1939 Newsreel Shows US Pledge of Allegiance Was Once Godless

Post Reply New Topic

Some Christians seem to think "Under God" was always in the pledge when it was only added in 1954. Here's evidence against:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DI6C5JtoKms[/youtube]

That's nothing new, and as a Christian I knew that.

Quite a few don't. Sarah Palin during the campaign even thought it was put there by the founding fathers!

The "under God" phrase was added in 1954 during the Eisenhower Administration. I was brought up reciting the "godless" version of the pledge.

The Pledge of Allegiance was a propaganda ploy which was introduced in the years following the Civil War to counteract regional alliances. "One nation indivisible...." is anti-secessionist propaganda.

Contrary to what the Pledge says, there has never been liberty and justice for ALL, just for SOME.

ruveyn

True there's never been liberty/justice for all, but it was actually written around 1900 and not adopted until WWI.

This is the original Pledge of Allegiance:

"I pledge allegiance to my flag and the republic for which it stands: one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all."

And here's the one we use today. You'll notice we added a bunch of garbage to it.

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands: one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

Did you know that until the Nazis came along. People used to salute the flag in a similar manner the Nazis saluted Hitler or their superior.

Right arm extended, but the palm was up, not down. After the Nazis came to power the gesture was changed to hand over heart.

ruveyn

If you read it the pre-1954 one is much more poetic. Adding 2 more syllables ruins it. It was added by request of a fanatical Catholic group known as the "Knights of Columbus." Also heavilly influenced by McCarthyism and the idea (still sometimes used by idiots today) equating Atheism with Soviet-style communism - much more rarely since the end of the Cold War.

You pretty much hit the nail on the head there, especially about the anti-secessionist bit. Personally I think people should start threatening secession to protest the overpowered federal government.

I've always found it very fascistic to brainwash children with these slogans.

I have seen pictures of pre WW2 children giving the pledge palm down just like the Germans.

But wait. "I pledge allegiance to a FLAG!" ???

What does that mean?

Everyone from the President to the local dog catcher has a flag behind his desk.

This means "I represent the flag so you should do as I say"

What about the CONSTITUTION ?

The constitution says that everyone can own guns. The constitution says that there will be no standing army.
The constitution says that only the government can issue money. Not the privately owned "Federal Reserve"

The constitution says that the Federal Government can only make laws on issues that the constitution allows. All other powers are to be retained by the States.

Does this sound like America today? No it isn't.

Obama idolizes Lincoln, and I don't want to be unjustly harsh of Lincoln, but what he did as president ultimately is why he was assassinated. It wasn't about hatred of blacks or giving them emancipation. The issue that started the Civil War was an economic one....the assets of the states that were not part of the original 13 colonies was to be pledged for the national debt to overseas interests. The states rebelled and seceded over that issue more than anything else. These states were new territory...not pledged in surety for any debt and the federal government felt it had the right to do so for its own preexisting debt.

Lincoln did more to expand and abuse the power of the federal government in unconstitutional ways than anyone before him. The writers of history books prefer to leave out the more shameful parts of his legacy.

So, knowing what I know about Lincoln and seeing what Obama is doing, I get nervous when he says he idolizes the man.

[quote="MattShizzle"]Some Christians seem to think "Under God" was always in the pledge when it was only added in 1954. Here's evidence against:

Why "Some Christians" and not "Some people"?

It's amusing to think that making kids recite a slogan formula every schoolday morning actually has any deep psychological effect.
I grew up and attended school in New York City during the 1930's and a large number of kids mumbled "invisible" instead of "indivisible" whether it made sense or not. Certainly it had no effect on either the loyalty or disloyalty of the kids (or me) as a pledge per se signified nothing. Adults have this strange idea that social formulas are effective generally. They are not.
It's in the category of the Christian lyrics "Jesus is the cross I bear" converted to the more interesting "Jesus is a cross-eyed bear".

There is more objectionable about the Pledge than just the "under God" bit.

Cite your sources, please.

Wasn't the pledge of allegiance written by a proud socialist?