presence of dissent and disagreement. She feels “blessed” to say the Pledge of Allegiance because it’s an expression of the freedom of speech, but apparently dissenters aren’t “blessed” when they disagree with the addition of “under God” because that’s not an appropriate use of their freedom of speech.
What is an appropriate use of one’s freedom of speech? Jenn Fultz, David Scott, and all the others seem to make that clear: to say what the State informs you that you should say. Because the State has chosen to side with particular theistic beliefs, you should feel “blessed” to exercise your “freedom” by repeating the religious oath which the State has singled out for endorsement. If you don’t, then you’re simply acting outrageously and shouldn’t be in America anymore — America doesn’t have room for you anymore and you’ll be fought if you try to insist that you have rights, too.
I guess this is what passes for civic education in Lakewood Ranch High School, at least for ROTC cadets. I weep for the future of the American military. It’s being undermined by fascist, totalitarian attitudes before people even become full members. I’d rather see America disappear from the pages of history than have it become defined by people like this.
Read More:


Comments
No comments yet. Leave a Comment