thedrifter
12-07-04, 06:32 AM
12-06-2004
On Sacred Oaths and Eternal Vigilance
By Matthew Dodd
“I, … do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic …. So help me God.”
The above are excerpts from the Oath of Enlistment for our military enlisted ranks and from the Oath of Office for our military officer ranks that are administered on certain special occasions, such as upon entering military service and during promotion or re-enlistment ceremonies. I have often reflected on my oath, but some events of the last couple of years have driven me to reflect on my oath from some completely new perspectives:
“Is the Constitution of the United States itself unconstitutional? Is my Oath of Office unconstitutional?” And, in a related reflection, are our national core values and foundational principles coming under relentless attack from foreign and domestic threats?
I am not naïve nor arrogant enough to suggest that I consider myself an expert on the Constitution and that I can give the definitive answers to those questions, but I do want to share some facts and observations from some recent research and subsequent discoveries. I will leave it to you to come to your own conclusions.
The Constitution was ratified on September 17, 1787. The first ten Amendments to the Constitution, known as the Bill of Rights, were ratified on December 15, 1791. The First Amendment opens with: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof …. ” In modern terms, that simple opening is known as “the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.”
Recently, a California elementary school principal forbid one of her 5th grade social studies teachers from using our Declaration of Independence as a reference document to support his prescribed lesson plans, on the grounds that such documents are “religious documents.”
Let me share with you excerpts from that foundational document, enacted on July 4, 1776, that must have qualified it as a “religious document” in the mind of the principal (italics added):
“When in the Course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them …. 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…We, therefore, the Representatives of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, in GENERAL CONGRESS, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World for the Rectitude of our Intentions …. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm Reliance on the Protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”
Of the almost five full pages that the entire Declaration took in the pamphlet I used in my research, the excerpts above took up about one-quarter of one page. The sixteen words I italicized would take up only two lines on one page. Because of those sixteen words, 5th grade students in this one California school are being denied the opportunity to read, learn from, and learn about the founding document that declared to the entire world our independence as a sovereign nation.
On June 26, 2002, a three-judge panel for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that voluntary recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools, with the words “under God,” violated the Establishment Clause because it constituted a “religious act.” The massive public outcry against this decision was immediate and made national news media headlines. In an ironic twist, while researching this particular case I discovered that the 9th Circuit Court’s formal session-opening announcement includes the phrase, “God save these United States and this honorable Court.”
Back in 1999, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sued the Department of Defense (DoD), the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and others, challenging their support of the Boy Scouts of America (BSA). The ACLU claimed that those Departments’ support of the BSA violated the First Amendment Establishment Clause. The ACLU lawsuit focused on the Boy Scouts’ Oath that contains the pledge, “To do my duty to God and my country.”
On Nov. 15, 2004, DoD entered a “partial settlement” in the Boy Scout case. Despite news media reports that DoD was changing its support to the BSA, the Department has had a long-standing rule against sponsoring non-federal organizations (like the BSA) and insists that the rule had not been violated. The Department’s “partial settlement” was an agreement to warn or remind military bases worldwide that they should not directly sponsor the BSA or any other non-federal organization.
In letters on Dec. 2, 2004 to both the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the Senate Majority Leader, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld wrote:
“[T]his agreement does not fundamentally change the long-standing relationship between America’s Boy Scouts and U.S. military installations. I have been assured that Scouts will continue to have access to our facilities for camping, hiking, fishing, etc. I am concerned with the impression left by the ACLU in recent reporting of this matter that suggests [DoD] is changing its relationship with the Boy Scouts …. [T]he Department should continue to exercise its statutory authority to support the activities of the Boy Scouts, in particular the periodic national and world Boy Scout Jamborees …. ”
As scary or silly as it sounds, you may be as surprised as I was when I discovered that the notion that the Constitution of the United States might itself be unconstitutional was actually cited a few times in legal and scholarly reviews and discussions. Yes, even the simple words at the very end of the Constitution “in the Year of our Lord” are enough to invoke strong opinions and challenge the validity of the entire document.
Now, think about the implications with respect to our National Anthem, the National Motto, the Gettysburg Address, and the ultra-patriotic song, “God Bless America.” Suddenly, my wondering if my Oath of Office is unconstitutional no longer seems as far-fetched as when I first thought about it. To me, that thought is a very scary one.
Fortunately, I learned that the U.S. Supreme Court has been consistent in saying that patriotic invocations of God do not amount to a government establishment of religion.
On a related note, I also reflected on whether our national core values and foundational principles are coming under relentless attack from foreign and domestic threats. In all honesty, I now believe that question is a lot bigger than I am prepared to address at this time.
However, I will close with a very thought-provoking passage from the Roman philosopher Cicero (c. 106-43 B.C.) that warns of the types of domestic threats to our national core values and foundational principles that many in our politically-polarized country believe are happening right now:
“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear.”
To the time-honored Marine Corps motto, Semper Fidelis (Always Faithful), I would add: Semper Vigilans! Always vigilant!
Lt. Col. Matthew Dodd USMC is a Senior Editor of DefenseWatch. He can be reached at mattdodd1775@hotmail.com. Please send Feedback responses to dwfeedback@yahoo.com.
Ellie
On Sacred Oaths and Eternal Vigilance
By Matthew Dodd
“I, … do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic …. So help me God.”
The above are excerpts from the Oath of Enlistment for our military enlisted ranks and from the Oath of Office for our military officer ranks that are administered on certain special occasions, such as upon entering military service and during promotion or re-enlistment ceremonies. I have often reflected on my oath, but some events of the last couple of years have driven me to reflect on my oath from some completely new perspectives:
“Is the Constitution of the United States itself unconstitutional? Is my Oath of Office unconstitutional?” And, in a related reflection, are our national core values and foundational principles coming under relentless attack from foreign and domestic threats?
I am not naïve nor arrogant enough to suggest that I consider myself an expert on the Constitution and that I can give the definitive answers to those questions, but I do want to share some facts and observations from some recent research and subsequent discoveries. I will leave it to you to come to your own conclusions.
The Constitution was ratified on September 17, 1787. The first ten Amendments to the Constitution, known as the Bill of Rights, were ratified on December 15, 1791. The First Amendment opens with: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof …. ” In modern terms, that simple opening is known as “the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.”
Recently, a California elementary school principal forbid one of her 5th grade social studies teachers from using our Declaration of Independence as a reference document to support his prescribed lesson plans, on the grounds that such documents are “religious documents.”
Let me share with you excerpts from that foundational document, enacted on July 4, 1776, that must have qualified it as a “religious document” in the mind of the principal (italics added):
“When in the Course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them …. 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…We, therefore, the Representatives of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, in GENERAL CONGRESS, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World for the Rectitude of our Intentions …. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm Reliance on the Protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”
Of the almost five full pages that the entire Declaration took in the pamphlet I used in my research, the excerpts above took up about one-quarter of one page. The sixteen words I italicized would take up only two lines on one page. Because of those sixteen words, 5th grade students in this one California school are being denied the opportunity to read, learn from, and learn about the founding document that declared to the entire world our independence as a sovereign nation.
On June 26, 2002, a three-judge panel for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that voluntary recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools, with the words “under God,” violated the Establishment Clause because it constituted a “religious act.” The massive public outcry against this decision was immediate and made national news media headlines. In an ironic twist, while researching this particular case I discovered that the 9th Circuit Court’s formal session-opening announcement includes the phrase, “God save these United States and this honorable Court.”
Back in 1999, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sued the Department of Defense (DoD), the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and others, challenging their support of the Boy Scouts of America (BSA). The ACLU claimed that those Departments’ support of the BSA violated the First Amendment Establishment Clause. The ACLU lawsuit focused on the Boy Scouts’ Oath that contains the pledge, “To do my duty to God and my country.”
On Nov. 15, 2004, DoD entered a “partial settlement” in the Boy Scout case. Despite news media reports that DoD was changing its support to the BSA, the Department has had a long-standing rule against sponsoring non-federal organizations (like the BSA) and insists that the rule had not been violated. The Department’s “partial settlement” was an agreement to warn or remind military bases worldwide that they should not directly sponsor the BSA or any other non-federal organization.
In letters on Dec. 2, 2004 to both the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the Senate Majority Leader, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld wrote:
“[T]his agreement does not fundamentally change the long-standing relationship between America’s Boy Scouts and U.S. military installations. I have been assured that Scouts will continue to have access to our facilities for camping, hiking, fishing, etc. I am concerned with the impression left by the ACLU in recent reporting of this matter that suggests [DoD] is changing its relationship with the Boy Scouts …. [T]he Department should continue to exercise its statutory authority to support the activities of the Boy Scouts, in particular the periodic national and world Boy Scout Jamborees …. ”
As scary or silly as it sounds, you may be as surprised as I was when I discovered that the notion that the Constitution of the United States might itself be unconstitutional was actually cited a few times in legal and scholarly reviews and discussions. Yes, even the simple words at the very end of the Constitution “in the Year of our Lord” are enough to invoke strong opinions and challenge the validity of the entire document.
Now, think about the implications with respect to our National Anthem, the National Motto, the Gettysburg Address, and the ultra-patriotic song, “God Bless America.” Suddenly, my wondering if my Oath of Office is unconstitutional no longer seems as far-fetched as when I first thought about it. To me, that thought is a very scary one.
Fortunately, I learned that the U.S. Supreme Court has been consistent in saying that patriotic invocations of God do not amount to a government establishment of religion.
On a related note, I also reflected on whether our national core values and foundational principles are coming under relentless attack from foreign and domestic threats. In all honesty, I now believe that question is a lot bigger than I am prepared to address at this time.
However, I will close with a very thought-provoking passage from the Roman philosopher Cicero (c. 106-43 B.C.) that warns of the types of domestic threats to our national core values and foundational principles that many in our politically-polarized country believe are happening right now:
“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear.”
To the time-honored Marine Corps motto, Semper Fidelis (Always Faithful), I would add: Semper Vigilans! Always vigilant!
Lt. Col. Matthew Dodd USMC is a Senior Editor of DefenseWatch. He can be reached at mattdodd1775@hotmail.com. Please send Feedback responses to dwfeedback@yahoo.com.
Ellie