What about the Pledge of Allegiance

The Pledge of Allegiance was written in August 1892 by the socialist minister Francis Bellamy (1855-1931). It was originally published in The Youth's Companion on September 8, 1892. Bellamy had hoped that the pledge would be used by citizens in any country.

1892 "I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

1923 "I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

1954 "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."

Bellamy was a FreeMason.

Masons take a much higher and stronger oath of loyalty to their society and any proposed to a country. Every FreeMason should recuse himself from any pretense of loyalty to any lesser government than his own society.

Significant that this came after the Civil War, and the drafters and cheerleaders were supporters of tax-supported, universal, compulsory education.

The original salute to pose when you were reciting, was the same adopted by the Axis Powers in WW II (Germany, Italy) so we had to change it.

The connections to the Union victors of the recent war, the Union officer who began the first draft, the emphasis on the unified nation (after such major overturning of the natural position of the States prior to the war), the fact that instead of freeing one class of slaves, the effect of the Civil War was more towards enslaving the entire populace, the reality that a large part of the nation has been under soft-martial law under an Army of Occupation (no treaty of Peace was ever signed after Appomattox, and technically, parts or all of the country is still under the post-bellum military jurisdiction).

Because of the nature of the Masonic civil religion the country is dominated by, I'm afraid this ambiguous oath of loyalty is analogous to Christian Baptism among believers, as well as parts of Sunday Service liturgy related to renewal of our covenant. The notion of "republic" is long gone, if the word meant the rule of principled men favored by the majority of the people who were held accountable to an unmoving law system based on the Revelation of God from outside of Man and their conflicting opinions. Now the irrational concept of democracy is promoted by those who demonstrably do not believe in the sovereignty of Majority - and only to to weaken us and increasingly dominate us.

Now because of the last two elections, it is plain that hardly anyone even bothers to hide the fact they do not believe in the rule of law or that majority should decide the candidates and laws. If we hadn't already lost what we thought our country was, it should be evident now that it is just gone and never coming back.

In addition to all that, the flag itself is extra representative of our military and our victorious military history. Unfortunately, the seasoned historian may find himself nauseated and ashamed at how our country and others have ended up with less actual "freedom" and prosperity AFTER our military victories than we had before. Remember President Obama signed away our right to a fair trial/innocent-until-proven-guilty in the NDAA of 2012. Henceforth, if the military suspects you have been supporting or collaborating with 'terrorist' entities (remember that now means people who want to hang on to the Constitution, their Bible, and their guns, or use honest money) -- they can indefinitely detain you on home soil or from any country, and can only promise you, annually, and military "hearing", and not a jury trial.

Many desire to fly the flag upside down these days, in recognition that a state of emergency exists because of the way our civil, national government is treating its own citizens and other nations. There is also a relationship between the flag as a symbol of military obligation in our conscription laws that require every man, at least, to register for potential military service, with the potential to be called upon to lay down his life for his country, and most likely that in an unjust war.

You could also argue for the idolatrous flavor of this profession of allegiance, when one has a much higher allegiance somewhere else. There are elements to this which may be contrary to the essential confession: Jesus is Lord; in that it implies Ownership by the national government, whereas, because of the incarnation and exaltation of Jesus Christ -- every man, and especially Christians, now belongs to Jesus. That is really what our outdated word: lord does mean.

History explains that "under God" was added to distance ourselves from the Communism we were supposedly fighting in the Cold-War era. Ironic because from FDR on, 9/10ths of the Communist Manifesto has been part of government operations. Universal, tax-supported education which the Masons major in promoting. Monopoly on money by a Central Bank. Graduated Income Tax/Inheritance taxes. About the only thing the US has not been doing is moving city-dwellers out to the country. Ironic in that we were supposedly fighting communism when so much blood and treasure had been expended to expand Russian communist domination over the countries of Eastern Europe while the UK and US were actively employing communist practices in government and banking and teaching in the public schools and universities.

Also, wouldn't "under God" mean we are bound by God's laws revealed in the Bible? The Bible is very clear that stewardship of land, labor, and Stuff is delegated to the Family and Individual under the comprehensive ownership of Christ over all things. This is very opposite of the group-ownership mind-set of socialism, fascism, and the more-brutal Communism, where the individual and his labor and "stuff" all belong to the civil government, and that is why he has to pay a graduated "rent" on his private use of these things (in the form of taxes). Maybe the Pledge should have said "under Mob Rule" to be more compatible with the claim of Democracy.