2007-02-11 07:20:12 · 24 answers · asked by irishumanist 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Yes.
2007-02-11 07:27:26 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I just answered this a bit ago, but yes. The pledge, and the in god we trust on the money, are anti-commie rhettoric from the 50's. Like the other parts of that (loyalty oaths,Mcarthy witch hunts, etc.), I think it's long over due to remove it.
Speaking as a pragmatist....this fight isn't worth the cost. The reward is just not that great. It is non-denominational...and because of that it does offend me less. I wish it were removed, but I think we have a lot of other fights that are more critical. Pick your battles.
The biggest battle right now should be focusing on eliminating public finding for religious eductions being disguised as "charter schools" and vouchers.
Also removing the faith based initiatives program should be a priority. Pat Robertson is currently getting money out of that one, and it removed cash from the inner cities.
2007-02-11 07:25:20 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I'm 61 and as far as I can remember I've been more less athiest. Moreso as I become older and wiser. But when I was a child in school it really didn't make any difference to me wheather
I said "under God" or not. I had to many other things to think about such as how long it was till recess or lunch. I think the big deal nowdays is what the parents think not the kids.
2007-02-11 07:44:24 · answer #3 · answered by Toycrusier 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The original Pledge of Allegiance didn't contain the words "under god". The congress voted to include that in 1954 during the McCarthy era. The purpose was to distinguish the U.S. from the "godless communists", and in doing so, clearly violated the constitutionally established separation of church and state. McCarthy was later revealed as a zealous opportunist, liar, and fraud. One must ask: Why is his legacy still recited daily in our nation's schools.
2007-02-11 08:09:23 · answer #4 · answered by The Truth 2.0 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Whether people like it or not America was founded on Judeo-Christian values. I'm not saying "under God" should or shouldn't be in the Pledge. Personally I think it should be optional, but that's beside the point. I'm just saying that it would be a shame to deign the belief system that lead to the create of a superb government and mark it that our freedoms come directly from the Christian belief of equality.
2007-02-11 07:34:28 · answer #5 · answered by just a girl 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
good concept. extra effective yet, eliminate the Pledge of Allegiance: Jehovah's Witnesses imagine that that's a demonstration of idolatry. i'm a operating in the route of Catholic, yet i imagine that the Jehovah's Witnesses have a level.
2016-11-27 01:28:35 · answer #6 · answered by zarate 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, the cold War is over, and we're not worried about those "godless commies" so much anymore.
And, anyway, it was utterly inane to think that a Soviet spy would refuse to say "under God", which was the point of adding it, really.
So, yeah.
2007-02-11 09:53:08 · answer #7 · answered by Praise Singer 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely
2007-02-11 07:23:50 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Yes. "Under God" potentially makes Americans who do not believe in a God (this includes buddhists), especially school children feel unAmerican.
2007-02-11 07:26:13 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. The original version was better at uniting the variety of beliefs celebrated in this land.
2007-02-11 07:36:13 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
YES! Why impose a god on non-believers. They will be judged according to their actions, not their beliefs.
Do not do to non-believers that which you don't want done unto you!
To do no wrong is the first step to doing right!
.
2007-02-11 07:41:43 · answer #11 · answered by Hatikvah 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋