the first two parts are an American soldier mindlessly repeating phrases that have been drilled into him by the military as a whole or Christianity.
the fourth part describes his love's superficial following of Christianity. she goes to church, holds the books, but doesn't know the hyms. it's a front that gives her life no meaning. "And your soul will not be free."
the first half of part five tells how the government exploits people's Christian faith in order to get them to die for our country. "For you to live, I(Jesus) took your place(died on the cross for your sins)."
the second half of part five:
it's easy for politicians to "steal" the lives of people from poor socioeconomical areas of high religious faith and send them off to war and die. The politicians then go back to their long and affluent lives("die old in better homes surrounded by your peers"). They have the chance to play with their own "grandchildren far and near" while not even caring that they robbed an innocent man's chance of the same thing "and no one will shed a tear for the love no longer here."
part six is more of part one and two done for structure of the song.
parts three and seven describe the cold truth about what would actually happen if he died in a war(part three) and how religious faith can make someone rationalize this(part seven). i really think these two parts should be switched in the song.
the first two parts are an American soldier mindlessly repeating phrases that have been drilled into him by the military as a whole or Christianity.
the fourth part describes his love's superficial following of Christianity. she goes to church, holds the books, but doesn't know the hyms. it's a front that gives her life no meaning. "And your soul will not be free."
the first half of part five tells how the government exploits people's Christian faith in order to get them to die for our country. "For you to live, I(Jesus) took your place(died on the cross for your sins)."
the second half of part five: it's easy for politicians to "steal" the lives of people from poor socioeconomical areas of high religious faith and send them off to war and die. The politicians then go back to their long and affluent lives("die old in better homes surrounded by your peers"). They have the chance to play with their own "grandchildren far and near" while not even caring that they robbed an innocent man's chance of the same thing "and no one will shed a tear for the love no longer here."
part six is more of part one and two done for structure of the song.
parts three and seven describe the cold truth about what would actually happen if he died in a war(part three) and how religious faith can make someone rationalize this(part seven). i really think these two parts should be switched in the song.