was written without 'Under God' included. It was included in the 40's during the McCarthy Communist Scare. Basically if you weren't Christian you were un-American and Communist.
The pledge was fine just the way it was before 'Under God'; people recited it and it was a great way to show our allegiance to our country. Now there is a fight to have those added words removed because it forces people to pledge allegiance to a country they love while invoking God onto them.
People have a right to believe what they want and, according to the laws of this country, shouldn't be forced to say or believe in something they don't want to. Why then should we continue to have these words in our Pledge to a country that isn't supposed to have alliance to any one particular religion or belief? What about the people that don't believe in God yet love this country and want to speak their allegiance to it along with everyone else? What has happened to the tolerance that this country was built on?
2006-09-20 01:46:45 · 10 answers · asked by FaerieWhings 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Macki4 is an example of the intolerance that some people in this country have.
I said I love this country. This country was built on the idea of EVERYONE having their own opinion and beliefs, not just you. Do a little research on the words that were added and why they were added. It was a scare tactic.
2006-09-20 01:55:40 · update #1
Chris, why should someone be forced to stand out because they don't want to recite the pledge with those words in it when they weren't in there originally and are against everything that this country is supposed to stand for?
2006-09-20 01:57:09 · update #2
I apologize for my saying that it was included the pledge in the 40's. You are all correct when said it was int he 50's.
2006-09-20 02:43:48 · update #3
i fully agree with you. and it could be removed today and i wouldn't cry about it. i would continue to say "under God" as well.
but many things go unsaid..
"America was founded by Christians, not religionists..."--George Washington
"American should elect Christians to be their leaders"--John Jay
i could go on, and on...
Christians are the vast majority here. OUR government expressly prohibits religious endorsement of any kind (and Thomas Jefferson went as far to fully explain the "separation of church and state" and it's neccessity)
but we're talking about the largest voting block in the country, and the way that politics can sway that,as you already noted, is being taken advantage of very well, by the scare tactics of the day.
p.s. i think this is why guns are legal(at the moment), here in the states!(it's amazing how a firearm can help one overcome fear)
2006-09-20 02:23:43 · answer #1 · answered by daddio 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Funny, but I recall reciting the Pledge in grammar school in the early 50s without 'under G-d' and then in about '53-'55 there being a big deal about learning the 'new' pledge with that phrase added. Maybe it wasn't instituted until about then?
I would with some reluctance support removing the words in the interest of purity of spirit and intent of the constitution, however, I personally like the Pledge the way it now is. It is barely enough to imagine that some people repeat this and are swearing to a G-d other than the one I may choose. We should protect others feelings and it isn't enough to simply allow some people to not say those words as they wish because it is publicly recited and that singles them out. Also, if they lead the recital, the situation poses a serious problem for them.
There should never be any discussion of religion in schools other than in a historical reference.
When I go for jury duty and am asked to swear on a Bible I prefer to not do this. The Torah is part of the Bible which is proferred in that situation and I will not swear on the Torah. So, I give an oath of affirmation and this is accepted. This bothers me a little because I must set myself apart to do this, but i live with it. Infringement of religious freedom is pernicious in the USA but religious freedom in general here is as well protected as anywhere else on Earth and I am thankful for that fact. G-d bless the USA!
2006-09-20 09:29:47 · answer #2 · answered by Nightstalker1967 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You were wrong on when "Under God" was placed into the Pledge. It was concieved in 1951 by the Knights of Columbus and made national in 1954. It wasn't because of the Communist scare either.
I agree that Church and State needs to be seperated and that no one should be forced to sit out on the pledge to our country because they disagree with two simple words. I am a Christian and I believe this.
So I agree that it is in the best intrest of America to have them removed even though I like them there.
If you want to attack something like this, by all means do it, the history and the lesson is awesome, but don't half-*** it. Get the facts.
Here is the actual history of how it came to be...
2006-09-20 09:17:15 · answer #3 · answered by Q-burt 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well unfortunately much of the tolerance this country was built on is just flat gone. The words under god as far as I can find were actually added in 1954,but that may only be when it was made official.They of course should be removed but as we are in the middle of what can only be called a scary type of religious revival in America at the moment it's not going to happen. There are too many reasons for this to go into but it comes down to the fact that one of the most vocal and active voting blocks are Evangelicals who truly do believe that America should be a theocracy,and many people who would gladly oppose them end up voting with them against the left who might try to stop it because of a few central issues that the left hangs onto tooth and nail even though the majority disagree. It's over I believe,as I see it we are simply going to have to go through another horribly intolerant period because those who would oppose it also oppose things most Americans agree on thus making it impossible to rally enough people to stop it.And since only 30-40% of Americans vote as it is the right will win on things like this because of their ability to get voters out on such issues as abortion,gay rights,gun control,affirmative action,etc.So just buckle up and get ready for the intolerance roller coaster coming to your town soon.
2006-09-20 09:09:30 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Not only should religious issues be excluded from the federal arena, moral issues should not be in the federal political arena as well. The federal government should be involve in only matters of national defense, interstate commerce, and individual constitutional rights. Moral issues, such as abortion and gay rights, are not constitutional issues and need addressed at state and community levels. Right and left wing politicians have tossed these issues into the federal arena and split the nation.
The federal government was originally design to preserve states' rights, the right of the community to rule itself. More and more States' rights are being ceded to the federal government. Having the federal government rule on moral issues and make it the law of the land forces many of us to support ideals we find intolerable. Nobody seems to care that prostitution is legal in Nevada. The same would apply to other regional laws on moral issues.
2006-09-20 11:34:57 · answer #5 · answered by Overt Operative 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I agree with you. America is not suppose to have a religious government. It is suppose to be a country with freedom of religion to be practiced privately without restrictions from the government not forced on people by the government..
2006-09-20 09:03:31 · answer #6 · answered by courage 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Well said, that is why religion should not be taught in the public schools unless they cover all religions. I bet you get plenty of hate mail for this question but you are right to think this way.
2006-09-20 08:52:09 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋
1. They'll stay in because it's politically impossible to remove them.
2. Let them not say "under God."
3. It went when the American Taliban (Republicans) gained power.
2006-09-20 08:51:43 · answer #8 · answered by David B 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Who is forced to say the Pledge, and what are the consequences/punishments if they don't?
Edit: I ask you again: Who is actually forced to stand out? I haven't heard of this happening. Do you have verifiable evidence of this?
2006-09-20 08:53:51 · answer #9 · answered by Chris S 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
you don't have to say the words and i do not belive they should be removed.if you don't love this country then get out and see if there is a nother one as good I don't think you will find one good luck.
2006-09-20 08:52:47 · answer #10 · answered by macki4 4 · 1⤊ 6⤋