This is pretty tied into religion, so let's talk about it.

 

The 'Under God' phrase in the Pledge made its way back into the news yesterday as Congress tried to be foolish and propose a bill limiting the Supreme Court's say on the matter. It was originally ruled that these "controversial" two words had to be taken out of the Pledge by a court in California, but that decision was put on permanent stay, never taking effect.

 

Should 'Under God' be in the Pledge of Allegiance (sorry if I spelled that wrong, it's 10 in the morning) of a supposedly secular country? Or does this phrase do little to influence religion, as all of our money does say "In God We Trust" (feel free to touch on this if you please).

 

Please stay away from talking about whether this is a real case or if its relevant to us, as anything the Supreme Court accepts they deem to be important. Remember, we're just talking about the religion vs secularism argument that is the basis of the case.

well seeing that i never say the pledge any way it really doesnt matter to me. but i will say that the atheist and those trying to be politically correct are just going to far. its been around for over 200 years, no reason to change now. if you dont like it than dont say it. i never say the pledge so i dont see why the atheists cant just avoid saying it themselves.

Actually it hasnt been around for 200 years. It was added to the pledge as part of the 1950s red scare.

 

We've had a thread about this. I think most people dont care either way. I said the pledge when I was in school but it seemed really irrelevant to me. It didnt cause me to be pressured into believing there was God. If someone is weak minded enough that saying God in the pledge has that large an effect on them, then I dont think taking it out will help them think independant of it.

Actually it hasnt been around for 200 years. It was added to the pledge as part of the 1950s red scare.

 

We've had a thread about this. I think most people dont care either way. I said the pledge when I was in school but it seemed really irrelevant to me. It didnt cause me to be pressured into believing there was God. If someone is weak minded enough that saying God in the pledge has that large an effect on them, then I dont think taking it out will help them think independant of it.

571766[/snapback]

 

my bad about the 200 year comment, never really read up on the pledge. i just assumed that it had always been there. my mistake.

Yeah I just recently found that out too.

I personally see no problem with it for the same reasons f_m stated, but people have the right to take up an issue with it if they really deem that's what they want to do.

Should "Under God" be in the pledge?

Should "Under God" be removed from the pledge?

 

I can't identify with either statement. But I disagree with the second more, simply because of who's behind the movement and the reasons they are.

 

I say let it be.

I don't see a problem with it. Granted, if the gov't was smart they'd release individual recordings of the thing and sell them with everyone's own personal idol in it. I don't care if it's "One Nation..." under Islam, Buddha, Mohammed, or whatever. It's irrelevant. Who's so dense they get worked up about this?

 

The only time I get worked up about it, is when the bible thumpers give the big G a bad name by being stupid. Other than that, I have no problem with it. Just don't get mad when people say things like "One Nation Under" Santa Clause or the Easter Bunny.

Non-issue for me, but I second Brian's sentiment. If I want to say under Allah and I get any problems for it then something is wrong there. I have more a problem with the pledge than the content.

why change it when a VERY small amount of people want it out. MAJORITY not MINORITY rules.

either:

1. remove under god from the pledge of allegiance

2. ban school-led pledge of allegiance in public schools

why change it when a VERY small amount of people want it out. MAJORITY not MINORITY rules.

573048[/snapback]

The consitution rules above all. And the "under god" is unconstitutional.

why change it when a VERY small amount of people want it out. MAJORITY not MINORITY rules.

573048[/snapback]

 

It's "Minority rights with Majority rule." Big difference. So, the Majority is supposed to be big enough to look out for the little guy they're discriminating against.

 

I just think there are bigger problems than "Under God."

either:

1. remove under god from the pledge of allegiance

2. ban school-led pledge of allegiance in public schools

573054[/snapback]

I guess that means we cannot allow any money in public schools either, since there are references to God on that as well.

either:

1. remove under god from the pledge of allegiance

2. ban school-led pledge of allegiance in public schools

573054[/snapback]

Why?

It doesn't bother me as long as it's not exploited for political reasons. Why did this come up again? Because of 9-11? It seems that if you disagree with the current political structure or leaders of the county, you're labeled unpatriotic.

 

Again- I personally don't mind. And I think the words "Under God" mean whatever God you want them to mean, not just Jesus or Allah or whatever you call him/her.

 

But to force students to say it, then I'm dead set against that. Or to allow bullying tactics toward those students who would rather not say it.

 

As a teacher, I make every student stand. What they say is either the pledge or they stand quietly out of respect. They can pledge their allegiance to the hott gurl next to them for all I care.

Do students get in trouble if they dont want to say it? I recall being a kid and another kid in my class got detention for refusing to say it. But he was just being a trouble maker.

 

I wonder if the situation ever arises where a kid doesnt want to say it because he himself chooses not to believe in God. Most younger kids dont think that far ahead. But Im sure the problem arises in upper classes. There seems to be an interesting dichotomy. Take a 15 year old who thinks more than your average 15 year and for whatever reason, feels God does not exist. Does the school compel him to pledge to an entity under God? Clearly the state cannot compel a person my age to speak of God. Why this kid? This is different from the much younger child who has not made the decision to not say it, but one might argue that that child cant think to that level and is being indoctrinated.

 

I dont think it gets that technical in reality though. Most kids probably dont get massivley affected by it. Ive been agnostic for a long time and for me it was more an annoyance than a pressure. I remember at my high school graduation, the class president saying something like "may God be in all of your hearts and guide you..blah blah blah" The way it affected me would be the way being dragged out to a religious event by my parents might.

Do students get in trouble if they dont want to say it? I recall being a kid and another kid in my class got detention for refusing to say it. But he was just being a trouble maker.

 

I wonder if the situation ever arises where a kid doesnt want to say it because he himself chooses not to believe in God. Most younger kids dont think that far ahead. But Im sure the problem arises in upper classes. There seems to be an interesting dichotomy. Take a 15 year old who thinks more than your average 15 year and for whatever reason, feels God does not exist. Does the school compel him to pledge to an entity under God? Clearly the state cannot compel a person my age to speak of God. Why this kid? This is different from the much younger child who has not made the decision to not say it, but one might argue that that child cant think to that level and is being indoctrinated.

 

I dont think it gets that technical in reality though. Most kids probably dont get massivley affected by it. Ive been agnostic for a long time and for me it was more an annoyance than a pressure. I remember at my high school graduation, the class president saying something like "may God be in all of your hearts and guide you..blah blah blah" The way it affected me would be the way being dragged out to a religious event by my parents might.

573828[/snapback]

 

This has come up in post 9-11 where some rebellious kid didn't want to say it, or Muslim kids had to get special exclusion, but it was at least two to three years ago when it really got going, so I can't really say any recent cases...

Do students get in trouble if they dont want to say it? I recall being a kid and another kid in my class got detention for refusing to say it. But he was just being a trouble maker.

 

I wonder if the situation ever arises where a kid doesnt want to say it because he himself chooses not to believe in God. Most younger kids dont think that far ahead. But Im sure the problem arises in upper classes. There seems to be an interesting dichotomy. Take a 15 year old who thinks more than your average 15 year and for whatever reason, feels God does not exist. Does the school compel him to pledge to an entity under God? Clearly the state cannot compel a person my age to speak of God. Why this kid? This is different from the much younger child who has not made the decision to not say it, but one might argue that that child cant think to that level and is being indoctrinated.

 

I dont think it gets that technical in reality though. Most kids probably dont get massivley affected by it. Ive been agnostic for a long time and for me it was more an annoyance than a pressure. I remember at my high school graduation, the class president saying something like "may God be in all of your hearts and guide you..blah blah blah" The way it affected me would be the way being dragged out to a religious event by my parents might.

573828[/snapback]

 

I know a girl within my senior class who doesnt want to stand when they do the pledge but she does anyway so she doesnt cause a commotion but she wont say the pledge. But shes one of those rocker rebels people so who knows why she doesnt want to pledge.

 

I know Jehova Witnesses which I've had a lot of them through out my years in school dont say the pledge. Most of the time they will stand but wont pledge.

I know Jehova Witnesses which I've had a lot of them through out my years in school dont say the pledge. Most of the time they will stand but wont pledge.

573909[/snapback]

 

yeah, i used to always stand back in the day but never pledged. at games you'll see me stand during the anthem but ill just be standing there looking around. no singing or putting the hand over the heart although most people do the same.

Schools should have the pledge recited in the morning, and under god should not be removed. The constitution is very vague on this, so saying under god is unconstitutional is ludicrous and just a way of interpreting it whichever way you'd like. Freedom of religion does not specify anything, so it isnt that clear cut whether under god is constituional or not. Of course, if a child refuses to pledge he should have the right to refuse, but that is a seperate issue, a child should be allowed to refuse pledging for w/e reason he chooses end of story,

In Florida, the requirement is you stand while the pledge, anthem, and/or moment of silence is being observed. The pledge is said every morning, but is optional for individuals to recite.

One thing to consider is that the pledge uses a very generic term: one nation under god. It does not say one nation over a christian god, or under a muslim god, or any other religion for that matter.

 

It must be considered that the founders of this great nation were men of faith. Not necessarily christian faith, but man of faith who believed in the existence of a superior being. I think that feeling is what the pledge tries to capture.

One thing to consider is that the pledge uses a very generic term: one nation under god. It does not say one nation over a christian god, or under a muslim god, or any other religion for that matter.

 

It must be considered that the founders of this great nation were men of faith. Not necessarily christian faith, but man of faith who believed in the existence of a superior being. I think that feeling is what the pledge tries to capture.

574428[/snapback]

 

 

I agree the term 'god' although often associated with the christian god, can refer to allah, jehovah, jesus, vishnu or anyone else

This country was founded under the principles of God and religion, and although you have the right to practice whatever religion you want here, that fact should be realized in advance (and yes, i'm aware "Under God" was added to the plege during the Commie scare).

 

I think people can show the common courtesy of standing during the pledge, even though they don't believe in a Christian God (just like i would show respect in a Buddhist setting even though i'm not Buddhist) but at the same time, you don't HAVE to say the pledge.