It's always seemed to me that America needs its big, broad self-definitions to keep its cohesion. Whereas smaller, more homogenous countries share similar values, America is a patchwork of regions that are sometimes have very little in common.

For Europeans, the fetishes for the flag, the Pledge, the self-definition as Leader of The Free World sometimes seem a touch corny and simplistic. But in essence, that's kind of the point of them.

We're the land of opportunity. We're the home of the free. We're Christian. It all has the feel of a national dialogue that happened a long, long time ago. But America needs its sweeping self-definitions. Without them it falls apart.

As someone who loves American culture and has visited the States many times, even I feel slightly unsettled by the Stars & Stripes in every yard that you see in some areas. It's as if, to keep the national identity strong, the statements of patriotism need to be overpowering, conspicuous and ongoing, in a way that more naturally cohesive national identities do not feel the need for.

Posted by DL

First, this is off-topic. Second, perhaps you should ask somebody who knows his *ss from a hole in the ground about the meaning of the term 'scientific consensus'.

Drag out Lincoln's Thanksgiving proclamation and tell me about how religion isn't at the core of things

Go figure - in a time of war, a President invoking religion.

Drag out the Treaty with Tripoli and tell me about how religion is at the core of things.

This must be like that consensus thing that proves scientifically that there's a global warming crisis.

Your position is untenable, but obviously stubbornly held and non-temporal.May you sincerely enjoy it without further challenge.

Right up until the Constitution established our United States.

One of the larger misconceptions I've seen today.
Drag out Lincoln's Thanksgiving proclamation and tell me about how religion isn't at the core of things, even 100 years after the constitution was in force.

Religion has been engrained in our political culture since, quite literally, its inception.

Right up until the Constitution established our United States. Similarly, racial and gender inequalities were engrained in our political culture since, quite literally, its inception (when blacks counted as 3/5 of a white and women couldn't vote.)

Was your wedding a civil ceremony?

Ours was.

Are you one of those folks who habitually refers to the conflict of 1861-65 as, "The War of Northern Aggression"???

I generally call it "The Civil War."

Was your wedding a civil ceremony?

But of course.

Religion has been engrained in our political culture since, quite literally, its inception.

I would argue it predates it.

I should make it clear that I think you have always shown yourself to be respectful and civil and that my comment was a broad observation and not intended to be a personal affront.

Well spoken, Floyd.

James, in that same vein allow me to ask what may be seen as an overly personal question... (Though I hasten to point out that by definition, an oath is an extraordinarily personal thing.. and anyway you know me well enough to know I don't dive into this stuff with you on malice)...

I’m not offended, for example, that In God We Trust appears on my coins. Most Americans do in fact believe that there’s a God and do in fact trust in such a being and derive some comfort from that belief. It does me no harm to acknowledge that fact on my legal tender.

Having people recite it as part of a loyalty oath, however, is problematic. At best, it further dilutes the Pledge into a mere social custom.

Question: Was your wedding a civil ceremony?
Given your objections to an oath before God, I would think that promising before God to love and Cherish only one other would be problematic, too.