One Nation, (Fill in the blank,) Indivisible

I am not a morning person. I get dragged out of bed, through the shower, out the door, onto the bus, and somehow I find myself sitting on a couch in the Scrounge at 8:20 wile my adviser talks about "Environmental Club." One thing I'm always very aware of, though, is the Pledge of Allegiance. It's something I'm very conflicted about. On the one hand, it's a display of love for America, and pride for our country. On the other hand, I often feel that it's a display of empty patriotism, and I believe many people recite it without really understanding the words or even thinking about them, like a child reciting obscene lyrics to a catchy song. But regardless of what I think about the pledge as a whole, I wholeheartedly object to one line. Not even a line, a phrase. Two words. "Under God." (Note: the only reason I capitalized "God" is because I was referring to the Christian God, who is the subject of the line in the pledge.) Quite frankly, I just don't understand why it's there. Separation of church and state, anyone? Remember that? Not only that, but I disagree on a spiritual level as well. I myself am an Atheist, so I believe it's unfair to acknowledge the existence or even the benevolence of "God." But not only Atheists are outraged by this phrase. Other religions who believe in god in a different form or believe in many gods could be offended by this as well. I get very heated about this subject, and often bring it up to my adviser and other kids in my advisory. I can't even count how many times they've said to me, "...so just don't say it." To me and many others, "Under God" isn't just two words. It represents a a Christian nation, where other religions (or the lack of religions) are acknowledged as lesser. I see this phrase as directly violating the 1st amendment and the rights of millions of people living in America. Next time you're saying the pledge, think about the words you're using, and ask yourself, "Do I really believe this?"

To Serve and Protect (And Sometimes Steal Your Stuff)

I read very few things that make me cringe with a potent cocktail of outrage, despair, and anxiousness. This article did just that. It opens with a man taking his lower class family to see his father in the next state over. They buy a used car and put the only cash they have, some $6,000, into the center console. The man is driving at night and is pulled over for driving for too long in the left lane, or "passing lane" (not a crime.) The officer asks if there are any drugs in the car, the man says no, the officer "smells marijuana," though they never found any, and the situation quickly escalates. At the end of story, the couple is told that they can either hand over all their cash to the police department or give their two children to Child Protective Services. All of this was completely legal. How? Civil forfeiture. Basically, it's a law that lets police officers take your stuff. The law allows officers to seize your possessions WITHOUT finding any evidence or even charging you. All they need is probably cause, which, in the case of the story from the New Yorker article, can be "smelling" marijuana (but not finding any.)  I didn't believe this could be true at first. I could not bring myself to believe that in America, the supposed home of the free, that this law could exist. But somehow, it does. Lately I've been seeing a lot of articles and video clips popping up on Facebook and Twitter about police officers unlawfully searching people and their vehicles, but nothing compares to this. It is clear that many police officers in this country are unable to protect society justly, as our laws outline. And unfortunately, police officers are the sympathetic ones in courts, because both entities are operated by the federal government, and they can often get out of cases like this with only a slap on the wrist. Frankly, I believe that not only should we update outdated and unconstitutional laws like civil forfeiture, but we should take power away from corrupt police officers who unjustly harm innocent citizens.