In Defense of Obama's PatriotismA dissent on the pledge.
Posted Monday, Nov. 12, 2007, at 3:34 PM ET
PRINT
DISCUSS
E-MAIL
RSS
RECOMMEND...
Facebook
MySpace
Mixx
Digg
Reddit
del.icio.us
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Sphere
StumbleUponLast time I read the Constitution (I admit it's been a while), I didn't find anything like that, even in the penumbra of the penumbra.
But Justice Harlan Fiske Stone, in what has become a celebrated dissent, treated even the pre-"Under God" pledge as a kind of religious ritual mandated by the state, designed to advance "conformity" rather than "religious liberty."
And then he added this great line:
History teaches us that there have been but few infringements of personal liberty by the state which have not been justified, as they are here, in the name of righteousness and the public good, and few which have not been directed, as they are now, at politically helpless minorities.
Beautiful!
And then three years later, a different Supreme Court (a couple of new justices) reversed itself in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, and speaking for the new majority, Justice Robert Jackson wrote:
If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.
Yes! The pledge is a kind of forced confession of orthodoxy. No, not water-boarding, but coercion nonetheless. Especially for peer-group-pressured school kids. Even if they have the right to opt out. In past school-prayer cases, the court has resisted the idea that the state should be implicated in even the social coercion or propagation of religion.
Busybody school boards and bombastic anthem peddlers at ball games should let people find their way to allegiance in their own fashion rather than making "allegiance" an implement of state power used to extract oaths.
Is it possible—is it conceivable—that at great risk to his political ambitions Barack Obama is doing things like doffing the flag pin and putting his hands at his sides during the anthem because he is being honest about the inner reservations he may feel at such practices?
Not the pledge. He's told an affecting story about how his grandfather taught him to put his hand over his heart while taking the pledge.
Still, that picture in the viral e-mail of Obama listening to the anthem while standing—looking all casual, with hands clasped—next to two people with hands over their hearts, could be taken two ways. It could suggest that he doesn't think there's anything wrong with the anthem, but it's not as deserving as the pledge of hand over heart. Or it could be a way of saying that sacralizing a song with hand to heart is akin in meaningfulness to wearing a flag lapel pin. And that he's not going to disguise his attitude for superficial political considerations. That, in a way, he's saying, "If you reject me for being honest about this, it's your loss as well as mine."
It's probably too much to hope that it's all that deliberate. That he feels it's worth making a point, starting a debate about real patriotism, rather than faking it for the sake of making it. If he does, though, his argument is intellectually superior, however politically inopportune. And not a distraction from "real issues" like the war, because arguments about what is and what isn't "American" and "un-American" are being thrown around indiscriminately in that debate.
Justice Harlan Fiske Stone was in an 8-1 minority when he dissented and called the pledge for what it was. Now we revere his words. As we do Justice Jackson's "fixed star" analogy. I'm sure Obama, a Harvard law school student, is quite familiar with these decisions and the thinking behind them.
Is it too much to hope that's what's going through his mind? Maybe. But Obama's all about the audacity of hope, right?
Harry Reid's Clever Scheme To Tax Rich People To Fund Health Care
Fix Your Terrible, Insecure Passwords in Five Minutes
The John Cassavetes Movie That Changed American Cinema Forever
Why Doesn't Health Care Cover Birth Control?
Why Do They Play Bagpipes at Military Funerals?
The Four Reasons Precious Is So Fat
Remarks from the Fray
Patriotism gives me the creeps. This country was based on the idea of NOT trusting the government or its power. I shouldn't pledge allegiance to the government; it should pledge allegiance to me. Government exists for the people; not the other way around. It definitely shouldn't be fostering a love for itself in the hearts and minds of children by forcing them to recite an oath of loyalty.
Politicians should recite a pledge to the people every morning. School children should be finishing their homework before class.
--cornhog
(To reply, click here)
Sure, it's a ritual to put your hand over your heart during the pledge of allegiance, to take your hat off at the beginning of the ball game during the Star Spangled Banner. Such customs develop in human society. But I'm not aware of anyone getting in trouble for not doing so. I'm not aware of jail time for refusing to do this.
--Earlybird
(To reply, click here)
I haven't been in the political or news loop much in the past two years, because I spent 16 months of that as a combat infantryman in Afghanistan, but it is always refreshing to come back and hear this kind of talk.
When I'm in uniform, I salute for the pledge and the national anthem. When out of uniform, I place my hand over my heart. I wear a flag on my sleeve to work every day. But that's about the shallowest form of patriotism I can think of. Shoulder up seventy pounds of body armor and weapons and walk for a couple of days through the mountains of Afghanistan, and I think you might have dug a little deeper.
--mountainmatt
(To reply, click here)
What boggles my mind the most is that the only citizens who are regularly expected to recite the Pledge are 1) schoolchildren (whose loyalty to their country is hardly a concern and who rarely have a clue what they're saying when they robotically repeat the Pledge each morning), and 2) sports event attendees, whose loyalty, at least at the beginning of the game, is primarily directed to their home team. Meanwhile, the rest of us get up, go to work, and progress through our days without once being asked to stand, put our hands over our hearts, and assure random listeners that we will not betray our country. Am I supposed to be comforted that my six-year old and the guy screaming obscenities in the bleachers are loyal Americans? It's just beyond absurd.
--MommaJ
(To reply, click here)
(11/13)