In this editorial in the New York Times (registration required), noted historian Arthur Schlesinger reinforces the newness of the Pledge of Allegiance and of the even newer insertion of “under God” into the text. Although the Pledge was first formulated in 1892 for the quadricentennial of Columbus’ arrival in the Americas, it wasn’t until 1942 that Congress got involved by officially adding the Pledge to the US Flag Code. It was given the official name of “The Pledge of Allegiance” in 1945, and in 1954, the words “under God” were added.
Reaction to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals recent decision of the unconstitutionality of the “under God” phrase has been predictably overblown both by the media and by the religious right. Most American children from the Baby Boom onward have been exposed to this version of the Pledge all their lives, and many assume it has always been this way. (I am sure that most people also do not realize that Francis Bellamy, creator of the Pledge, was also a Christian socialist and a former Baptist minister who, according to his daughter, would not have approved of Congress’s 1954 addition to the Pledge.)
As Schlesinger also points out, the motto of the US, “In God We Trust” did not become the official motto until 1956. Prior to that, it had been commonly accepted that “E pluribus unum” (Out of many, one) had been the motto. Perhaps Latin was too difficult.
President Teddy Roosevelt in 1907 had removed the then unofficial motto from the new $20 Gold Piece, considering its presence on coins which were used for all manner of irreligious acts to be “dangerously close to sacrilege.” Congress, believing that removing the motto from the coins was dangerously close to sacrilege, passed a law in 1908 mandating that from then on, all US coinage would bear the motto.
It wasn’t until 1955 that the motto was applied to paper money as a reaction to the “scourge of Godless Communism”. The motto would, its supporters claimed, by its mere presence on our greenbacks, “…strengthen the foundations of our freedom. At the base of our freedom is our faith in God and the desire of Americans to live by His will and His guidance. As long as this country trusts in God, it will prevail.”
Because of the complexities involved in redesigning the currency, it wasn’t until September 1966 that all US currency had been modified to carry the motto.
These are not ancient texts and events, made immutable by the weight of the ages. They are recent changes and surely worthy of questioning.
I have to wonder why, in ,em>Wooley v. Maynard (430 U.S. 705), which the US Supreme Court decided in 1977, the Justices said that requiring a Jehovah’s Witness to advertise New Hampshire’s (much more secular) motto of “Live Free or Die” on his automobile license plate is unconstitutional on First Amendment speech grounds, while specifically exempting consideration of the unconstitutionality of the US motto on coinage, concluding in a footnote that currency “…is generally carried in a purse or pocket and need not be displayed to the public.”
I have to wonder why, in Aronow v. United States (432 F.2d 242) in 1970 and in O’Hair v. Blumenthal (588 F.2d 1144) Circuit Courts “…concluded that the primary purpose of the slogan was secular…”, and the Supreme Court refused to hear the appeal of this twisted bit of logic.
I have to wonder why (along with Garrett Moritz‘s excellent gTexts blog), the same people who cheered the recent school vouchers decision, which rested on the intent of the law, not its effect, are not supporting this decision, which relies on the same logic.
