Promotion of the Pledge of Allegiance

[halfDemon]

Should public school's promote the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance?

The Pledge was introduced in 1892, and nationally adopted in 1945. It is recited in nearly every public school nation-wide. Although in most students are allowed to opt out, they might require a note from their guardian or even may be ridiculed for not reciting the Pledge.
Some people think that the Pledge is merely an oath to the United States, and that there is nothing wrong with its promotion. However, with the addition of the (misinterpreted) words "under God", taken from Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, many believe that this is a violation of the First and Fourteenth Ammendments and is a cross between church and state. The argument is that by having said words, it transforms the United States into a religious state.
Even without the words "under God", the pledge can still be controversal because of its swearing allegiance to the United States first-and-foremost, which is putting the nation above everything else, including God and other deities or beliefs of religions.

What do you think?

 

[McCloud]

Oh man, I thought this was about promoting the pledge of allegiance to like... the pledge of mindless brainwashing.

 

[1337marth]

I say yes to it, keep it. Well it is showing nations pride, and I think God is a huge part of it.

 

[Indigo4]

Well, it certainly is something that has become controversial lately. My thing is, it should be something that is practiced daily, and God should be included. But if someone doesn't want to participate, then so be it. They may sit out while everyone else does. A great example I can use was from my high school. We had pep rallys, which, to me, were rather annoying and loud. So, I simply waited in the library with some friends until they were over. Just because I don't like something doesn't mean everyone else shouldn't be allowed to enjoy the things they like, but I shouldn't have to participate if I don't want to. Everyone is happy.

 

[1337marth]

Well, it certainly is something that has become controversial lately. My thing is, it should be something that is practiced daily, and God should be included. But if someone doesn't want to participate, then so be it. They may sit out while everyone else does. A great example I can use was from my high school. We had pep rallys, which, to me, were rather annoying and loud. So, I simply waited in the library with some friends until they were over. Just because I don't like something doesn't mean everyone else shouldn't be allowed to enjoy the things they like, but I shouldn't have to participate if I don't want to. Everyone is happy.

I really agree with that, I think it is very Important. It is a huge part of it.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

Even if "under god" were removed, I still believe that this type of indoctrination is more harmful and dangerous than helpful in the promotion of patriotism. A mindless Mantra that is just spat out every morning by children who do not understand what they are saying helps no one. And can bring resentment at being forced into having to say it.

Starting it at a young age and forcing it down children's throats is tantamount to brain washing/conditioning. To tell little kids that they are pledging allegiance to a flag is terrible. I don't have allegiance to my flag, my allegiance is to my country (not my government). Even if the flag is a symbol of my country, it is not my country.

And "under god" was added in the nineteen fifties specifically to harass and discriminate against atheists. Partially because it was believed that all atheists were communists but also to force some people to christianity. Like how the Romans forced people to become christian or die. This is anathema to the American spirit and is diametrically opposed to our constitution. It is ironic that this nation was founded on religious freedom from the Church of England, only to be subverted by the churches here.

 

[Foe]

I feel like that it is unfair to people who do not believe in God. They cannot do the 'oath' because they do not believe in God, even if they are serving in the Military. (If it does offend them) I think that it would be better with out it because those 2 words offend people and taking the 2 words out would not offend anyone except extremists.

 

[AltF4]

Patriotism is the belief that your country is better than everyone else's solely because you were born there.

The government is a necessary evil. Never trust it to have your best interest in mind.


The pledge is a symbol of blind patriotism, a symbol of coercion and control. What any nation needs is not sheep that follow anything their government tells them, but intelligent and skeptical citizens that can keep their government in check.

 

[Misto-Roboto]

... However, with the addition of the (misinterpreted) words "under God",...

Misinterpreted my ass.

 

[Keitaro]

If I was tired in class I'd just stand up without my hand to my chest and not recite anything. I never got problems from anyone doing that and I know alot of people just stand up and not say anything everytime. Unless someone is forced to do the pledge of allegiance I don't see any problem with it. Even if the "under God" part is added since you don't really have to say anything.

If a teacher forces the student, then the teacher is either insane or the child is in a very young grade and I doubt the young child would fight against doing it.

 

[AltF4]

The argument "It's optional, and thus not a problem" isn't valid. If that were the case, then it shouldn't be a problem to recite ANYTHING in class, as long as it's "optional".

Why not make every high school kid stand up and recite bible verses? It would be "optional" so it's no problem right? Why don't we have them recite the communist manifesto, or passages from Mein Kompf?

The pledge (with and without "under god") is nationalistic propaganda, and fundamentally un-American.

 

[1337marth]

If they take "Under God" out, wouldn't that be religious against Christians?

 

[Eor]

No, that'd be if they added "One nation that doesn't worship jesus"

 

[Gamer4Fire]

If they take "Under God" out, wouldn't that be religious against Christians?

A question for your question. Which religion against christians would it be then?

 

[Osco316]

Not including a reference towards God does not make something anti-Christian or anti-religious.

 

[Indigo4]

It's not the fact of God being taken out of the pledge that is Anti-Christian (Or any other religion that believes in a supreme being, even though it is cleary aimed towards Christans since America was built on Christian beliefs) but the ACT of taking it out is what bothers me. It seems like everyone is offended of the most trivial things anymore. Like I said, if you don't want to say it, you shouldn't have to. However, I do agree that the pledge is, as many have brought up, a mantra that many children say without any idea what it truly means. Words like Indivisble, Alligance, and Republic were lost on me when I learned this back in kindergarden. I think there should be some clear explanation to what exactly the pledge means and stands for, because quite frankly, if you don't know what something really means, what is the point in even saying it? I won't doubt that it is indeed a form of brainwashing. I haven't said the pledge in YEARS, but if you asked me to recite it, I could in a heartbeat. So that's my thoughts. I think, like I said before that it should be an optional thing, but that it should clearly be explained better, or else it's pointless.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

Its the fact that it was added in by christians (under god) to discriminate against other religions, that is the reason it should be removed.

 

[1337marth]

A question for your question. Which religion against christians would it be then?

In my perspective, people who worship Jesus.

 

[Crimson King]

Stop posting signatures.

1337marth, I really don't get what you mean. The "Under God" was added to appease the growing religious majority at the time and the country is predominantly Protestant, so that would be a Christian branch.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

A question for your question. Which religion against christians would it be then?

In my perspective, people who worship Jesus.

"People who worship Jesus" would be against christians? Okay, you are fail.

 

[Ophelius]

America was founded on Christian beliefs. In every state constitution, God is in there at least once. And the country IS mainly Christian. Just because some atheist doesn't agree with it doesn't mean something has to be taken out of the Pledge because of him.

 

[Ophelius]

Catholics are christians too! They don't worship Jesus. Just his mommy.

 

[1337marth]

Well I am a Jesus and God worshiping person. I do not know about any other church things.

 

[Mediocre]

America was founded on Christian beliefs. In every state constitution, God is in there at least once. And the country IS mainly Christian. Just because some atheist doesn't agree with it doesn't mean something has to be taken out of the Pledge because of him.

No, it has to be taken out because of the law, which states that the government cannot endorse a religion.

This is not a question of hurt feelings. It's a question of legality. The "under God" in the pledge is clearly illegal, although no case has made it to the Supreme Court on the issue yet (besides the Newdow case, which was dismissed on other grounds).

Really, though, I find it troubling that you think that the US is a Christian nation. Yes, the people in the US are predominantly Christian, but Christianity is not, and has never been, the official religion of the US. Neither the original Constitution nor any of the bill amended to it since mention any God. In fact, the Bill of Rights specifically prohibits Congress from making any "law respecting an establishment of religion". I'd say the government supporting Christianity, as you seem to think it should, pretty clearly breaks this law.

If you want an idea of what the founding fathers intended when they formed this nation, the clearest indication you can get is from what they wrote. And on this particular subject, it is quite clear that they did not want to make America a Christian nation.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

"Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law."
— Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814

"The United States of America should have a foundation free from the influence of clergy."
— George Washington

"We have abundant reason to rejoice that in this Land the light of truth and reason has triumphed over the power of bigotry and superstition ... In this enlightened Age and in this Land of equal liberty it is our boast, that a man's religious tenets will not forfeit the protection of the Laws, nor deprive him of the right of attaining and holding the highest Offices that are known in the United States."
— George Washington (1732-1799) 1st U.S. President, letter to the members of the New Church in Baltimore, 1793, in Anson Phelps Stokes, Church and State in the United States, Vol 1. p. 497, quoted from The Great Quotations on Religious Freedom

"Lighthouses are more helpful than churches."
— Benjamin Franklin

"I have found Christian dogma unintelligible. Early in life I absented myself from Christian assemblies."
— Benjamin Franklin, Toward The Mystery

"I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved — the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!"
— John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
-Treaty of Tripoli, Article 11

And the real clear one;

"There is not a shadow of right in the general government to intermingle with religion. Its least interference with it would be a most flagrant usurpation."
— James Madison, Founding Father and author of the First Amendment, 1788
And do you understand the difference between religion and true Christianity?
They were addressing the Liturgical stranglehold that happened in Europe

Your move.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

Catholics are christians too! They don't worship Jesus. Just his mommy.

You are fail, too.

 

[Indigo4]

Again, though, even though America is a "Christian" nation, the pledge cleary states under "GOD." It does not say Jehovah, Yah-weh, Krishna, whatver. It says under "GOD." Had it specifically pointed out a particular God, then there would be more than enough room for a case against it, because America practices freedom of religion and has no official church. However, the Christian God is merely implied.

Now, the only people this should negativly effect are atheists. Because the constitution states freedom of religion, I raise this question: Is Atheism actually a religion, or rather a philosophy? A religion would concern the nature of the origins of the universe on a faith basis. Science is not a religion, yet it consistantly tries to find the origin of the universe, much like religion. So...what exactly does atheism fall under? Although it's clearly stated that Atheism is the belief that there is no God, it's truly ambiguous to whether or not it is a true religion, or rather, a philosophy. because of this, I find it hard to say whether or not it is unconstitutional to in keep God in the pledge or not.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

You seem to also discount all religions that are polytheistic as well as atheistic. Such as Orthodox Greeks, Hindu, Hutu, Buddhists and Taoists. Or do they not count?

 

[AltF4]

Why should the pledge be recited in schools at all? With or without god.

 

[Teebs]

The pledge should be recited in all schools because we are recognizing our freedom in this country and that we pledge ourselves to it.

One thing (which probably has been stated already) is the "under God" area of the pledge. Public schools, and the students and parents, and possibly some faculty that are part of that school say that the "under God" statement in the pledge is trying to get people to worship God, or turn to a "God worshiping" religion. I don't see how that promotes a religion. All you state is that this country is protected by God. If you are part of a religion that does not include God or you simply don't believe in God at all, then don't state it at all, just keep quiet for two words. It's really up to the person reciting whether they want to recite words in the pledge or not.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

You should be forced to say something in order to recognize your freedom. Are you crazy or stupid?

 

[AltF4]

The pledge should be recited in all schools because we are recognizing our freedom in this country and that we pledge ourselves to it.

At what point did the school system become a soapbox for nationalistic propaganda? I certainly do not pledge allegiance to any organization, neither should any responsible American. To do so would be fundamentally un-American.

At what point did patriotism become: "Support the current administration, no matter what they're doing"? A patriot is someone who stands against the establishment and demands that the ideals on which the country was born is realized.


But suppose you're correct for a moment, suppose that the pledge does confer some sort of positive benefits, I pose the question: Why at school?

The public school system exists solely to educate the public, not to instill (potentially controversial) values in impressionable children. Having kids swear unconditional obedience to the national government on a daily basis is not part of a healthy curriculum, and has no place in the public school system.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

Having kids swear unconditional obedience to the national government on a daily basis is not part of a healthy curriculum, and has no place in the public school system.

And neither does claiming it to be under the protection of an invisible cloud man. Why should people have to shut up just because they believe differently? Remove the reference to the judeo-christian god, it has no place in the government, as I have already pointed out.

 

[Indigo4]

You seem to also discount all religions that are polytheistic as well as atheistic. Such as Orthodox Greeks, Hindu, Hutu, Buddhists and Taoists. Or do they not count?

I'm not discounting polytheistic religions. Again, I said under "God." It is up to the person to decide which God they are using in the pledge. As long as there is no definded God, how can it be wrong? And you never did truly answer my question: Is atheism a religion, and furthermore, are similar atheistic "religions" even religions? I went to school with a buddhist who said that buddhism was a philosophy, not a religion and that he did not believe in religon. So...what is the interpretation here? Is a "religion" without a creator being a "religion" at all, or rather a philosphy? If that were the case, then why should God be removed from the pledge?

HOWEVER, that is not to say I promote the pledge. I do indeed view it as a form of brainwashing, and I think it is wrong to instill this mantra into small children who have so say, or even understand what is going on. But the reason I argue for God to stay in the pledge is because I wonder how long it's going to be until God is a taboo word, and is taken off of everything, all because a few toes were stepped on. As long as the word God remains ambiguous and up for interpretation, I don't see the harm in God remaining in our everyday lives.

 

[Eor]

That's a big slap in the face to polytheistic religions, as declaring that a nation is under one of their gods is the same as flipping off all of their other gods. They believe all Gods are together and have different aspects of the universe, a nation can't be under one God without being under the other Gods, nor is that what the pledge means. It means the Judeo-Christian God, that was clear when it was put in, and it is clear one.

Freedom of Religion means the freedom to have believe what you wish about Religion, even to not have one. I don't see how turning Atheism into a "philosophy" changes anything, all religions can be called philosophies.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

I'm not discounting polytheistic religions. Again, I said under "God." It is up to the person to decide which God they are using in the pledge. As long as there is no definded God, how can it be wrong?

I think Eor answered this pretty well.

And you never did truly answer my question: Is atheism a religion, and furthermore, are similar atheistic "religions" even religions?

No, atheism isn't a religion, but there are religions that are atheist. It comes down to how many gods you think there are. If your religion doesn't have any gods in it, then it is an atheist religion. Poly=many, mono=one, a=lack of, theos=god(s). And you can have no religion, which would make you atheist by default (lack of belief).

I went to school with a buddhist who said that buddhism was a philosophy, not a religion and that he did not believe in religon. So...what is the interpretation here? Is a "religion" without a creator being a "religion" at all, or rather a philosphy? If that were the case, then why should God be removed from the pledge?

The difference between philosophy and religion is that religions require a belief. In the Mahayana and Theravada Buddhist sects, they have a belief in reincarnation. Zen Buddhists do not believe in this and is therefore a philosophy. All Buddhists do not believe in a god figure so they are all atheist.

So it is not the case that it is only a philosophy and declaring a god over them, against their beliefs, goes against the first amendment.

But the reason I argue for God to stay in the pledge is because I wonder how long it's going to be until God is a taboo word, and is taken off of everything, all because a few toes were stepped on. As long as the word God remains ambiguous and up for interpretation, I don't see the harm in God remaining in our everyday lives.

90% of all Americans are Christian. I'm living in bible central right now. There is no way that god will become taboo since the vast majority of Americans believe in it and will all cite their first amendment rights, even when it doesn't apply to them (putting the ten commandments in courtrooms).

The god on our money and in the pledge refers specifically to the judeo-christian god and was added in the nineteen fifties to discriminate against all other religions.

 

[halfDemon]

Again, though, even though America is a "Christian" nation, the pledge cleary states under "GOD." It does not say Jehovah, Yah-weh, Krishna, whatver. It says under "GOD." Had it specifically pointed out a particular God, then there would be more than enough room for a case against it, because America practices freedom of religion and has no official church. However, the Christian God is merely implied.

No, it does point out a specific god, which would be the Christian, God. The only god to have a capital "G" and be referred to solely as God. It clearly states the Christian faith.

 

[Pythag]

Atheism is a religion, so by removing God you are "shoving down our throats" the belief that there isn't a God.
And like it or not, your quotes for why religion has no place in government really aren't quite taken in context.
The "separation of church and state" (which isn't even in the constitution, mind you) is in reference to an established church that rules with the government. There's no chance that we have that now, seeing as people who have diferent beliefs aren't put to death or imprisoned.
Including the "under God" in the pledge does not mean that the government is forcing you to worship God, but perhaps giving a nod back to the relgion on which it was founded. What are you gonna do, start changing history books so that our founding fathers were atheists just so no one gets offended?

 

[Gamer4Fire]

What are you, stupid? Which "religion" is atheism?

 

[Pythag]

since you can't prove God doesn't exist just as much as we can't prove that God does exist,
you are choosing to believe that.
Atheism is a belief dude.
(sorry, religion was probably the wrong term, belief system would have been better)