2007-10-19 05:39:46 · 32 answers · asked by Mike 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Yes. It constitutes an "establishment of religion."
2007-10-19 05:43:17 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 2⤋
Let's look at the history of the pledge. The Pledge of Allegiance was written for the popular children's magazine Youth's Companion by Christian Socialist author and Baptist minister Francis Bellamy on September 7, 1892. Bellamy's original Pledge read as follows: I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. The "one nation under God" part was added when Eisenhower signed the Oakman-Ferguson resolution into law on Flag Day (June 14, 1954). Prominent legal challenges have been based on the contention that state-sponsored requiring or promoting of the Pledge is unconstitutional because it violates one or both of the religion clauses in the First Amendment. I guess the Supreme court will eventually have to rule on this one. If I was on the supreme court (I've got a better chance of winning the lottery), I'd say change it to represent all Americans.
2007-10-19 06:07:31 · answer #2 · answered by Incognito 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
As an athiest, I don't care. In the context of the Pledge, "God" is used as a name for whatever you believe in. If you believe in no gods, then it's but an idea....we have much better things to argue about.
2007-10-19 05:47:55 · answer #3 · answered by steve.c_50 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
As far as I'm concerned, it's a label that some people feel they need to cling to. I don't care if it's there or not, as a Buddhist and essentially atheist, since it's simply paper upon which a bunch of symbols that someone gives great significance to are placed.
_()_
2007-10-19 06:17:50 · answer #4 · answered by vinslave 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"Under God" wasn't in the pledge as it was originally written, but added during the 1950's during the "red scare". Think, if you remove this additional phrasing , how many more people would be willing to recite the pledge.
2007-10-19 05:47:22 · answer #5 · answered by Todd T 5 · 5⤊ 1⤋
I think, technically, the courts already ruled that it is.
atheists.org had a piece on it.
It was not originally there. The phrase was inserted in the 1950's a part of the 'Red Scare'.
The Treaty of Tripoli, Act 11, specifically states that America was not found on Christianity.
And, the US started b/c a bunch of brilliant rebels were tired of paying taxes and not getting their (original) country's help or support-remember there was something in history about 'taxation w/o representation'?
BTW, the ORIGINAL Americans were Indians and were nature worshipers who also believed in different pantheons. That was the original religion of the Americans.
2007-10-19 06:01:13 · answer #6 · answered by strpenta 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
I have rewritten the pledge of allegence to be more accurate to the times:
I pledge allegence to the flag of the United States of America
And to the Capitalist society for whith it stands
One nation, manipulated by religious organizations and their Gods
Divided in to many parts
With liberty and justice for those rich enough to take it
Amen
2007-10-19 05:44:59 · answer #7 · answered by nacsez 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I would agree. But I doubt it would ever happen in the current political climate. Trivial issues like this are what the politicians use as a touchstone to rally the base. They do this every so often to deflect attention from the real issues like health care, social security failing, Iraq, poverty among all the riches in this nation, etc.
2007-10-19 05:49:52 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
It should be taken out because it was not in the original to begin with. It was added later.
And we are Not "one nation under God" - any God(s)... we are a divided nation under Democracy.
2007-10-19 06:09:56 · answer #9 · answered by River 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Ok for one thing those that say yes, I believe you guys should just suck it up. Our good country was based on these beliefs. I do believe that it SHOULD stay in the pledge but athiests shouldnt have to say the pledge if they dont want to. Another thing if you dont like it move to russia, korea, iraq, or pakistan. In those places I bet you'll find something less trivial to argue about. I understand you dont believe in God but most of oiur country does. And is this country not a democracy. So either way your greatly outnumbered. If you dont like it just dont say it and keep the U.S. from wastingall this money about debates. I dont care if it is just to run the electric bill of the building your arguing in. If your using it fgro that sole puirpose your wasting mnoney over something you can just simply ignore. If the pledge allegiance said one nation under Darwin I wouldnt like it but I wouldnt take it to court and cry and whine about it. I wouldnt say it and maybe even complain to my friends but I wouldnt waste so much time and money. But Now that we have Under God established in the pledge and then they changed it of course I would be mad. 1. At the precious time and moeny we just wasted and 2.because it was just fine the way it was. So I think that changing the pledge because the minority is upset is very wasteful and stupid. I'm sorry for my grammar and spelling mistakes. have a nice day and God bless!
2007-10-19 05:56:39 · answer #10 · answered by AtcyJAC 2 · 1⤊ 5⤋
Not just atheist citizens... ALL citizens. Christian or not, no child should be REQUIRED to pledge allegience to any god (even if they believe in it). To require such a thing is to violate the First Amendment of the US Constitution, and I don't think ANYONE wants that, not even the people who just so happen to believe in the god to whom we're all expected to pledge our allegience.
2007-10-19 05:46:06 · answer #11 · answered by ZER0 C00L ••AM••VT•• 7 · 8⤊ 2⤋