Does the phrase ‘under God’ in the Pledge of Allegiance
constitute government support of religion? I don’t think so. It is ridiculous to
think that one phrase of the Pledge of Allegiance is supporting the
collaboration of church and state. I think that people are looking way too far into
two little words that are not meant to be offensive to anybody.
I do
see where the people who believe that this phrase is offensive are coming from.
If you don’t believe in God, or believe in a different religion, you don’t want
to announce that your nation is ‘under God’. But let’s face the facts; this
country was founded on religion. If it were not for peoples’ intense belief in religion,
none of us would be where we are today. So technically this nation was actually
founded ‘under God’. It may not be the God that you believe in, but it is the
God of the founders of this country.
Honestly
I think that there are much more important things to think about rather than
the phrase ‘under God’ in the Pledge of Allegiance. We’re still in a ten year
war! Anybody who makes a big deal of this is just trying to cause trouble.
There is plenty of separation between church and state in this country. There
are constantly cases being brought to the court’s attention in the matter of ‘the
wall of separation’. This small phrase in our pledge is the least of our
problems. If you don’t like the pledge, don’t say it. Nobody is forcing you to
say the Pledge off Allegiance.
The
article “Under God in the Pledge” brought up a good point: state constitutions,
currency, and the presidential oath already contain references to God. If we
change our pledge, do we need to change all of those things too? Maybe it’s
just me, but I think changing our entire currency would be a hassle just to
make a small portion of people happy. I agree with Greg Katsas in the Huff Post
when he says, “There is a religious aspect to saying "One nation under
God," but it isn't like a prayer. When someone says the pledge, they're
not praying to God, they're pledging allegiance to the country, the flag and
the ideals of the country.” It’s true. Nobody is making an effort to offend
others my stating our pledge. People are only trying to pledge allegiance to
their country.
I agree that the ‘under God’ in the pledge of allegiance should not be a problem for the people that live in the United States to say. It is not like saying a prayer or saying that you have the same beliefs, just that you pledge allegiance to our great nation. It is true that our country was founded almost solely on religion; and since that’s the case, we can prove that our nation has been one of faith from its very beginnings. Why do people today want to change what our founding fathers established from the very beginning? If the phrase ‘under God’ offends anybody that much that they want the words removed from the pledge, they can omit that part when saying it. However, it should never be actually removed, or even discussed to be removed for that matter, from the pledge of allegiance to our country.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the phrase “under God” should not be taken out of the Pledge of Allegiance. It is two simple words, and when you look at the big picture, two words really are not that big of a deal. There is no law that requires people to say that phrase when saying the pledge, so it keeps the separation of church and state. In fact people can choose not to say the Pledge at all. Since there is no law enforcing the phrase, why do people think it is such a big deal? The Pledge is more about loyalty to our country. It promises liberty and freedom. It is not making a big deal about the teeny tiny phrase “under God.”
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with the points made in this blog and in the comments. It seems ridiculous to me that people want to take out the phrase “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance. I understand both sides of it, however I don’t think that those two words are going to make a child feel oppressed or offended when reciting the Pledge in classrooms. I think the phrase “under God” can mean different things for different people, depending on where they stand obviously. Some people find the phrase very powerful and others probably could care less about it. Overall, I think it should remain in the Pledge of Allegiance and if people have a problem with it, they should just not say it.
ReplyDeleteI really like the point made about people looking for an argument when they bring this topic up. Being nitpick to the point of something like this is completely unnecessary, and like you said when you mentioned us still being in the middle of a 10 year war, there are many more important things that we can and should be focusing on. Hopefully people are smart enough to realize what you said in regards to our Founding Fathers founding this country out of religious intent. As you made clear, if it weren't for the God of the ones who set out to establish the United States as we know it, there wouldn't be the topic of a few words in the national anthem to get bent out of shape about. At the end of the day, I feel that everybody has to view this topic in the context in which it was written, and stop trying to bring today's issues into a thing of the past.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, I am whole heartedly for the Pledge of Allegiance we have now. Secondly, some of the previous things I've read from this blog makes me think that people think the pledge has been around unedited since the 1700s. That is not true. It was made in 1892, adopted by congress in 1942, and last edited in 1954. Lastly, I think the majority of people say it wrong. It is "one nation under God" not "one nation, (pause) under God." At this point, I say the people who don’t want to say "under God" don’t have to, but taking it away almost seems like a slap in the face to my, and many other religions.
ReplyDelete