Pledge of Allegiance (Religion vs. Patriotism)

[jayx8318x]

First off, I know this would be better off in the US/Canada forum, but I'm hoping to reach wider religious affiliations. (I'll move it to US/Canada later if seem fit)

The issue is this, in the US public schools, children learn the "Pledge of Allegiance" which is basically what it says, pledging loyalty to the country.
When I was in kindergarten, we had to place our hand over our heart and recite it every morning. This is what it says, note the bolded part.

I pledge allegiance to the Flag
of the United States of America,
and to the Republic for which it stands:
one Nation under God, indivisible,
With Liberty and Justice for all.

The issue is this, people want to either take it out of schools entirely, or remove/change the under God part to make it religiously neutral. Opponents say it's 'tradition' and just suck it up, the kids don't really even know what it means.

In my case, that was true, I had no idea what this pledge meant really, we just did as we are told.

I have a question though since I don't know what they are doing in the elementary schools anymore, do they still make you recite it everyday? Or just learn it?

I'll tell you my position right now, if the case is that they DO make you say it all the time, I think the pledge 'as is' violates freedom of religion (one of our basic rights here in the US), and pretty much forces a Christian mentality on children who could be of different religions. And yes the kids don't know/care, but I think then it should be removed entirely (again if they are made to recite it everyday, I see nothing wrong with just learning about it and knowing it's there). I wanna hear what others have to say (I'm dying to hear from our devout Christians, and of course non-Christians), before I build on my stance. =)

[cowboy]

This little chesnut has been quite the hot topic in the US recently. Man, has it got everyone all fired up. FYI, past Supreme Court caselaw has long since struck down the practice forcing children to recite the Pledge. The issue is the "under God" bit, and if it violates the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution.

Not that it matters on this issue (because it is a purely legal issue), I am a non-Christian. This issue should never be tackled from a religious standpoint, like all religion issues that face public education (or other public venues.) From prayer in school to the posting of the Ten Commandments, the Supreme Court has religiously (no pun intended) struck down these practices as unconstitutional, and therefore illegal. The Establishment Clause of the 1st Am clearly states that the US gov't cannot further one religion before another. That basically means that if the gov't wants to support one, it must support them all, or none at all. That's a little hard to do when there are a lot of atheists out there. thus, religion has remained outside of school.

The fact that the "under God" statement is an affirmation refering to the Judeo-Christian god, I can see no reason why this is phrase still remains in the pledge (it was added in the 1950's to combat communism, because we all know that those bloddy commies are evil devil worshipers :dry: ). Personally, I feel this phrase violates the 1st AM and should be removed. We don't need it. It offends some people, so take it out, what the hell. If you think we do need it, then why not change it to "under Allah"?

The only reason that it might remain intacted is because of a precedent set forth in one case (Marsh v Chambers), where the Court upheld the Nebraska (my home) Legislature's practice of holding a prayer before sessions. The Court ruled that it wasn't religious in nature and a f=mere formality, so it could be allowed. "Under God" might fall under this precedent, but I pray it doesn't.

I thought I'd elaborate on the issue, as I've studied civil liberties and the Constitution. Like most free democracies, the US has a strict policy of seperation of church and state. Remeber that when coming to an opinion.

[scarletwillow]

Well put.
If they remove the pledge, they might as well remove the moment of silence. You could argue it's clear discrimination against people who don't pray in a sitting position with their heads bowed.

[cici bebe]

The Pledge of Allegiance is becoming more and more of a tradition, that "under God" has just become empty words. Who really thinks or cares anymore that the US of A is truly "under God"? I'm a Christian and I believe that the Pledge is just out of patriotism and tradition. In some schools, they have taken out the reference to God entirely so it can't be said out of religion anymore.

However, the founding fathers truly did have purpose of making the United States "under God". Over the years, we have perverted the saying and again, they are now only empty words. Children mutter it because it's all part of a whole, not many people really think about what it means anymore. The reason it's not "under Allah" or whatever, is because that's not the way it was orginally written to mean.

Saying "under God", for me, isn't pushing religion on to kids. It's not forcing them to believe in Christ, it's just stating that the United States was to be under God, but over the years, less and less until we finally see it vanish in some classrooms. To me, that's just too bad how this could offend others while discussion on any other kind of religion doesn't. But that's a whole new debate.

[cowboy]

As long as they are empty words, no one is going to miss it when it is gone. Right?

[jayx8318x]

However, the founding fathers truly did have purpose of making the United States "under God". Over the years, we have perverted the saying and again, they are now only empty words.
Saying "under God", for me, isn't pushing religion on to kids. It's not forcing them to believe in Christ, it's just stating that the United States was to be under God

That's a good tidbit there cici, I didn't realize that. According to this site (http://www.homeofheroes.com/hallofheroes/1st_floor/flag/1bfc_pledge.html) the phrase "Under God" was approved by Eisenhower because:

"In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country's most powerful resource in peace and war."

I can't help but cringe when they naturalize citizens, they make them say that pledge...these people from all over the world, with of course different race & religion.

[cowboy]

It was just Cold War rhetoric by Ike to unify the country against the "Reds". Kinda like all of Bush's patriotic rhetoric to get us behind him and against the terrorists and Saddam.

true this country was founded by a lot of Christians, but many of our Founders were agnostics and atheists. It was the Enlightenment after all.

[scarletwillow]

They're all Deists :P

[ker_ai_teresa]

If you think we do need it, then why not change it to "under Allah"?


isn't Allah essentially "God" in the Islamic/Muslim religion?

personally, i think it all depends on how the individual defines "God". i can think of him as the Christian/Catholic God, or i can think of him as Allah, or whichever god i worship. i don't see any probs with using this term in the pledge unless they also teach that the God referred to here is specifically the Christian God. the prob i see is that the education system doesn't teach what the pledge means (i assume this is still true today, with only an emphasis on recitation?). so when children are forced to learn the pledge they don't know what it means, hence when they grow older, they can decide for themselves which god it is they want it to refer to.
do i make any sense at all? :glug:

another thing. what about the national anthem of England? "God save the queen"? i know this has nothing to do with the States' pledge, but the same issue applies. where should we draw the line when it comes to political correctness?

[loko]

i'm an atheist living outside the USA so i don't actually know what it's like to recite the pledge so often.

as has been said, alot of kids don't realise/care what they're saying when they say these things, so this then doesn't then seem to promote any kind of true patriotism. there's no problem in teaching it to children, but they should also be taught what the pledge means and why it exists in order for the pledge to achieve its purpose. otherwise, i can't see much point in it if children are just going to be restlessly reciting words they don't truly understand everday. please correct me if i'm wrong.

Obviously Christians have the right to want to maintain the "under God" bit, and since that is how the pledge was composed, in a way it should be preserved. But perhaps if they changed it to "under god," i.e. referring simply to a religious superior being, since God with the capital G more specifically refers to the Christian God. It would be a step forward to religious neutrality even if it disregards other atheists, if too many citiznes are uncomfortable to remove it altogether (if this is already the case then please tell me).

[scarletwillow]

Honestly, after 9/11, I simply refused to say the pledge and do the moment of silence. No, not a terrorist. Just wanted to protest blind nationalism.

And yeah, it was *required* at my high school -_-

[cowboy]

If you think we do need it, then why not change it to "under Allah"?


isn't Allah essentially "God" in the Islamic/Muslim religion?

personally, i think it all depends on how the individual defines "God". i can think of him as the Christian/Catholic God, or i can think of him as Allah, or whichever god i worship. i don't see any probs with using this term in the pledge unless they also teach that the God referred to here is specifically the Christian God. the prob i see is that the education system doesn't teach what the pledge means (i assume this is still true today, with only an emphasis on recitation?). so when children are forced to learn the pledge they don't know what it means, hence when they grow older, they can decide for themselves which god it is they want it to refer to.
do i make any sense at all? :glug:

another thing. what about the national anthem of England? "God save the queen"? i know this has nothing to do with the States' pledge, but the same issue applies. where should we draw the line when it comes to political correctness?

Once again, children are not forced to learn the PLedge in American schools. they are merely encouraged, because it is the schools's duty to teach patriotism (according to most state laws.) Aslo, "Allah" is the exact same god as the Judeo-Christian god, but many Christians don't acknowledge that fact. Thus, the "under Allah" bit always fires up the hardcore Christians.

This issue isn't about so-called "political correctness." There is a difference between being "politically correct" and exercising a Constitiutional right. That is where the line is drawn in the US, we take our Constitutional rights very seriously. The US also has "In GOd We Trust" on our currency. No that has remained there because of tradition, but if it stays....who knows.

[lattae]

this debate on the 'god' issue brings to my memory my guides' promise (the promise that every girl guide has to take)... it goes this way:

I promise to do my best,
to do my duty to God.... (etc etc)

being founded in the christian faith, guiding/scouting inevitably had 'god' in the promise...

let me tell you what they teach/explain to the kids in singapore (where all things are supposed to be politically correct), the very explanation I was taught to give the girls should I be asked (it was part of this course for leaders I was taking)

by God, there is no specific relation to any god... it is merely a recognition that there is a higher being looking over us. (we were supposed to discourage atheism)... as to why we all need a god, it's so to keep us in check in terms of morals, knowing that there is someone watching. also for spiritual refuge...

even when we sing grace... very traditional guiding style... giving thanks to god for the food... it's not directed at any specific god too... the god can be the god of your religion.

I am personally okay with that... cos I think that keeps things quite clear... we don't change the 'traditions' cos that's part of heritage of the society/group... part of the identity... but the god mentioned therein can pertain as mcuh to one god as to the other... cos the 'forefathers' based it on their 'own god' too... (get my arguement?)

I am a christian... and in many ways I want to keep the mention of 'god' no because I want to impose my God on others, but it's presence does remind me a certain sort of reverence I'd have to pay to my God... I think it can serve purpose for others as well...

btw "allah" means god in arabic... simply put, allah and god are equivalents... so as much as the muslims call their god 'allah' it's fundamental meaning/message is the same... matter of language diff


just my 2 cents worth :blush:

[jessca]

I remember in primary school, there was one teacher who made us stand behind the desk and say a prayer out loud before we were dismissed to the lunch hall. I cant remember whether pupils of other religions were allowed to sit out but the Athiests didnt seem to mind. You could argue that we were too young then, kids may not have told their parents what happened at noon every weekday so parents who would protest may not have known to complain.

From a young age, we were made to repeat the Lords prayer, kids would have grown up believing that at school, they were Christian, but at home, they were of a different religion. By the time they realise, they are no longer at primary school and can opt out out of choice.

another thing. what about the national anthem of England? "God save the queen"? i know this has nothing to do with the States' pledge, but the same issue applies. where should we draw the line when it comes to political correctness?
Yup..our national anthem came to mind when i came across this thread. So i will use it in the argument cos it works the same and im not familiar with when and where the pledge of US is used..hope you dont mind.

God Save the Queen
God save our gracious Queen,
Long live our noble Queen,
God save the Queen!
Send her victorious,
Happy and Glorious,
Long to reign over us;
God save the Queen!

Like lattae has said, i guess we are encouraged to think that by God, there is no specific relation to any god... it is just a recognition that there is a higher being looking over us, whether the god is Jesus Christ, Allah, the sungod whatever... its just patriotism. Some younger children i know think that the only purpose of the national anthem is to start a football match off.

With everyday language containing exclamations in which Gods name is being used in vain, i dont think the national anthem can be considered religious in any way anymore. Children are watching on tv and listening to music where the name of God is no longer used correctly and can be repeated and used in any sense...they automatically assume that it shouldnt be taken seriously in the anthem...

So i guess it doesnt make much difference cos it depends on the individual whether its out of religion or patriotism. The non-Christians would accept that 'God' is the higher being or the one they yell in frustration at when things go wrong (but cant seem to accept He exists...different debate.. :oops: ) whereas the Christians will always take the anthem (or pledge) seriously and with the intent in which it was written with. You could say theres nothing wrong with repeating it cos its down to the individual how its interpreted.

[Vant]

by God, there is no specific relation to any god... it is merely a recognition that there is a higher being looking over us.

lol... We consider some 'higher being' to be a god...

Amazingly... My high school forces me to stand up whenever we pledge (Although removing caps, hand-over-heart, and reciting are optional)... Yeah I do find it annoying at times... But not enough to make me argue about it...

I find the pledge of allegience outdated... I don't really care about the god reference... As it's just words to me... However... Making citizen tests to include the phrase bothers me a bit (btw I'm ABC so I never did it)...

There are other ways to declare allegence to the US without being religious... Why should we be forced to use one that is religion affiliated?