“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.”

Oh, the wonderful Pledge of Allegiance. I can hear its echo reverberate in my eardrums as I reminisce about elementary school. If there was one thing as school children we could count upon, it was the first bell’s shrill ring still bouncing around in your head as you recited the pledge of allegiance. And if you didn’t stand up and recite (or at least move your lips pretending to have it all memorized), you were prepared to heavily defend yourself.

I chose not to stand and recite the pledge of allegiance one day in high school preceding a school function.

For defiance of that tradition – and in some states, law – I was suspended for three days.

When asked why I refused to pledge allegiance, I said what I still say now: I want to agree and have full confidence in any ideal and country I pledge myself to.

But my particular issue with the Pledge of Allegiance isn’t what has brought it into the news again.

In 1954, Congress added the words ‘under God’ to the pledge, and once again, those words are challenged in federal courts. United States District Judge Lawrence Karlton ruled Wednesday that the pledge’s reference to one nation ‘under God’ violates school children’s right to be “free from a coercive requirement to affirm God.”

What about a potential coercive requirement to affirm this nation as a whole?

I’m all for party-loyalty and taking pride in one’s nation. At football games, I get my ‘go-go Huskies’ on. Yet it’s something parallel to Russia with Stalinism and Germany propagating Hitler-esque ideals when a person’s suspended for refusing to recite the pledge of allegiance.

The Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals ruled the pledge of allegiance “unconstitutional” in 2002 for a reason that misses the larger point.

In current headlines, federal courts are discussing the pledge’s standing in society, again, missing the vital point.

The recital of the pledge was once a statewide law in Pennsylvania, but now schools are required to inform parents about a child’s non-participation in reciting the pledge.

In 2003, Colorado had its mandatory pledge law blocked only because it discriminated against teachers who didn’t have the opportunity to opt out of the pledge with a note, unlike the students.

And Illinois Senate Bill 1634 requires all public high schools set aside time each day for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Is it wrong for government to force a religious affirmation on people, but all right for them to push nationalistic agendas through the same medium?

Rev. Francis Bellamy, the man who wrote the pledge, had a good idea. Just like James Madison, George Washington, Benjamin Banneker, Alexander Hamilton and the other signers and founders of this nation. Yet their ideals didn’t drive this country into the free and justice-filled nation according to the pledge we should, certainly by now, be.

Actions inspired by those constructs of society do that.

It’s ironic to recognize in very few other countries would a column like this be allowed. At the same time, in 2005, it’s a paradox to read columnist after columnist writing about the failures of a supposed ‘indivisible’ government to respond adequately to arguably the most catastrophic natural disaster this nation has ever faced.

Some may call this true naiveté, idealism or liberalism. But I call it true patriotism.

After all, who will make the better country, a person who questions the integrity of its mother nation and live to better it, or somebody alongside those who blindly follow suit with the majority and mumble in rhythm the words to a pledge that they’ve failed to truly analyze but only commit to memory?

Columns reflect the opinion of the author and not necessarily that of the Northern Star staff.