Sarah Palin on the Pledge of Allegiance
September 1, 2008Liberal morons have now started circulating more smears against Governor Palin. This after the “fake pregnancy” myth (smear) was destroyed by Ed Morrissey over Hot Air. The idiots over at Kos are not going to stop. They would rather create side issues to distract people instead of debating actual issues. Now they are floating the idea the Governor Palin believes the pledge of allegiance was written by our founding fathers. They base their nonsense on a questioner she filled out in 2006 that asked:
“Are you offended by the phrase “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?”
Sarah Palin’s reply was, “Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and I’ll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance.”
The moonbat over at Kos said, “Ok. First, the Pledge of Allegiance was not written by the Founding Fathers. It was written much later. Secondly, the words “under God” were not originally part of the Pledge. ”Under God” was added even later.”
The question was not specifically about the Pledge of Allegiance, it was about the phrase “Under God.” When she answered her question, this is what she was talking about. The founding fathers supported the idea that our nation was a country blessed by God.
Benjamin Franklin said:
“I have lived, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth — that God Governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?” - July 28, 1787 address at the Constitutional Convention
Thomas Paine wrote:
“The cause of America is in a great measure the cause of all mankind. Where, say some, is the king of America? I’ll tell you, friend, He reigns above.” – Common Sense
However, our Constitution is secular, and for good reason. The Founding Fathers saw the strife caused by religion being intertwined in government in European history and wanted none of it for their new country.
Some people even believe that the Ten Commandments are in the Constitution or that our laws are based upon the Commandments. Nothing could be further from the truth. Prohibitions against killing/murder were established long before the Commandments. Same with theft. As for some of the other Commandments, I don’t see any laws against “graven images” on the books….
but to the point. If Sarah Palin believes the Founding Fathers wrote the Pledge, then she is revealing not only her ignorance of history, but her adherance to extreme fundamentalist thinking. And we already have enough extremists in our government and around the world.
also…. i’d like to point out that both from Franklin and Paine were Deists. That is to say, they didn’t believe in God in the Christian fashion. Deism is the belief that there is some Greater Creationary Force in the Universe. I’m a Deist. I would never allow the murder, molestation and money-making of the Christian Nation to be affiliated with my beliefs. I doubt Franklin, Paine or even Jesus himself would join most any church in America today.
Awaken also makes a good point. Knowledge of history is terrifyingly low among our elected leaders. Regardless of what your political opinions are, and regardless of whether Palin thought the founding fathers wrote the constitution, we have a huge knowledge gap with the rest of the world when it comes to being well-versed in the history of mankind (BusinessWeek and the Economist have pointed out this gap in the last few years. How can you lead forward, when you are unable to comprehend how it is you got here in the first place?)
Back when I was teaching government in Texas, I would always have some students from fundamentalist homes inform me that the precepts from the Bill of Rights could not control because they weren’t in the Bible.
Still, again—- this nonsense that the Bible is the basis for the Constitution! Puh-leaze! The colonist were, in many instances, running scared from countries that required religion! The Constitution came about to insure total freedom of—and from–organized religion. “Under God” came about when the kooks (like Sen. Joe McCarthy) saw a shot at power by scaring the be-jesus out of everyone over the Commies.
History has repeated itself with the current set of kooks, also exploiting fear and religion to gain and use corrupt power.
Bye bye to that!!!
Thomas Paine has an “e” at the end — at least, according to my Dan Quayle desk reference. Speaking of Dan Quayle — wasn’t he supposed to be just a good looking VP in order to get the female vote?
[The question was not specifically about the Pledge of Allegiance, it was about the phrase “Under God.” When she answered her question, this is what she was talking about. The founding fathers supported the idea that our nation was a country blessed by God.]
As already pointed out… the phrase “under God” doesn’t appear in the U.S. Constitution, so rather clearly it didn’t come as good enough for our founding fathers. Nor in the Bill of Rights. Nor in any amendment. Whether or not “under god” WOULD have worked out as good enough for the founding fathers in something like a “pledge of allegiance” works as a different matter. Really though, the whole notion of a “pledge of allegiance” in the nationalistic sense we have such today doesn’t square with what the founding fathers initial thought of as The United States of America.
Really, they didn’t want… or at least didn’t seek… such a nationalism. They named our country the United States of America which implies a loose union states which regulates states as little as feasible. It implies that our individual “states” work as governing bodies of their own. The federal government interfers as little as feasible. It also means that we didn’t really have one state or nation we would pledge an allegiance to, but rather a union of states. After all, you don’t really unite geographical regions in the same sense states can unite, so the term “states” in “United States of America” didn’t refer to geographical regions, but rather states in the sense of a soverign entity. So, the phrase “under God” wouldn’t have worked for the founding in a fathers in a pledge of a allegiance, since even a pledge of allegiance wouldn’t have worked for them.
Just because the phrase and wording “Under God” doesn’t appear, it’s silly to say the founding fathers did not share those sentiments.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
The Creator of men is God. Are these basic unalienable rights are endowed by Him. And these rights are the framework of America.
“The question was not specifically about the Pledge of Allegiance, it was about the phrase “Under God.” When she answered her question, this is what she was talking about. The founding fathers supported the idea that our nation was a country blessed by God.”
And how precisely do you know what the question or her answer was about? She was indeed asked about the phrase, and its place in the Pledge of Allegiance. She was not asked about the idea of whether the FF believed our nation was blessed by God, as the original question didn’t even mention the FF. She did. Stop trying to slant the situation according to your own personal spin. Palin is more than capable of speaking for herself, and she did. She doesn’t need a total stranger interpreting her words for everyone else. If the questionnaire wanted to know her views on the FF’s ideas about God, it would’ve asked her about that.
I wouldn’t assume she needs people interpreting her words either, and yet liberals want to twist them to mean something else. So round and round we go…
“Are you offended by the phrase “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?”
“The question was not specifically about the Pledge of Allegiance”
Ummm. Perhaps you use a different version of English than I do. The question was specifically and explicitly regarding the phrase “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance. It didn’t say ‘the phrase “Under God” in things like the Pledge of Allegiance”.
Also, since the phrase “Under God” wasn’t used by the founding fathers at all, it wouldn’t even make sense if you did try to read it into a broader context.
There’s a lot to like about Palin. Trying to make a lame excuse for an inarguably bad answer is not going to help your case.
[Just because the phrase and wording “Under God” doesn’t appear, it’s silly to say the founding fathers did not share those sentiments.]
It comes as silly to say that the founding fathers thought the idea of “God” had a place in terms of institutions of the state, because they didn’t include it anywhere in the constitution, and the first amendment puts a separation between church and state. Since the pledge often comes as a required statement to say by school children, it ends up prohibiting the free exercise of religion, since someone who doesn’t believe in “God” has to say “under God”.
[“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”]
This comes from Declaration of Independence, which did not found this country. The U. S. Constitution did not contain this phrase. Since some of the same people were involved in both Declaration of Independence and the U. S. Constitution, and they used the Declaration of Independence to help write the U. S. Constitution, this indicates that they darn well thought about putting some phrase like “under God” that in the U. S. Constitution. It didn’t work out as good enough to go into the U. S. Constitution.
[The Creator of men is God. Are these basic unalienable rights are endowed by Him. And these rights are the framework of America.]
No. Look, the U. S. Constitution… the framework of America… spells out several rights without any reference to personal beliefs about where those rights come from. It simply didn’t work as good enough to put in. The U. S. Constitution (via the 9th Amendment, which restricts the original constitution) even acknowledges that more rights of the people exist than the U. S. Constitution lists. Here’s a copy
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution
/constitution.billofrights.html#amendmenti
Here’s a copy of the Bill of Rights with its preamble
http://www.billofrights.org/
Also, the Pledge of Allegiance didn’t get written until 1892. The phrase “under God” didn’t appear until 1954. There exist plenty of sources to confirm that. Franklin saying ““I have lived, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth — that God Governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?” – July 28, 1787 address at the Constitutional Convention” comes in his request for prayers at the convention. It does NOT come as commentary on the document or say anything about rights or how “God” acts with respect to country. He gave that on June 28, 1787. Paine’s _Common Sense_ does not exist within the U. S. Constitution.
Franklin gave a speech on the last day of the convention which makes no such reference. http://www.usconstitution.net/franklin.html
You know, this is hilarious! Whether or not she meant what she said is ridiculous. Everyone makes mistakes when recalling historical facts. There are some days, if I am not absolutely focusing on it, that I could have a very difficult time remembering even basic facts, and the older I get (I am 42), the more I forget (and so do most of you). Give the woman a break. It’s not imperative that she, or Joe Biden, know every detail of historical facts. This kind of stuff is going to come back and BITE the democrats big time, and I cannot wait until it happens.
It’s pretty obvious that she IS talking about the Pledge of Allegiance. Who is the bigger idiot? Sarah Palin or John McCain for choosing her?
It’s quite a stretch to say that “the question was not specifically about the pledge of allegiance”.
It was clearly and unabiguously about the phrase “under God” _in_ the Pledge of Allegiance. It’s not about the phrase “under God” in some general sense.
You can argue that the founding fathers believed the country was blessed by God. But, that’s not what the question was about. Not even close.
Do I care that Palin was ignorant about the origins of the Pledge of Allegiance. No, it’s not terribly relevant; but, that doesn’t change the fact that she was uninformed.
I find it interesting that the questionnaire has now been taken off of the eagle forum. Is someone afraid that others will read her answers?
“The question was not specifically about the Pledge of Allegiance, it was about the phrase “Under God.” When she answered her question, this is what she was talking about.”
Epic Fail.
Question asked: “Are you offended by the phrase “Under God” *****in the Pledge of Allegiance?***** Why or why not?”
Palin Response:: “If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and *****I’ll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance.”*****
I’m sorry but this woman is an idiot. She actually thinks the Pledge was written and recited by the founding fathers.
The Pledge of Allegiance was written for the popular children’s magazine “Youth’s Companion” by Christian Socialist author and Baptist Minister Francis Bellamy on September 7, 1892. The owners of Youth’s Companion were selling flags to schools, and approached Bellamy to write the Pledge for their advertising campaign. Nothing more. It was marketed as a way to celebrate the 400th anniversary of Columbus arriving in the Americas and was first published on the following day.
“Under God” was added in 1954 by President Eisenhower in response to the “Red-Scare” of the atheist Communist Society of the USSR and after much lobbying by the Knights of Columbus.
In my opinion, had it just become a national practice to say “under God” I’m sure there would not be such controversy today. But what President Eisenhower did was actually sign the wording into LAW (United States Code, Title 4, Chapter 1, §4) on June 15, 1954 stating: “These words [“under God”] will remind Americans that despite our great physical strength we must remain humble. They will help us to keep constantly in our minds and hearts the spiritual and moral principles which alone give dignity to man, and upon which our way of life is founded.”
By doing so, the President made a direct violation to the 1st Amendment to the Constitution under the Establishment Clause which specifically states:
“Congress shall make no LAW respecting an establishment of religion…”
More fun facts about the Pledge of Allegiance include that Minister Bellamy’s original draft of the Pledge included the word EQUALITY along with the words LIBERTY and JUSTICE. At the time, the Board of Education did not want equality for women or blacks, so the word was removed.
Also, the specified proper salute to the flag between 1892 and 1942 was “right arm fully extended with palm up towards the flag” This remained until it was realized that Nazi Germany had adopted the same salute. Our Pledge salute was then changed to “right hand over heart.”
As far as Ms. Palin is concerned, I can’t wait to hear her say something about George Washington singing the the “Star Spangled Banner” which incidentally did not become our National Anthem until 1931 and was written 15 years after President Washington died. LOL
PS: SLAVERY was good enough for our founding fathers. Is that good enough for her too?
Wow, that was a lame point.
The “POINT” is that her uneducated statements show that not only is Ms. Palin deficient on Middle-School level US History, but that she is also ignorant to the law, the Constitution and as to how the words “Under God” got there in the first place, meanwhile amplifying her stupidity by using “good enough for the founding fathers” as a basis for conjecture in debate.
Trying to set up Thomas Paine as some paragon of the promotion of Christian morality in the public sphere is ludicrous.
He may have used certain Christian imagery to woo his reading audience at certain times. But the truth is that Paine was opposed the institution of Christianity as it were in his time and wrote a whole book (“The Age of Reason”- look it up) arguing against basic principles that are still part of Christian orthodoxy.
Paine was a Deist- not a Bible believing Christian. For everyone that wants to reconcile their admiration of Paine with their conviction that Christ died for their sins, I offer a direct quote from the man’s work:
“As to the Christian system of faith, it appears to me as a species of Atheism — a sort of religious denial of God. It professes to believe in a man rather than in God. It is a compound made up chiefly of Manism with but little Deism, and is as near to Atheism as twilight is to darkness. It introduces between man and his Maker an opaque body, which it calls a Redeemer, as the moon introduces her opaque self between the earth and the sun, and it produces by this means a religious, or an irreligious, eclipse of light. It has put the whole orbit of reason into shade.”
-Thomas Paine “The Age of Reason” 1793.
Sad that supposed patriotic conservatives do the founding fathers such a disservice as to project their own politically-motivated religious dogma onto them. Considering these people risked death to found a new nation based on the radical idea of separation of religion from government, the least you could do is acknowledge their efforts instead of creating your own ignorant myths. If you ever read the letters of Thomas Paine, or even Jefferson, the opinions expressed with regard to orthodox Christianity would give you definite pause for thought before writing such errant nonsense.
I have, fried wire. And this little bit from Thomas Paine’s letter to Andrew Dean from 1806 might interest you:
“As to the book called the Bible, it is blasphemy to call it the Word of God. It is a book of lies and contradictions, and a history of bad times and bad men. There are but a few good characters in the whole book.”
Now what was this about my creation of “ignorant myths” again?
Easy there big fellah. I was kinda agreeing with you and disagreeing with the original post these comments refer to. You sound beyond the level of nous that thinks of this country as an extension of the pilgrim colonies and ignores the constitution and the guys that wrote it.