NEWS: 'One Nation Under God' to stay in Pledge

Well, I hope this puts the legal debate to end for good. But unfortunately it won't. Prank Monkey said it best - insert your favorite deity, or don't insert anything at all.

As for me, I don't care what the courts say. When I recite the Pledge, I'm going to say "one nation, under God". Loud and clear. What are you going to do, sue me?

I grew up saying the pledge with "under God" in it and further more my public school had missionaries that visited for school assemblies monthly. We didn't have kids bringning guns then and in fact the worst thing to happen was a school yard fight from time to time. We had morning devotion followed by the pledge both of which were broadcast over the PA system. I think the removal of programs such as the missionaries as well as morning devotionals and prayer also removed a sense or morality and replaced it with a sense of hoplessness and anger. Many don't want to see a corrolation between the removal of prayer and the upswing of violence but its there.

Now, having said that I really don't think I would have a great problem with the pledge reverting back to the original version. I don't have that big a problem with separation of church and state in all aspects. I don't think a person should be ineligible for leadership because of strong faith. There is a difference in using religious beliefs and morals to guide your decisions as well as way you do your job and forcing that religion upon someone who isn't interested. If we say the pledge the way it was originally written, that doesn't mean I can't pray or that I don't realize the reasons the US was founded. I don't think removing "under God" has any bearing on my right to worship. The responsibility to teach children faith begins and ends in the home. I think its one of the most important dutys a parent has to their child and once religion left public schools, parents dropped the ball, in my opinion...otherwise, we wouldn't have kids shooting each other.

As a child the pledge was never recited were I am from in Puerto Rico, we have morning prayers and at the time I did not care, as a teacher I ask the students if they want to recite the pledge or not and I let them do whichever they want I care less.

[edit on 15-6-2004 by marg6043]

I have to think that the main issue here is that the whole political correct stuff is really going overboard. Of course it is important not to offend people. In fact it would be wonderful if it were possible to go through all of life without offending anyone at all. Unfortunately that is very difficult. It's particular difficult when dealing with millions of people as opposed to one. The fact is, in almost all parts of life something is going to piss someone off. There's no avoiding it. My lifestyle might upset you, yours might upset me. So what. That's what tolerance is about. If we become a people who worry more about not upsetting anyone than we do about taking care of ourselves and living our own lives then I don't see us lasting very much longer. Political correctness should not interfere with people living.

Lawsuits like this frivolous crap are going to be the undoing of all society.

No National Anthem prior to sports events so as not to offend immigrants and foreigners, no religion of any sort to be practiced outdoors, no smoking period, the list could go on forever. Think it's far fetched? Not really.

I'm an atheist, but don't care what anyone says because it's my opinion that the problem isn't with the word "God", but rather with the fact that most who say the pledge don't understand what "pledging allegiance" to ANYTHING means. It's just noise to a lot of people, something you recite without even thinking about it since childhood.

But having said that... I'm surprised at the people who don't think anyone can or should be offended or concerned about having the word "god" included in something that becomes so instilled during childhood that it's almost like a form of brainwashing. Everything you have to memorize and then recite day after day over and over becomes meaningless after awhile. But what if you replaced the word "God" with the word "F**k"? What if the majority of people decided that was fine, but there were still appreciable segments of society who were offended by it? Would it still be trivial for them to try and change what they might perceive as supporting a trend toward a state of existence that they don't want and shouldn't have to endure?

I personally don't care if anyone believes in a higher power or not. Don't care how much anybody goes to church. Don't care how many flyers get handed out, though I don't appreciate people who come to my door disturbing me to sell anything, whether it's newspapers or religion. But I do get bothered when the president says he's using a handbook that's been around for 2000 years and points to the Bible. I do get concerned when the person responsible for being the head of this nation constantly refers to god and religion in the context of his job. I don't want a theocracy. Saying "one nation under god" might not seem like a big deal, but to some who care very much about the direction this country is taking, it is a big deal.

One nation under Canada, above Mexico.

I do object to the God part, its a stupid sneaky way to get a little bit of religion into kids minds.

Lets face it, this all boils down to the old prayer in schools question. The pledge is nothing more than a diluted prayer with "under god" in it.

The Justices finally used common sense by throwing this out, what a waste of time an money. I personally don't care if the pledge contains the word God in it, but I do care that most who say it have absolutely no idea why we pledge. When I was in kindergarten, they explained it to us, but that was so long ago. If you were to ask any child today why they say the pledge I'd wager most couldn't tell you. By the way Doom that was a great post.

Originally posted by Nerdling
One nation under Canada, above Mexico.

I do object to the God part, its a stupid sneaky way to get a little bit of religion into kids minds.

Lets face it, this all boils down to the old prayer in schools question. The pledge is nothing more than a diluted prayer with "under god" in it.

I would have to agree, the question one has to ask is why was it put in 50 years ago? Was it to "sneak" in a protestant agenda? It should not be there, it is a subliminal message, "under god" most certainly implies a christian god. It is also pretty ethnocentric to say "one nation under god", like the rest of the world does not matter. In other words we are the chosen people, one nation under god. Nice huh? No wonder the world hates America. IMHO.

Personally I do not want my kid subliminally being taught a certain dogma, that is my job, not societies.

[Edited on 16-6-2004 by Narnia]

I am unashamed in saying: Finally, traditional America has the drawn the line. No longer shall the majority bow to the minority

Originally posted by RogueX
I am unashamed in saying: Finally, traditional America has the drawn the line. No longer shall the majority bow to the minority

Hence, mob rule. The individuals rights are diminished as a result of the majority. Lets just say this issue isn't over til it's over.

The constitutional challenge over the word "God" in the pledge is trivial. The real issue is whether or not it is appropriate to require a pledge of allegiance to the government at all. Government should be pledging allegiance to the people, not vice versa.

When government behaves as it should it will have the allegiance of the people making any pledge unnecessary. When government does not behave as it should any pledge is a mockery.
.

I didn't mean the majority is always right. I just mean that when I grow up and have kids I want them to be able to pledge allegiance to their country and God. If you don't want to say it then don't say it, but don't ban others from saying it.

I believe the pledge was put in, by a movement by Joe MacCarthy, in his crushing of the Godless communisn. If you think good nations can't to horrible things, one should take a closer look at that timeline. Rights, what rights.

Originally posted by df1
The constitutional challenge over the word "God" in the pledge is trivial. The real issue is whether or not it is appropriate to require a pledge of allegiance to the government at all. Government should be pledging allegiance to the people, not vice versa.

When government behaves as it should it will have the allegiance of the people making any pledge unnecessary. When government does not behave as it should any pledge is a mockery.
.

Actually the word "god" is not trivial when placed in a ritual for the purpose of allegiance to a larger body of people. The pledge of allegiance is the totem to unity in America, so I differ in that opinion. We are a nation of diversity, unison should be at the core of any ritual. Under "god" which implies a Christian god, divides us, as we are not all Christians. The original pledge had that forethought, but then the religious sect of society, being the majority, (as Nerdling so brilliantly put it) snuck it in.

Originally posted by RogueX
I didn't mean the majority is always right. I just mean that when I grow up and have kids I want them to be able to pledge allegiance to their country and God. If you don't want to say it then don't say it, but don't ban others from saying it.

Pledging allegiance to the country is one thing to teach in school, pledging to god should be done in your institution of worship and at home.

sorry this is a long one but it's VERY EDUCATIONAL and should send the sparks a flyin



Francis Bellamy (1855 - 1931), a Baptist minister, wrote the original Pledge in August 1892. He was a Christian Socialist. In his Pledge, he is expressing the ideas of his first cousin, Edward Bellamy, author of the American socialist utopian novels, Looking Backward (1888) and Equality (1897).

Francis Bellamy in his sermons and lectures and Edward Bellamy in his novels and articles described in detail how the middle class could create a planned economy with political, social and economic equality for all. The government would run a peace time economy similar to our present military industrial complex.

The Pledge was published in the September 8th issue of The Youth's Companion, the leading family magazine and the Reader's Digest of its day. Its owner and editor, Daniel Ford, had hired Francis in 1891 as his assistant when Francis was pressured into leaving his baptist church in Boston because of his socialist sermons. As a member of his congregation, Ford had enjoyed Francis's sermons. Ford later founded the liberal and often controversial Ford Hall Forum, located in downtown Boston.

In 1892 Francis Bellamy was also a chairman of a committee of state superintendents of education in the National Education Association. As its chairman, he prepared the program for the public schools' quadricentennial celebration for Columbus Day in 1892. He structured this public school program around a flag raising ceremony and a flag salute - his 'Pledge of Allegiance.'

His original Pledge read as follows: 'I pledge allegiance to my Flag and (to*) the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.' He considered placing the word, 'equality,' in his Pledge, but knew that the state superintendents of education on his committee were against equality for women and African Americans. [ * 'to' added in October, 1892. ]

Dr. Mortimer Adler, American philosopher and last living founder of the Great Books program at Saint John's College, has analyzed these ideas in his book, The Six Great Ideas. He argues that the three great ideas of the American political tradition are 'equality, liberty and justice for all.' 'Justice' mediates between the often conflicting goals of 'liberty' and 'equality.'

In 1923 and 1924 the National Flag Conference, under the 'leadership of the American Legion and the Daughters of the American Revolution, changed the Pledge's words, 'my Flag,' to 'the Flag of the United States of America.' Bellamy disliked this change, but his protest was ignored.

In 1954, Congress after a campaign by the Knights of Columbus, added the words, 'under God,' to the Pledge. The Pledge was now both a patriotic oath and a public prayer.

Originally posted by Narnia
Actually the word "god" is not trivial when placed in a ritual for the purpose of allegiance to a larger body of people. The pledge of allegiance is the totem to unity in America, so I differ in that opinion. We are a nation of diversity, unison should be at the core of any ritual. Under "god" which implies a Christian god, divides us, as we are not all Christians. The original pledge had that forethought, but then the religious sect of society, being the majority, (as Nerdling so brilliantly put it) snuck it in.

Well... This nation was founded on Christian principles. Like it or not, we're really a Christian nation. Being a Christian nation doesn't neccessarily mean theocracy, either. It just means that our nation was founded on principles of Christianity.

Originally posted by Faisca


Well... This nation was founded on Christian principles. Like it or not, we're really a Christian nation. Being a Christian nation doesn't neccessarily mean theocracy, either. It just means that our nation was founded on principles of Christianity.

This nation was founded on a lot of dumb ideas. Slavery, inequality of women, the massacre of Native Americans, but as we grow as a Nation, we become more mature, and understand that some of the things this country was founded on aren't that great and needs to be changed.

If you don't want to say it then don't say it

It doesn't bother me if you don't want to say it, but just don't take it away from others. I totally respect that others have different beliefs, respect mine please.

Originally posted by curme
This nation was founded on a lot of dumb ideas. Slavery, inequality of women, the massacre of Native Americans, but as we grow as a Nation, we become more mature, and understand that some of the things this country was founded on aren't that great and needs to be changed.

Yeah a lot of dumb ideas... One of the best governments in the history of politics and the world is a very dumb concept I guess... Christian ideals, for one thing, aren't dumb. Don't murder people, don't steal, don't lie, don't harm others for no reason, etc, etc. These aren't bad ideals to found a country on, and these are the ideals that our country was founded on. Are you saying these basic moral concepts are dumb ideas? If you are, you need to get your brain straightened out...