A physics genius and a comedian. Seems right to me.

Similar words were spoken by Einstein re:
genius.....

You should google anything that you are not sure of, and most things that you are.

I remember the pledge as being late 19th century?
The religious part was added in mid 1950s, about when I was 14 and still required to pretend to repeat the god part. When something becomes a tradition, it loses any real human purpose other than some small left over evolutionary survival of the fittest so that those who need a sign of trustfulness can feel good.

I have to disagree on several grounds. I do agree 100% that patriotism can be a kind of religion: my country right or wrong; Gott mit Uns. I get that. But Ayn Rand delineated a kind of rational patriotism wherein you identify the fact that no nation is freer, no place more deserving of your allegiance. If you need references to Ayn Rand on this, I can help. I suggest that you begin with her speech to the US Military Academy at West Point, "Philosophy: Who Needs It."

Beyond that, some people will stuff their shirts with whatever is handy. Right now, I serve with a good team, but I can think of one staff officer for whom the label "martinet" applies. So, too with religion. One time, as a result of a talk that I gave, I was invited to the Methodist church in the small town where we lived. So, one time, the Church Teens usher takes me to back row pew. (No one wants to sit down front, right?) But I see the president of the Men's Club down there and in a church whisper loud enough for everyone to hear, I say, "No, I want to sit down front with the hypocrites and Pharisees." And he turns around, smiles, and waves me down front to sit with him and his family.

No stuffed shirts there that day... Church is for sinners who need Salvation. Some understand that; others do not.

But I am still an atheist and that church was only so fulfilling for so long.

On religion, while Sunnis kills Shiites (the current most popular atrocities, replacing Catholics vs. Protestants in Northern Ireland, and besting even the Palestinians vs.Israel), you never saw Heisenbergers killing Einsteinians. Physics is about reality. So the truth is easier to obtain.

I get that.

But over all, there are good people and bad people in just about any random group, religionists, communists, or Objectivists.

Substitute "reverent" for "patriotic" and this is a good description of organized religions, too. They're mostly theater -- a way for stuffed shirts to boast of how pious they are. Makes me think of the repeated oaths in Catch-22. So does the Pledge.

Also, the pledge only dates from the 20th century. The US had by then already lost most of its worthiness to be so adored.

Although you and I are both atheists, we apparently differ in our expressions of non-belief. You must be aware of the fact that the engaged atheist community has abandoned the Flying Spaghetti Monster as having outlived his usefulness. The time is long since here for better arguments.

Even the Bible is nuanced. Paul of Tarshish ("Saint Paul") said in his book "Epistle to the Romans" (simplyt the book called "Romans") that our rulers are put here on Earth by God. It is our duty to obey them as we obey our heavenly Father. That injunction contradicted 3500 years of teachings. From Kings
to the Maccabees, the Bible is a continuing narrative of resistance to secular rules in the name of Holy Law. That appears in mundane form in Atlas Shrugged.

If it was the flag of the constitution or of reason, then I'd agree with it. Subjecting it to the Flying Spaghetti Monster's whims is foolishness.

Mostly.
Got to make clear what that higher law is. Some suggestions might make a good topic.

The Nazis just took the Roman salute. It was also the Olympic salute. But your deeper point is valid: all of them, from the Romans to the Nazis subordinated the individual to the state. As I pointed out the pledge was written by Francis Bellamy, a Christian socialist who, as you know, sought to overturn individualism and capitalism. See my earlier post:
https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...

You can google Francis Bellamy and the Pledge and find many links, among them, of course Wikipedia.

See my comment to Herb above.
https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...

I am also an atheist, but I have no problem saying the words "under God."

If you search on YouTube you can find Tom Snyder's interview with Ayn Rand. She accepted the common intention of "God bless America" wherein God means the best or the highest.

In that sense, I point out that by our military customs, no flag ever flies higher than the American flag, except the chaplain's flag (while services are being held). The meaning is that the government is subject to a higher law. I think that you agree with that.

Here's another similar one:
"There's a limit to intelligence,
But no limit to stupidity."

It is an abdication of patriotism which is an individual's love for the USA as a land of liberty and worthy to fight to keep. The pledge is an attempt to force patriotism on mainly children who have not yet developed the power of critical thought, the same as many religious parents do to young children.

Actually it was due to a preacher who did not think people were patriotic enough back in the late 1800s. Then came the flag in every school movement. The original salute to the flag was the same as the Nazi salute and changed when the Nazis came into power because it did not look patriotic in that political climate. None of that stuff was actually patriotic, just a way to rid people of patriotism, just as today with flags as big as football fields, and all the other trappings put upon the people by some who like to pretend that they are in control.

It is a pretense at patriotism. Oaths, flags, most patriotic celebrations, etc. are not patriotism. Most of those are because of what some who would want to rule you, say you should do to be patriotic. Really, almost none are patriotic. Here is an article which might be closer to what patriotism is:

https://fee.org/articles/the-true-mea...

That's the phrase that keeps coming back to me during each Presidential debate...

Not games between each other, but language games with those that have confounded our language...that's what progressives do, but we know the Real meaning of words and concepts.

caution:...won't work in a "progressive" court of law.
[SAD]

Yeah no point in playing games with each other. I was just attempting to stick to reality as much as possible and avoid the popular mysticism of both the left and the right.

To have ideas...one requires a mind. To have a mind, one Must be Conscious and Thoughts can represent intent. So, if I pledge with the intent to align with an idea...it is so...and progressives still loose.

I agree with your argument, But that's why it makes no difference to me what progressives and their allegiances mean to them, because my intent is 180 opposed the theirs.
We can play the "Language" game too.

I agree that ideas and intents can change over time! You make a great point Carl. But I still stand by my point that it is a pledge of "allegiance" which means unquestioning fealty, and specifically the very next line is "and to the republic for which it stands." The flag, according to the text of the pledge, stands for the republic, which itself is the government and the state.
This is very similar to the entire concept that John F. Kennedy promoted of "ask not what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country." In this scenario, both requests or demands are wrong. "The country" does not exist as a source of goodies for us, and we do not exist to serve it.
I guess the point I'm trying to get across is that a pledge to anything other than ones self creates a duty to others, an unchosen obligation to them. We cannot pledge allegiance to an idea because ideas are not conscious and therefore cannot have values, needs, or interests. Allegiance implies taking actions towards the ends desired by that to which you are pledging such allegiance. We can only take actions to support things that have real physical existence. That is why the "war on terror and "is such a failure. You cannot fight ideas, only those who follow them. When you pledge allegiance to an idea, you were pledging allegiance to those people who control (or possibly follow) that idea. If the idea is "the republic" then what is being requested of you is unquestioning fealty to those who run the republic.

And one final thing, which I feel with much less conviction then the rest of what I said before, but I thought it was worth mentioning anyway is that I do not agree that "many of us" changing the way we feel about the pledge will actually erase the original meaning of the pledge. Just like many people feel differently about the meaning of the Second Amendment, but that does not change its actual meaning. Like I said, this is a much lesser point, but I thought it was worth mentioning my opinion.

It appears to me that Red was pretty good at history and the Constitution. But, there is no doubt that he had a traditional religious background.

My favorite Red Skelton line:
"Beauty is only skin deep, but ugly's to the bone."

Never saw the Flag as a symbol of the "state". It is a symbol of an idea, a hard fought idea in the name of Mankind whom seeks to rule one's self.

The pledge, may have been a progressive swearing of allegiance to a their idea of a state. I always saw it as a pledge, in appreciation, of the opportunity, to engage in this hard fought for, "American" Idea.

As for the addition, "Under God"...I fear not the mystical for the greater understanding of the phrase...which may actually express appreciation of the unlikely hood of the establishment of any country, so brazen, to dare put the people in control of their own lives, something we still battle in favor of today...with that wish for All mankind..."Justice for All".

I think many of us, thought the same; if this is true, then the progressives loose. Will we ever win this battle?

Never saw the Flag as a symbol of the "state". It is a symbol of an idea, a hard fought idea in the name of Mankind whom seeks to rule one's self.
The pledge, may have been a progressive swearing of allegiance to a their idea of a state. I always saw it as a pledge, in appreciation, of the opportunity, to engage in this hard fought for, "American" Idea.
I think many of us, thought the same; if this is true, then the progressives loose.

Since I was young I always liked his sense of humor and his authenticity.