Recent decisions by federal judges that the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools is unconstitutional due to the phrase “under God” has predictably put conservatives in a tizzy.

But Alan Bock, in his brief article The Pledge: The Real Objective, explains why conservatives should not object to these decisions. The reason has nothing to do with any mention of the word “God,” either. For, as he writes:

It’s not the “under God” part I object to; although I can see an abstract argument that this is a first step on a slippery slope toward establishing a religion, it really isn’t. If I thought it really meant the nation was to submit itself to God, which would mean a lot fewer wars of choice and a lot less stealing in the “public interest,” I might even be enthusiastic. But this formulation is one of vague public piety more meant to imply that God is on our side than to express fealty to His commandments.

Bock explains the real reason why conservatives should object to the Pledge:

I object to the very idea of making students “pledge allegiance” to a rapacious state mechanism – and that is unquestionably what the pledge was designed to do, to encourage an attitude of unquestioning obedience that is unworthy of a free people.

....

In a country founded on “unalienable rights” of individuals, in which the government’s job is supposedly to “preserve these rights” and not much else, the government should be pledging allegiance to citizens and their rights, not the other way around.

Bock then goes on to explore the origin of the Pledge. Not many people know that it was actually written by Francis Bellamy, an “unapologetic socialist” and former Baptist minister who was removed from his position for using his pulpit and sermons as an opportunity to push socialism. Bellamy later tried to advance his socialist agenda through the public schools, and Bock believes the forcing of students to recite the Pledge was “unquestionably part of his campaign.”

The article is certainly interesting—its only downside is that it is too brief and doesn’t address other issues that can be raised. But certainly, it ought to make conservatives think twice before they gripe about court rulings against the Pledge, or even recite the Pledge themselves.