what do you think about this????

Question

school administratrators have forrbiden saying the pledge of allegiance during class time or asemblies due to the phrase "under god". Consider religion in American culture, the history of the pledge and the phrase under god...

why should it still be alloud?
do you think it should be banned?
why?

good answers....why do you think it should stay in school?
what if you dont believe in god?
would you want to say it?

Answer 1

I don't care how many people believe in it. If you can't prove it or show reasonable evidence, it is important to keep religion and state apart. Religion is a popular culture and nothing more when it comes to government and schools. I don't think a 2 min pledge is going to affect people's lives either way, so I wouldn't ban it, but I dont think it makes sense. But if they start teaching bible class in k-12 schools, that would be crossing the line.

Answer 2

Allowed, not alloud.

I do not think the phrase Under God should be in the pledge of allegiance in the first place. There is a seperation of church and state in this country, and that phrase ignores it! It was only put in to make us seem different from the anti-religious communists during the Cold War. Do we really need that kind of disrespect of other cultures and religions, not to mention a hold-over from the horrible Cold War? I think not. That whole phrase should be removed.

Answer 3

I said the Pledge of Allegiance all through grades 1-6 and I'm none the worse for wear. I don't think they should 'ban' anything. If there are those that do not choose to recite the pledge they can stand (or sit for that matter) quietly.

Answer 4

It should be ALLOWED! However, people should have the right to opt out. This country was built on the christian church. LIKE IT OR NOT! Separation of Church and State was created to keep the government from forcing it's punishments on the church. It was not meant to keep God out of the country. The people who came to this country were mostly escaping religious persecution. They didn't want the government to force people into one religion, but they did believe that this country would fail with out God. Tolerance goes both ways people. Loosen your shorts.

Answer 5

Actually, it shouldn't be allowed, not until "under God" is removed. I've been reading up on this issue since it became a hot topic. This includes the history that, well, I don't think many people even know about. I sure didn't as a kid(of course, kids just think it's one more thing you do before you start the school day. Kids don't exactly think anything of it like adults do), but now as an adult, I wouldn't want to say it, and I certainly wouldn't want my children saying it.

First off, the Pledge as we know it nowadays is quite different from the way it was originally written. There have been numerous additions and battles over whether or not to allow it to be said in schools. The currently embattled phrase "under God", was added in 1954 during the McCarthyism era, with the Cold War, the "red scare" and the fear of Communism.

The whole reason "under God" was put in at that time, was because it was widely believed in those days that the only difference between a free, democratic America, and the much-feared Communistic countries, was that we were a God-fearing nation, they weren't. The insertion of those two words in the Pledge was a knee-jerk reaction during a time when nuclear war was a fresh, fearful reality, and patriotism and religion were far more intertwined than they ever thought of being today.

To ensure that American citizens were loyal and not spies for Communistic nations, "under God" was stuck into the Pledge with the intention of making a direct, governmentally sanctioned reference to the Christian God. Because if a person did not acknowledge God's apparent hand in protecting America by protesting those two words, let alone refusing to even SAY the Pledge, they were immediately suspected of not being God-fearing and if you weren't God-fearing, you were probably an atheist and thusly a Commie.

And in those days, if you were a Commie, you were an enemy of democracy and freedom.

That's the whole reason those two words were even put into the Pledge and then-President Eisenhower even signed the bill that permitted those two words to be added, stating that; "From this day forward, the millions of our school children will daily proclaim in every city and town, every village and every rural school house, the dedication of our nation and our people to the Almighty."

You want proof on that little history lesson, check the source below;

http://www.freedomforum.org/templates/document.asp?documentID=16480

So as you can see, historical proof states that "under God" is quite unconstitutional when it was put in and remains so even now. People just don't know it because for them, it's "always been there". People succumb to religious fervor. Regardless of one's reasons for defending those two words, it still doesn't change the fact that they are quite unconstitutional and DO amount to a government sponsorship of religions, namely, Christianity.

Congress should have denied the measure the moment President Eisenhower stated that it was for the sake of all schoolchildren across America to make a nod to "the Almighty". Unfortunately, they didn't, and those words remain and will likely be fought over until people get the guts to admit that a mistake was made and repeal them so the Pledge can be said by all students, regardless of religious and racial background.

Do I think the Pledge should be banned? Not really. Needs to be altered back to its pre-1954 version and a lesson on the history of the oath should be taught in schools, especially if its recitation is going to be required. Though I'm not particularly for requiring the Pledge. I'm all for a little dose of patriotism in the morning, but true patriotism comes from the heart, not from government-required rote. The Pledge is a good thing, it just needs to be repaired a bit.

And to answer your final bit about if I don't believe in God(which I don't, I am indeed an atheist), would I still want to say it? Answer is no. Not so long as "under God" remains in it. I would likely be among the ones ostracized and punished for remaining silent and refusing to say those two words. To go one step further, if I were to have children, I would not want my children to say the Pledge with "under God" in it and more or less indoctrinate them into a religion that I don't believe in and would not indoctrinate my children to believe in.

Don't say that saying the Pledge with "under God" in it is not indoctrination and government-sponsored religion. My whole prior arguement proves that it WAS governmentally sanctioned Christianity and therefore, if you say the Pledge "under God", you're essentially pledging yourself not just to America, but to God and if you pledge yourself to God, well, then you're pledging yourself to Christianity. I would not want my children to pledge themselves to a God and thusly a religion that I have not indoctrinated them into myself.

Children do not know any better. As I said before, they don't think anything of it. Adults do. That's why we have laws about minors. Kids don't have the knowledge or wisdom to make major decisions like that. That's what parents are for and I quite frankly would rather teach my children to tolerate all religions, not just one narrow-minded view of the topic, let alone that same narrow view of America. Period.

Answer 6

I think that a morning pledge to love our neighbors would be a more appropriate thing to do. Certainly more spiritual.

Instead of worshiping a god that is going to condemn two thirds of the population to hell and a bit of colored cloth that we send our children to kill and die for.

Answer 7

The question of God within the school systems should be permitted just as much as they are permitted to promote evolution. Once they stop teach evolution then they can be allowed to discontinue the discussion of God. Until then I think it should be okay as long as no one's views are disrespected.