Why I Don't Say the Pledge of Allegiance

Few people ask me why I don't say the Pledge of Allegiance.  When they find out, most become emotional: angry, upset, unfriendly, or even aggressive.  A few knowledge seekers will kindly ask with gentleness, perhaps feeling these emotions, but in control and valuing our relationship enough to want to understand before unleashing whatever they are holding back.  To those people who do ask, thank you for your nobility.  For those who don't, perhaps you should try understanding where I'm coming from, then it least you'll know what you are angry at.
This is mainly about the Pledge of Allegiance, but I will expand a little below into other acts of 'patriotism' which aren't what they seem and are not things the founders of this nation would necessarily applaud.  There are two main reasons I do not say the Pledge of Allegiance. 
== Reason 1 - The Bible Says Not To ==
The first reason I don't say the Pledge of Allegiance is for religious reasons. Jesus taught that we are not to take oaths - the Pledge is a type of oath.
Matthew 5:33-37 - Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths: But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne: Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.
James 5:12 - But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation.
Only God can swear an oath and be assured of keeping it. Jesus said anything beyond an affirmation or denial comes of evil for the rest of us. This is because we cannot tell the future. No example of an oath in the NT except for that sworn by God is a positive example. A number in the OT ended badly as well (e.g. Jephthah in Judges 11).
A modern example of oaths becoming problematic is this past Republican primary (2016 election). All 17 men took a pledge to support whomever won. Donald Trump won. That put 16 men in the catch 22 of supporting someone they found personally reprehensible and as a party member who they viewed as the worst choice to represent their party (I'm not arguing for or against Trump here, just laying out how those men view him). Honorable men like Ted Cruz and Rand Paul were faced with going against their pledge or upholding a person they found morally unacceptable. This is the issue with oaths.
Another example, and one that personally affects me as a public school teacher is signing an oath not to cheat on state mandated tests while proctoring them.  As I tell my administrators when I inform them about proctoring, I don't sign the oath for religious reasons, but also because it makes no sense anyway.  If I'm going to cheat, signing an oath isn't going to stop me since I'm already a liar.  If I'm not going to cheat, signing an oath to that effect is redundant and superfluous.  Either way, there is no practical value in taking such an oath.
However, the most important reason I don't say the Pledge or take other oaths is simply because Jesus said don't.
== Reason 2 - History of the Pledge ==
I wouldn't say the Pledge of Allegiance, specifically, even if I had no religious reason against pledges. The history of the Pledge of Allegiance is very anti-liberty, anti-American. The current Pledge was written by Francis Bellamy in 1892. He was a socialist and his first ties to the Pledge was with the public schools, which are an inherently socialist organization. The Bellamy salute (which was later replaced with hand over heart that is used today) is the same salute used by the ancient Romans, the Italians in the early 1900's, the Nazis, and similar to the Black Panthers except they use a fist instead of an open hand. Bellamy was kicked out of the Baptist church for his views and simply stopped going to worship altogether after that. He was for increased federal government power, centralization, and 'equal redistribution of wealth'. 
Though the word 'liberty' appears in the Pledge, it meant something more along the lines of what is now termed 'social justice' today than what we see as individual liberty. 
The word 'indivisible' is a powerful word that speaks to the change America went through after the Civil War. Originally, the united States of America was comprised of several independent States mutually agreeing to work together with the Federal Government there to settle disputes peacefully between the States and to see to the protection of those States against foreign threats individual States could not manage against alone. The relationship between the State governments and the Federal was horizontal. After the Civil War, the relationship became vertical, with the Federal Government on top. We were meant to be divisible. Thomas Jefferson especially wrote about this. He spoke of the need for revolution when the central government became tyrannical. He spoke of the willingness of States to be bound together for mutual benefit, but that should one or more States no longer see benefit in the union, they should be allowed to go their way peaceably. That's what the South tried to do, and the Federal Government (supported by the Northern States) prevented by force. We are indivisible because the States that would leave are not powerful enough to endure the violent consequences of doing so...except Texas.
The Pledge and other national traditions are not essential to the identity of America. The first 18 presidents and those they served or who served with them in our government never took the Pledge or sang the Anthem. Those first few generations would have looked at the Pledge and scoffed at the idea, and detested the words as they understood and fiercely guarded the sovereignty of the individual states who remained part of the union voluntarily for mutual benefit. They would have been angered by the top-down structure and dominance of the Federal Government over the States after the Civil War and the 'indivisibility' that came with such centralization of power and would have known the tyranny that would follow. I believe the founders would have rejected the Pledge of Allegiance.
== Expanding the Point ==
I love the idea of America, of what the founders of this nation intended this nation to be.  I admire the things that make us great, our foundation on Biblical principles, our liberty, our rugged individualism, self reliance, personal responsibility, and the way our system is capable of making the poorest dreamer achieve their dreams.
Yet I despise what is happening to this nation. I despise the division that has been happening. Racism disgusts me. Yet Americans have allowed themselves to be programmed, allowed themselves to be divided into categories, seen for what group they belong to and not for the individual that they are. We are free only so long as the individual is important. The individual is no longer important in this nation, only the group, only the cause. The media plays America like Nero played the fiddle. Instead of paying attention to things that matter, the media focuses on some celebrity exercising his right to free speech. Do I agree with why those people aren't taking the Pledge? No. I think they're dumb. But those who are so wholly distracted by this are just as dumb. It's an emotional issue and so everyone is exploding because no one thinks any more.
I'm angry (with controlled anger) that so many people are so blinded by their emotions that they cannot see this for what it is. When all I hear, no matter where I go, is that blankety blank blank didn't stand for the Pledge, I just want to scream at them: Don't you see that you aren't free?! Don't you see that this nation is the antithesis of what it was designed to be?! I won't even get into specifics here because somewhere, in the back of all these patriotic people's minds, they know something is up. But they allow themselves to become distracted by emotional stupid stuff and then they become what they pretend to protect. Those football players have every right to say or not say the Pledge. John A. Patriot has every right to say they disagree with that football player. But to take the next step and try to PUNISH them for exercising their right is VERY dangerous. And all these patriots don't even realize what they are doing.
The Pledge is nothing. The flag is nothing. The government is nothing. Those men and women who have died for this nation, who serve in the military giving up their lives do so in service to the people of this nation, to the individuals back home. Jesus said, "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends." (John 15:13). Those in our military give their lives not for the government, not for the artificial groups that have been created to divide and conquer us, but for us as individuals. They lay their lives down for each of us as individuals because that's worth dying for.
So no, I will not take the Pledge of Allegiance because in doing so, I am swearing an oath to something that is being 'fundamentally transformed' into something evil, something abhorrent, and I will not be caught in a catch-22 of having to break my oath or be bound to something morally and ideologically opposite of what I believe, what is right.
When patriotism becomes so overwhelming that we lose sight of what we are attempting to defend, when we are guilty of violating the very rights we claim to uphold, of abridging the freedoms we claim to hold dear, then our fervor has reached a religious pitch. Our Anthem becomes a song of worship, a worship of the state. Our Pledge becomes our liturgy. The flag becomes our idol.
No doubt few see it this way, but on the outside looking in, that's what I see it to have become. For so many, it clouds their judgment the way religious fervor does, so that the difference is little more than semantics.
I appreciate that instead of being angry at me, you chose to read this first.  If your anger still remains, let us discuss it in peace, with reason and evidence, not with emotionally charged invectives.  I hope this article is sufficient to help you understand me better, though I know it is not likely that you will agree. I love the people of this nation (and of this world). I love the idea of America, what its founders intended it to be. I desire peace, individual sovereignty and liberty, and above all, that everyone would be a seeker after God first. To do this, we have to spread knowledge, not ignorance.
In Truth and Love.