No cut and pasting information, your own genuine answers with links to resources to support it.
2007-01-08 11:15:00 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
I think so. And if they change it, I will continue to say "under God" and will ACTIVELY encourage others to do so. On the other hand, I think that people who object to "under God" can just drop it. You see, nobody is forcing anybody to say "under God" and given freedom of speech I would not want them to prohibit those of us who believe in God from using that term in the Pledge. (Wouldn't prohibiting me and my family from saying "under God" be a violation of my freedom of speech and religion?)
2007-01-08 11:20:57 · answer #1 · answered by Yo it's Me 7 · 9⤊ 1⤋
The Pledge of Allegiance is a personal pledge (given only to one's own self), not a pledge or oath offered to, or required by, government or someone else in exchange for citizenship, work, school, social benefits, or anything else.
The Pledge has changed over the years to reflect the changes in our society, just as the flag has changed, our laws have changed, and the country itself has changed.
The words "under God" were added during one of those societal changes, and should remain as long as a majority of Americans both profess a belief in a God of some sort and feel those words serve a purpose (in their own lives or elsewhere).
2007-01-08 11:45:05 · answer #2 · answered by Dwight S 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, read the First Amendment. There is no separation of church and state that the liberals speak of. The government shall not establish a national religion. It does not say that they cannot acknowledge it. If you do not want to say God, do not.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
2007-01-08 12:08:31 · answer #3 · answered by Chainsaw 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Personally, I don't care whether the words are there or not. But I do care deeply about how the Establishment Clause is being interpreted, whether by the courts or by anyone else who thinks that they know how courts have interpreted the Constitution. Given that the words are already there in the Pledge, I think that if the words are to be taken out of the Pledge, the people who take them out should be:
1) Congress itself, because that institution is the one who put the words in.
Or
2) By the courts, if they can give an explanation why those words in the Pledge are not acceptable but it is acceptable for the words "In God We Trust" to be printed on all the currency, and for the Congress and the state legislatures to hire chaplains and for the military bases to hire chaplains, etc. ...................
2007-01-08 11:26:35 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
No, it wasn't added until 1954-and the US is the only country to use such a pledge-but that's the least of our problems..it's also a little odd the salute was originally a bit like a Nazi salute....pics at Wikipedia. It was called the Bellany salute-the same guy who "invented" it
2007-01-08 11:37:09 · answer #5 · answered by Middleclassandnotquiet 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Abolutely! And, by remaining under God we will hopefully enjoy our freedoms for hundreds of years to come. As for those who do not agree, then don't say the pledge.
2007-01-08 11:27:53 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
yes it should be there. if you dont want to say it dont your not forced, or shouldnt be. It is the PC world we are living in. People who belive in God and say it are told they are being offensive to non believers and are being forced to shut up. But non believers can bash christians and God and it is ok. There is to much of a double standard in the states today. everyone needs to learn to accept everyone and deal with it intstead of getting offended
2007-01-08 11:29:19 · answer #7 · answered by rizinoutlaw 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I personally believe that it should be a non issue. If people do not want to say that part, well that is the way it goes, I do not personally have a problem with it but could live without it.
2007-01-08 11:22:03 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
since it was not part of the original composition yes it should be removed..how about changing the national anthem and adding a couple more verses
2007-01-08 14:03:14 · answer #9 · answered by charmel5496 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It really shouldn't matter if it's in there or not because you can substitute who ever you want for the word God. It actually depends on your preference.
2007-01-08 11:25:29 · answer #10 · answered by Coot 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋