I don't believe in "God" so why shouldn't God be taken out of the pledge?

"Under God" was added to the pledge in the mid 20th century. It hasn't always been there. Nevertheless, I don't see why we need to "adjust" just because some atheists are militantly so. It's not all about them. It isn't even all about "God."

Really. If you're going to take "God" out of the pledge, then you better go back and change the Declaration of Independence, too. How can you ban one and live with the other? The Declaration says, "We are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights." It also says, "And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence..."

Why does it say that? Why doesn't it just say, "We hereby declare we have certain inalienable rights." Isn't that more politically correct and all-inclusive? The Founding Fathers were not all rabid Christians intent on ramming Christianity down everyone's throats. Some were atheists themselves. So why did they do this?

Because they were trying to say that freedom is bigger than mankind, that it does not depend on some man or group of men declaring it so, for they can declare anything with equal fervor and justification. They can declare dictatorships, declare a way of government, and enslave the people simply through declaring that "thus it is so." The Founding Fathers werer trying to evoke a greater power. Remember that in 1776 this had not been done before, at least in recent history. So they used the language of the times, including "God" and "Divine Providence" They weren't invoking the white haired guy on a throne in Heaven; they were invoking a power greater than Man.

We get so hung up on the simplistic word that we fail to understand the meaning behind the idea.

reply to post by King Seesar


This has been MY point and opinion the entire time. Who is to say who's rights are more important then anyone else's? The fact of the matter is this is ALL OF OUR'S country. Not just the Athiest's , or the christians or the catholics or buddhists etc etc. The country was founded on certain ideas and traditions yet no one wants to admit that in alot of their own thinking it is one sided for their own gain.

I will stand by almost anything if it is voted and chosen by the majority. I just don't stand by ANYTHING if it is only chosen by few and the masses show that they do not want it. The majority of people do not want it changed so why should we change it?

As I stated, If we were to write a NEW pledge or anything else for that matter. Feel free to write it to fit the current populations beliefs and ideas. But don't just change it because a handful of people want it changed. When things like that happen this country becomes less like a democracy where everyones ideas and opinions count and more of a monarchy, where 1 or few peoples ideas count.

Unfortunatly I feel in the future we will be a monarchy anyways since so many of us in the united states are actually united anyways. It'snice to say and it rolls off of the toungue well but we should be called what we are.

"The United On Paper, But Actually Only Out For Our Own Selves And Selfish Gains ,Corrupted Government And Corporate Greed of America"

Just my opinion nice thing about the U.S.A is that you DO NOT have to agree at all.

reply to post by schuyler


i would say you need to take it out because it makes america look like a bunch of religious wack jobs which actually isn't far from the truth especially the right wing.

The christian god is not factually proven. God didn't you give you any freedoms the people who fought in the revolution did. How about giving credit where credits due instead of to an imaginary sky man? I find it scary one of the most technologically advanced nations on earth goes on about religion so much .

Despite this religious stuff in america they're still the most socially backward nation in the west. So its not even done any good.

Originally posted by yeti101
so because people were a bit backwards in the 1800s they should remain that way?

Be careful here. Remember all the founding documents of the United States were written in the 1700s and those people are among the brightest in all of written history. The misconception that lack of modern conveniences = backwards is not true. Thomas Jefferson didn't have a microwave and Sir Isaac Newton probably didn't even have indoor plumbing. The idea that Abraham Lincoln was a knuckle dragger just because he lived during the 1800s is laughable . We can't honestly say that the world had no intelligence until the 1900s can we?

I know which i would rather have on my money, I'll take Darwin everyday of the week.

EDIT: Since you brought him up, do we add Darwin to the list of backwards people? He lived during the 1800s.

reply to post by dbates
Science and communication hadn't advanced to the high level it is today. These 2 things above all make us smarter. Also, both of these are heavily dependent on technology.

Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by schuyler

 

i would say you need to take it out because it makes america look like a bunch of religious wack jobs

which actually isn't far from the truth especially the right wing.

The christian god is not factually proven. God didn't you give you any freedoms the people who fought in the revolution did. How about giving credit where credits due instead of to an imaginary sky man? I find it scary one of the most technologically advanced nations on earth goes on about religion so much .

Despite this religious stuff in america they're still the most socially backward nation in the west. So its not even done any good.

You are correct, The Christian GOD is NOT factually proven. But there are alot of facts in the bible that HAVE been proven, such as locations, people, events etc. The point you are missing is NO GOD has been FACTUALLY proven. hence why every religion requires FAITH. FAITH by very definition is a belief in something regardless of evidence or facts. JUST LIKE ATHEISTS have FAITH that GOD DOESN'T exist.

The point is GOD is tradition. GOD is used in a way that it can be implied to any person. do buddhist believe budda was a form of god?, is allah god? so on and so forth.

The pledge does not say, " I pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, one nation under GOD "The christian god though you know, jesus's dad, not those other imaginary gods" indivisable with liberty and justice for all"

GOD is put in it as an aknowlegment of something BIGGER and GREATER then any one of us as individuals.

As a middle school teacher, I deal with this dilemma every school day.

I ask the kids to say it once a week, even though the school says it every morning.

We break it down first, and surprisingly, the kids have a bigger problem with a couple of the other sections;

'And Liberty and Justice for all' 'But my uncle is in prison for something I know he didn't do...!'

'And to the Republic, for which it stands' 'This isn't a republic, its a democracy, right?'...

'I thought a pledge was something you do once, so why do we have to do this every day?'

'One nation? What about the Native American Nations?'

Straight from the mouths of babes...

reply to post by Annee


you may beg to differ all you want, the truth is. neither of us will ever know what truly transpired in the lives of these men. we know tid-bits, like Jefferson and his many children, but that's about it I would say. no one probably cataloged the daily lives of these individuals like many historians wish, with what evidence there is, we can only speculate on the rest.

reply to post by dbates


darwin rejected the christian faith after realising the creation myths in the bible were a load of rubbish. So he was advanced for his time in this respect

when i say backwards i mean socially backwards compared to today. e.g : slavery, womens rights, gay rights, religion & equal rights for black people. Darwins stuff is full of casual racism but that was when those ideas or attitudes were the norm. They're not today we have advanced immensely.

The pledge itself wasn't always around, and as someone already been pointed out, "Under God" was added even more recently. I think it ought to be changed though. How about "One nation under the Constitution, indivisible, and with liberty and justice for all"? It's secular, without being anti-religious, and I don't think anyone would have a problem reciting it. I'm not religious and I'm not part of the Tea Party movement, still I think it would be healthy for the people taking the pledge on a regular basis, as well as the President himself upon inauguration, to be reminded of the founding principles of the country, as opposed to a religious view which just happens to be held by a large portion of the country.

Because it's not about you. Don't say it if you don't believe. If the pledge is something that you don't believe in, then you shouldn't say it.

Let me make something clear; there is absolutely nothing in the constitution that mentions the separation of church and state. It doesn't exist and it never has. It is one of those things that has been regurgitated so many times, people accept it as fact. It simple doesn't exist.

Like it or not, the United States was founded on Christian values. Open your history books and prove me wrong. Show me where the constitution says anything about church and state. You can't, because it doesn't exist. You are free to skip the "one nation, under God"; nobody is stopping you from doing that, so why would you expect it to be changed to accommodate you? The bill or rights says our rights were bestowed upon us by our Creator. Get over it or leave the country.

Originally posted by King Seesar
God should be kept in the pledge, just because ONE count ONE person wants it out it shouldn't be thrown out, what about the people who want to keep it in???.....Do they have no rights or say?


How about we do this, we hold a vote type election for either yes it should be kept in or no it shouldn't and what ever side gets more votes wins...


I find it appalling that one persons opinion should count more then a ton of peoples opinions, it's simply not fair.

How about we also have a vote for slavery...if more people think slavery should be instituted, then so be it...lets say, the asian people in america become slaves.

Democracy is total fail...mob rule
3 wolves and 1 sheep, all with equal vote, voteing on whats for dinner...

Originally posted by schuyler
"Under God" was added to the pledge in the mid 20th century. It hasn't always been there. Nevertheless, I don't see why we need to "adjust" just because some atheists are militantly so. It's not all about them. It isn't even all about "God."

Really. If you're going to take "God" out of the pledge, then you better go back and change the Declaration of Independence, too. How can you ban one and live with the other? The Declaration says, "We are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights." It also says, "And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence..."

My momma and my daddy is my creator...
I have no issue with that

Actually, I would be comfortable with the term "under god" to be changed to "Under our creator"...thats at least a step in the right direction...then religious familys can say it means god, and atheist familys can say it means mom and dad, or the founding fathers, or science, etc...God is pretty specific in describing a mystical wizard that popped everything into existance a few thousand years back.

A creator, or force of creation, can be as simple as a chemical reaction..physics...etc.

reply to post by schuyler


Excellent post.

One definition of Civility is: Consciously motivated organizational behavior that is ethical in submission to a higher power.

Secular humanism is all fine and good, up to the point of a crisis and competing self interest, but the atheists cannot understand the reasoning behind the neccessity of God as higher power (even if only as an imagined perfect observer).

It's like trying to communicate across a complete vacuum, they just don't "grok".

reply to post by General.Lee


You need to do some research, here mr. general.

Seperation of Church and State was a Major tenet of the founding fathers.

Founded on Christian Principles?

Do your homework, don't just spout non-sense your pastor told you.

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by schuyler

 

Excellent post.

One definition of Civility is: Consciously motivated organizational behavior that is ethical in submission to a higher power.

Secular humanism is all fine and good, up to the point of a crisis and competing self interest, but the atheists cannot understand the reasoning behind the neccessity of God as higher power (even if only as an imagined perfect observer).

It's like trying to communicate across a complete vacuum, they just don't "grok".

Religion requires science in order to know what is right and wrong
Science does not require religion in order to know what right and wrong is.

Watch the video and see things for what they are.

Too many people run fully on fear and brainwashing..."new"ageman...prove it...consider things not built on thousands of years of dogma and brainwashing.

i know its not the question asked but the point is moot because the pledge of allegiance should be banned its America why is there a plege in the first place?? free wiil, free thought, free choice, anyone?anyone?anyone? Let me see why would a government (or anyone else) want small children to repeat something everyday over and over again?? schools should be for learning not indoctrination!

reply to post by Rockdisjoint


The pledge STAYS.

Originally posted by General.Lee Let me make something clear; there is absolutely nothing in the constitution that mentions the separation of church and state. It doesn't exist and it never has. It is one of those things that has been regurgitated so many times, people accept it as fact. It simple doesn't exist.

Like it or not, the United States was founded on Christian values. Open your history books and prove me wrong. Show me where the constitution says anything about church and state. You can't, because it doesn't exist. You are free to skip the "one nation, under God"; nobody is stopping you from doing that, so why would you expect it to be changed to accommodate you? The bill or rights says our rights were bestowed upon us by our Creator. Get over it or leave the country.

If we have no hope hope of getting God out of government, then I truly am in the wrong country.

reply to post by SaturnFX

Religion without science is blind, yes, on that we agree.

Please let me know when science discovers the truth of human existence as we really experience it, without reducing the human being to a thing, or consciousness to an epiphenomenon of matter, at which point we might begin to have even more in common.