One nation under God?

Question

Ah...the ever so popular question. Should we remove this phrase from the Pledge of Allegiance?

To give you a quick background, I go to High School in Indiana. We just passed a law that requires all schools to recite the Pledge of Allegiance every day. I wouldn't find this so hard if it wasn't for the "One nation under God" phrase. If you haven't guessed, I don't believe in a higher power. If you pay any attention to the religion section of this Yahoo! answerer's forum, you'll notice how passionately atheists defend their beliefs. We defend them as strongly as Christians do. So us saying "One nation under God," because we have to by law, seems a bit strange to me.

So please, give me some comments. This is NOT an argument of which religion (or lack there of) is right, I want real answers about what you think about this law.

A couple more things. Yes, it was added long after it was written. If you just leave it out (which is what I've been doing) it makes perfect sense, and in my mind gives more power to the word "Indivisible."
And I know it is a pretty useless topic to complain about, but I'm bored.

Thanks for the answers...keep 'em coming.

From what I've heard so far, the fact that Indiana would pass such a law sounds absurd. If my sources are false, please tell me. I want to catch myself looking like an idiot as quickly as possible.

Answer 1

The requirement that students recite the pledge, or that teachers exercise their authority to influence students to recite the pledge, was already ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court long ago. So, the Indiana law is a non-starter to begin with.

And that has nothing to do with the "under God" portion of the pledge. It's violation of the Compelled Speech doctrine of the 1st Amendment right to free speech, and a violation of the Article VI prohibition against loyalty oaths for non-government officers.

As to the phrase "under God", I don't think it's proper. It was only added in the 1950s, in a response to 'godless Communism'. Also remember that was the era of Joe McCarthy and the House UnAmerican Activities Committee, so hardly a shining time for US integrity.

Given that not everyone agrees that this is a nation "under God" nor do we all agree what God is being referred to, my analysis is that it's an improper exercise of government intrusion into religion. Because there is no secular (non-religious) purpose for the phrase "under God" and because it has the effect of directly promoting religion, the 1956 Congressional law amending the pledge to include that phrase fails under the Lemon test as an unconstitutional violation of the Establishment Clause.

As such, the pledge should be rolled back to its earlier version, removing "under God" and putting back "equality" (which had been removed) as in the earlier version of "liberty, justice and equality for all".

Answer 2

I'm gonna answer this question without reading the long-winded and unnecessary description by saying that you should get over it and just accept that someone changed

sorry I got interrupted. Where did I leave off?

Ah yes. You're dumb. If you don't like it, don't pledge allegiance. If you wanna crusade for other little atheists' rights to not believe and not pledge, then you're just as bad as the overzealous Christians you so despise.

The only thing I hate more than overzealous brainless Christians who push their beliefs on everyone and when they answer questions here, just say "Repent! Repent!" as if that will make someone say "Oh of course! I hadn't thought of that!", is overzealous brainless atheists who constantly put everyone down and think they're so great because they think they've figured it all out--because you don't really know, do you? Do you really know? Even if there isn't a higher power, YOU are still not the higher power. So YOU and NO ONE ELSE has any right at all to push people around, so just cut it out!

And I understand the inherent irony in my comment, so don't be a smart-a**, because I am under no assumption that my answer has made anyone go "Oh of course! I hadn't thought of that!"

Finally, regarding the actual law: If atheist kids are dumb enough to be offended by that, then they'll do something about it. THEY'LL fight it, they'll resist, they'll stay seated as the other kids, the kids who are, according to them, WRONG, stand, as the kids who stand think to themselves, "What's the big deal? Lazy jerks, it's just some words."

Answer 3

I think every state should pass a law saying you have to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, however you are not required to say "Under God." For people that are religious i don't really see what the issue is. God is a generic term. It doesn't say under Allah, or Yahweh or Ganesha so what is the big deal? Maybe i love my country a little more then others and I'm more patriotic, but i think the Pledge of Allegiance is a sign of respect.

Answer 4

First, I_am_the_bmf, who shows more respect for the ideals embodied in the pledge? Those who remain seated, or those who consider them "just some words"?

As far as the law goes, I don't think it actually means anything. The Supreme Ct. ruled back in 1943 (West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette) that students cannot be compelled to salute the flag. Whether or not they can require the schools to do so is a matter of debate, but students are free to not pledge. This of course raises questions of coercion and social pressure, but that's another whole argument.

Answer 5

I believe the "One Nation Under God" phrase was a late add-on to
the pledge in the late 1940's. We could take it out just as easily.
The phrase has nothing to do with pledging patriotism which is
what the pledge should be.

Answer 6

I do not think that atheism is a faith. George Bush made that declaration particularly awhile in the past, and I have not heard any bad or constructive remark approximately it. It's been traditionally pushed aside through so much. Atheists are very most likely residents who vote and who battle in our wars, and pass approximately the standard industry of being well men and women. Because one character makes a remark, it does not make it actual and even valued at speaking approximately. What are the pursuits of the atheist? I rather do not know the reply to that one, however I do think that apart from this record, so much men and women pass approximately their industry on a daily basis with out drama. They do not speak about their devout system or loss of it, and nobody has to grasp or care wherein they stand. If "Under God" had been to be taken out of the pledge, or while prayer is banned in faculties, or while the Ten Commandments are not able to be displayed, I don't have any concern. I recognise wherein I stand. I recognise I can pray while and wherein I desire to, and nobody has to grasp. I recognise I can maintain the Ten Commandments in brain considering the fact that I recognise them through middle. No it is easy to take that clear of anybody, and nobody can persuade anyone to suppose whatever they decide upon to not suppose. I am under no circumstances disgusted through what any person character says, in view that he has a correct to mention it. I admire your notion-upsetting query.

Answer 7

I agree with you even though i'm not an atheist. It's a fact of contradiction, they don't want law to mix with religion but in fact it is. People have to swear to the bible in court, i dissagree with that. You do have the option not to say the pledge, because if you do not believe in that phrase it would conflict with your believe in the first admendment. However, your state passed the law so I do not understand. The sad thing is, it's not much you can do, it's on the dollar bills you spend even though you don't believe in them. Nice question BTW.

Answer 8

I always have to ask - what is God? Most have no definition and
only parrot what others have said. This is a strange world with
lots of clever stuff that you and I didn't invent and a lot of really
bad stuff that we didn't invent either - so I accept this simply as
"Mother Nature" for lack of a better definition. Whats the matter
with just saying "I dont know" As far as the government wanting
to continue with this idea makes no sense to me, but it doesn't
really bother me either and I am not going to do anything about
it, so why worry over it - I have much more important stuff to devote my feeble brain to. On our coins is "In God we trust"
which I dont. If I was asked for a vote - I would say remove it.

Answer 9

ok, as an athiest, then you likely fall under the evolution belief. which by my last check was still an unproven theory, and as well requires more faith than a belief in the "religious god". that being said, by believing that we "occured" rather than be created, then our perceptions and reasoning make us our own variable form of a god. So what is the problem? you dont like being under yourself?
Oh and the law isnt based on your, or my religious belief, but the historic belief of our founding fathers. and whether or not you agree with that, our entire legal, and government system is based upon it. I guess the rule applies that if you dont like living in someone elses ideal, go somewhere else and find one better suited to yours. The french might like you.

Answer 10

If you don't believe it you shouldn't have to say it, but then you shouldn't say any of the pledge. Under God is part of the pledge and should not be taken out, and therefore you should not have to pledge at all if it offends you. Personally I like the pledge-what it says and stands for so its not a problem for me.