Rejected headline: One nation, in denial. …

I don’t get it.

Seriously, the whole federal battle over the Pledge of Allegiance, particularly whether the “under g-d” line, is taking place in the wrong arena. Then again, what the hell do I know?

As a longtime nonsectarian, I used to fall silent during our morningly Pledge when I was a wee lass, particularly at the “under g-d” part. Even now, the Pledge is more of a tradition (and a PITA, as far as I used to be concerned) than a battle cry. I excelled at skipping homeroom, so I don’t know that I said it even once when I was in high school.

What I’m not getting is whether the atheist activist in charge of this brouhaha wants the Pledge to be banned or whether he wants to get rid of the “under g-d” part. Anyone who’s seen a news report that I haven’t seen, please feel free to enlighten me. (For the record, I’ve been an atheist and, most recently, an agnostic. And I still don’t get this guy’s point.)

I mean, with what would we replace that particular phrase? One nation … in purgatory? In hell? Under fear of terrorists? Under economic distress? Not under much of an ozone layer? Under a dominatrix? Over a couch cushion? In a hole? In denial? The list goes on.

I revere our flag. I salute it when necessary. I get mad when people burn our flag. I am careful to never let the cloth touch the ground. I am frequently reminded of what that symbol meant so long ago and what it means today. And while, on one hand, I don’t need a mantra in my head about it, the Pledge did come in useful for teaching me how to tell my right side from my left.

I’d sooner, though, pledge allegiance to our fags. I mean, come on, at least they wouldn’t have put red, white and blue together on the same piece of fabric, right? And horizontal stripes make anything look fat — I am certain they would have done a nice print or at least some vertical stripes. Now THAT, my friends, I would salute!!!

Comments closed.