Debate The Pledge Of Allegiance

There has been talk about wanting to take the words "Under God" out of the Pledge of Allegiance. In my opinion it's just stupid. The pledge has been that way for a long time, why change it now?

 

Because people complain.

Anyways, it might have to be due to the fact that more people are taking the "separation of church and state" thing seriously considering that (possibly) there are less religious people nowadays (or at least in the Christian religion) than in past years. Of course I could EASILY be wrong about that as I don't know the comapred statistics of Christians throughout years and such.

I, personally, don't give a ****. Never bothered to say the pledge. Had no real reason to... of course I tended to get detentions for not saying the pledge in school, or saluting the flag, or standing up.

I personally just don't see the point in it all.

 

I think it's a waste of time. There are more important issues in America to worry about.

 

yeah, so say all the christians

if it doesn't affect you , you don't care. it shouldn't be there, and.. wasn't the pledge writen originally without any mention of god?

 

The words "Under God" are not hurting anyone by being there.

What's next? Are they going to want to burn down churches just because someone claims they violate their constitutional rights.

 

alright, how would you feel if the words "under satan" were there?

it's an archaic custom that should not be forced upon the educated and unreligious of your country. they do not believe in a god, they are not under god. it is wrong to force them to say that they are and do.

 

People have their rights not to say "Under God" in the pledge but I as well as other people have constitutional rights too. So why deprive me of my right to say it. What Im getting at is this whole separation of chuch and state thing is a battle that no one will win so why fight it? If someone wants to say "Under God" in the pledge then they have the right to say it and people who dont want to say it can skip that part.

 

http://history.vineyard.net/pledge.htm
little bit of history, "under god" wasn't put in until 1954...

well because it's a pledge, if you're going to say it.. you should say it all.
perrsonally I think the very NOTION of a pledge is laughable, but (thanks be to my parents) I am not american.

 

To quote from the article which Mordeth has provided:

"In 1954, Congress after a campaign by the Knights of Columbus, added the words, 'under God,' to the Pledge. The Pledge was now both a patriotic oath and a public prayer."

Personally, I am neither Christian, nor terribly religious in any sense. I see nothing wrong with Christians wishing to praise God, and I have no problem with patriots wishing to praise their country. But they should NOT go together in something as loaded as the Pledge of Allegiance.

In school, children are often punished for refusing to memorize and recite the pledge. I remember doing that every day in elementary school, and even then I thought it was stupid - not the religious aspect specifically, but the idea of kids pledging allegiance to a political system they don't understand, using words they often don't know the meaning of. It's silly. And the fact that there is a direct Christian reference in it is offensive - because we all know damned well that no one's going to be allowed to recite "under Buddha" if they're Buddhist, or "under the Goddess" if they're pagan, or just remove the phrase because they're athiest.

You can't force religion on people in school, dammit. The phrase "under God" has no place in the Pledge of Allegiance. When you cannot accomodate every religion, it's better not to involve any of them, and leave prayer to individuals and churches.

And Saiyan Chichi, no one is telling you that you cannot offer up a prayer or acknowledgement to whomever you wish. But it's unconstitutional for others to be FORCED to say it if they don't want to - and yes, FORCED, at least in the early years of school. You can't omit a part of the Pledge of Allegiance, so it's only fair to make it acceptible to as many people as possible. If you want the right to say "under God," then everyone should be allowed to mention whichever deity they might like - Buddha, Satan, or even none at all.

 

Mord beat me to it. God was not always in there. I haven't RTFA yet, but it's my understanding that it was added in a fit of hyper patriotic American chest thumping around the time of the McCarthy debacle.

It certainly couldn't hurt as a method to distance itself from the communists and their atheism. I don't really mind it there. No one is forced to say the pledge in the first place, and as Mord makes so clear, the pledge itself is controversial enough.

I'm not really one bend over backwards to avoid offending every little group, but as a member of an occasionally persecuted religion (nowhere near as much as the jews of course), I can see the importance of not forcing beliefs or customs on others and setting them up for ridicule if they don't go along. As such, I wouldn't go on a rampage if the pledge was reset to its pre 1954 status.

 

*chokes on his coffee*

shouldn't that read as a member of an occasionally persecuting religion?

 

Toss the phrase out. It has no place being there.

 

I don't know, that sounds about right to me. But then again, that's just my opinion. ;P

 

All I was saying is it's a pointless battle that no one will win, no good will come out of it. I heard this whole thing got blown out of proportion because an atheist father got mad about his son saying "Under God" in the pledge at school. It was pointless because it wasn't hurting him. Just like that Ten Commandments thing in Alabama, if a group of people didn't believe in it that's fine but at the same time it wasn't hurting them.

 

Except, as already noted, in school - where some kids are punished if they refuse.

Yes, but here we're talking about ignoring the many, many non-Christian Americans and their rights. I mean, granted, I just stopped saying the pledge as soon as I stopped feeling threatened with calls home and other elementary school discipline. Still, it's the principle of the issue.

Personally, I just think organised religion has no place in things pertaining to government because someone's bound to get pissy over it. Might as well take the phrase out, that way no one can complain something's being forced on them.

 

Exactly, Dilandau. The government and any organized religion have absolutely no place interacting in any way. Like most of you I won't lose any sleep over "Under God" being in the pledge, but as an agnostic I'd prefer having it removed and let people reach their own conclusions as to whether they should add it on.

 

Maybe not hurting him physically, but it's still an infringement of rights.

How would you feel if you were told that you had to pray to Satan everyday at school? Would you feel that was hurting you? My guess is you would; it compromises your rights and religious beliefs. Likewise, an atheist's rights are compromised when they or their children are required to acknowledge God in a setting where God honestly has no place. (A public school has no business involving any religion in required activities. Private schools are another issue, since attendence is voluntary and paid for.)

 

Whoops.. missed that one. I'd complain about that before complaining about a reference to God.

You'll notice that by the end of my post, I'd come around to agreeing with you (just not in a totally excited way). I don't really care about the phrase being there, but I realize that my own feelings (or lack of them) is not a standard I could (or would ever want to) shove on everyone else.

At the same time, I take issue with the statement that the pledge is "ignoring ... their rights." They have a right to believe, or disbelieve just about anything, and being forced to say a phrase won't change that. BUT those who are judeo/christian monotheistic need only to think of the story of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego in the Book of Daniel who refused to bow down to the King's golden image. They wouldn't even do it for pretend, and continue believing in Yahweh in private. It is rather easy to draw a parallel between being forced to bow to an idol, and being forced to pay lip service to a being in whom one does not believe.

So, while many Americans may feel sad that it has come to a point where there are significant numbers of people offended by "under God," it should probably be admitted that for their sake, the phrase might be dropped (or at least made optional).

 

Oh go screw yourself. After my post I received a PM from someone who knew what I was talking about and mentioned what religion he adheres to. Amazingly (statistically it is amazing) it was the same as mine. He has a clue what I am talking about, you do not. Oh well.. no skin off my back (a phrase that I am pretty sure has nothing to do with the events in the Jesus Chainsaw Massacre). You made an assumption, and you assumed wrong. Sure was a good zinger though. I love the way you turned that word around persecuted/persecuting lolol. Made me choke on my coffee, so I guess we are even.