Various blogs I read have been discussing the upcoming supreme court case. The opinions run quite a wide spectrum, so I feel sort of like joining in.
Chuq has argued that this is being done by a small group of aethists that is try to assert their rights over others by interpretting the constitution in an absolutist manner. I disagree. I am culturally jewish, though I do not believe in god, so I suppose that make me a techincal aethist. I don't know that I ever believed in god, I know I certainly didn't by the end of elementary school. My thoughts really come down to two points:
First, the phrase "under god" structurally implies a belief in a monotheistic entity, which could be construed as offensive to both aetheists and polytheists. Therefore I can see the argument against it, but I would not disagree with a phrase along the lines of "under that which each of us holds sacred" or some other less specific statement. In other words, the current phrasing is absolute, which makes the absoluist argument seam a bit absurd.
The other, more salient point is that when the pledge was written it did not contain the phrase "under god," despite the fact that it was written by a Presbyterian minister (Francis Bellamy). The words were added in 1954 after a campaign spearheaded by the Knights of Columbus. In other words, there is a very specific, absolutely christian intent, that runs contrary to its original form. I wonder if the same groups who are so upset now argued against the change then, seeing as the absolutist argument was equally valid then...
Posted by louis at October 19, 2003 10:19 PM | TrackBackI believe that the pledge should take out "under God" not only does it force people to believe in religions that they do not but not everyone believes in God. I know I dont, and if i do stand to recite the pledge I do not want to say something that I do not believe in, and to just change it on my own by leaving that part out is rediculous. If America is truly free then I think we should just not have the pledge of allegiance at all. At my school kids can get up to 7 hours of detention just for not standing for the pledge.
Posted by: Cat at March 10, 2005 06:04 PMThe main question is what the founding fathers meant when they made the First Amendment and what Thomas Jefferson meant when he stated "a wall of separation of church and state." Seeing how they literally translate to the federal government not having a say in relegious issues at all, I think the words "under God" should be omitted. Though, I do believe in the Christian faiith, I can practice it myself without wanting to push it upon people that don't believe. I do wish everyone believed in God, seeing how I believe it's the best for everyone and those who don't are going to Hell according to the Bible, but they don't. Since we have freedom of religion in America, I think everyone should respect that. To people that want to keep "under God" in our pledge; Would you want to go to say, China, and recite something they made with "under Buddah", or "In Buddah we trust"? I know I wouldn't want that pushed on me. I think we need to respect that we Americans have freedom, one important one being, freedom of religion.
Posted by: who cares? at July 21, 2004 09:22 PM15% of childrem in schools are being asked to affirm a belief that is different then one taught at home. These are the atheists. What about the other 85% that do believe in god? By taking the words "under god" out of the pledge, you are taking away the rights of freedom of religeon to the 85% of kids rather then the 15%. If you do not beleive in god, then you don't have to say the pledge.
Posted by: at May 28, 2004 09:22 AM I think under god and in god we trust make this
country what it is today!
I think under god and in god we trust make this
country what it is today!
I don't think it would matter if the pledge was taken out of the pledge becuase it wasn't in the original version. I don't think has any great purposed. The message of the pledge will not be reduced if the phrase "Under God" was removed
Posted by: at April 30, 2004 06:13 AMI strongly believe that God is a huge contribution to what we have to pledge to. Or what i have to pledge to. But that does not mean that everyone else is wrong. yeah i have the right to say it and other people have the right not to say it. If we took it out then we would have to change the quarter and the President would have to watch what he says.. Making sure to not say "God Bless America." But there will always be an arguement to almost everything.
Posted by: courtney at March 28, 2004 11:32 PMif you dont believe in god then dont say it in the pledge. heck if you dont like the pledge dont say that either. nothing is going to please everyone so why cant people just get a life and not say it if they dont like it.
Posted by: someone at March 14, 2004 06:52 PMthe fact is this country was founded on christian beliefs although we also have the right to worship what ever we want the fact of seperating church and state simply ment that we would not have a church of america like the church of england if you do not want to pledge allegiance to this country and you do not want your children to pledge allegiance to this country then that is your right as an American citizen but you may want to take a hard look at where it was that your family came from before they got to the U.S.A. and you were born into freedom where you have the right to make these dicisions for you and your children because Im sure that if you had to live in one of those other countrys for just one year you will choose to live here and maybe you would be a little more willing to say the pledge of allegiance because maybe you would understand the meaning behind it and you would have more pride in this country AS YOU SHOULD!!!!!!!
Posted by: betsy at February 8, 2004 10:05 AMI think it should be taken out of the pledge. the bill of rights says we have freedom of religion. that is violating one of our rights.
Posted by: Katlyn at February 7, 2004 09:17 AMI think it should be taken out of the pledge. the bill of rights says we have freedom of religion. that is violating one of our rights.
Posted by: Katlyn at February 7, 2004 09:17 AMI think they should leave it in. If they do take it out than something is wrong with this country. Also if they do take it out, what about the phrase God used everywhere else in America? Will they take that out too? Are they going to take it out when a new president is sworn it? It's in the Declaration of Indepenece, the courts when put under oath, the American currency, our songs, the president always says "God bless America". Congress has no right to do this. It's called the First Amendment. And when people say it's not seperating church and state, then the schools can't have Christmas trees or Christmas decorations, that's religous too. It's way too much trouble. Whoever started this had way too much time on their hands. Get a Life!
Posted by: Richelle at January 13, 2004 07:20 PMI think they should leave it in. If they do take it out than something is wrong with this country. Also if they do take it out, what about the phrase God used everywhere else in America? Will they take that out too? Are they going to take it out when a new president is sworn it? It's in the Declaration of Indepenece, the courts when put under oath, the American currency, our songs, the president always says "God bless America". Congress has no right to do this. It's called the First Amendment. And when people say it's not seperating church and state, then the schools can't have Christmas trees or Christmas decorations, that's religous too. It's way too much trouble. Whoever started this had way too much time on their hands. Get a Life!
Posted by: Richelle at January 13, 2004 07:18 PMi think the pledge should have the under god part removed i think that the pledge should not have under god in it
Posted by: anonymos at December 9, 2003 09:24 AMI think the question is whether "under god" in the pledge constitutes prayer-like speach or if it's just patriotic adumbration like "in god we trust" on the quarter. Emphisis on dumb. My personal opinion is, get rid of it! It's a reminder of how fucked up the country was in the 50s.
Posted by: Geoff at October 20, 2003 08:22 AMI think the question is whether "under god" in the pledge constitutes prayer-like speach or if it's just patrotic adumbration like "in god we trust" on the quarter. Emphisis on dumb. My personal opinion is, get rid of it! It's a reminder of how fucked up the country was in the 50s.
Posted by: Geoff at October 20, 2003 08:20 AMWhen I was a kid I lived one year in NJ. In my honnor the Allegiance pledge was not spoken instead they sang "Frere Jacques". It did not seem to bother anybody. When I started pledging I always skepts the under god part.
Posted by: Ludovic Hirlimann at October 20, 2003 04:31 AM