Tuesday, February 9, 2010


There has been much debate about the substance of the Pledge of Alliegiance. The phrase "under God" has been challenged at the state and federal levels due to its religious connotations and possible violation of the separation of church and state. Do you think that our pledge violates the Constitutions' First Amendment that states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.."?
Moreover, do you think that students in public schools should be required to hear the pledge if it violates their beliefs? Should the pledge be changed or should it stay as it is?
"But even in times of peace, Americans have grown accustomed to invoking God?s name in everything from the motto on their currency ("In God we trust") to the saying at the start of every Supreme Court session ("God save the United States and this honorable Court"). Yet while the word God has become omnipresent in the nation?s ceremonial language, it should be noted that when the Founding Fathers were crafting the Constitution, the blueprint for a bold new nation, they left it out. " Nadya Labi

59 comments:

Pokachi said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
j.epstein said...

I think that everyone should have their own opinion whether to say "under God". If we were to officially remove it that would just be straying from historical customs, and with just one in would lead to many more. I know many kids that leave out the "under God" part so it should be up to each individual whether to say it. The separation from church and state doesn't play a big role in the arguments because it isn't at all a law you have to say the pledge as it is written. All in all I think that no changes should be made and people should be able to choose whether to say "under God."

g.jeong said...

The pledge of allegiance is not violating the First Amendment because it is not a law. For example, students at Fairview can choose not to rise for the pledges that occur every morning. It is not a strict law that people have to follow. "Under God" should not be removed from the pledge because America was found under the Christians. This phrase has been in the pledge for over 50 years, why would we suddenly change it for no particular reason?

There are also many other problems that would come up after rewriting the pledge. There might be people who would challenge the phrase "In God we trust" on the motto on the American currency. Dose that mean the we are going to get rid of our money? How is that going to help our economy? It is unnecessary to rewrite the pledge of allegiance because of an argument about something that does not even violate the Amendment.

rwu said...

I think that that phrase "under God" in the Pledge should be left out if the person believes it to be. I do not think that the Pledge of Allegiance violates the First Amendment because the person has a choice to say or not say the Pledge. But I do think that we should not completely cut that line because the Founding Fathers have declared it to be that way, and if one thing is cut, where are the boundaries for the other historical issues nowadays? And agree that if the students believe it to be offending in anyway, they should be able to leave the classroom. And also, why should it be such a huge federal issue if there is a definite difference between church and state? The government should leave this decision to the mind's of the citizens themselves for it is their choice to agree with this statement or not.

p.lindgren said...

The pledge of allegiance is not a law that all citizens of America must obey, and therefore it does not violate the 1st amendment. Also, instead of having to officially change the pledge, those who do not agree with the "under god" part can simply choose to omit it from the plege.

There are many other bigger issues that our country needs to deal with and it would be very time consuming and challenging if we had to change the pledge. This would also lead to other even bigger problems such as changing out country's currency that says "In God We Trust." The pledge and our currency are a part of our country and its history and we do not need to create a big deal out of something that can simply be ignored. Overall, I do not think that we need to make a change to the Pledge or our money, but instead give the citizens of America the freedom and decision to choose whether to ignore the "God" part or not.

vchen said...

I believe that the pledge is fine the way it is. Just like in Fairview, no one is forced to say the pledge if they don't want to, in fact, very few people in my first period class do say it. The main religion in America when it was first founded as a country was Christian, and most people in America still are Christian. Even though there are several more religions now in 2010, we should not dispute the fact that Christianity is the basis of all the laws and regulations that make up America today.

Also, several religions in the world have some sort of "God" in them, so saying "under God" doesn't necessarily have to refer to a specific God. Worst case scenario, a person can always change the "under God" part into whatever they believe in. Personally, I don't think it's a very big deal, one can always just zone out and not say the pledge while others recite it. I do not think that the Pledge of Allegiance violates the 1st amendment.

~Vivian Chen

H.Gurung said...

I believe that the 'under God' part of the pledge of allegiance shouldn't be omitted. It is true that the first amendment does state that 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..'. However, I don't think that reciting the phrase 'under God' is a law respecting the establishment of religion.

Like the prompt states, mentioning God in daily life is just an act of repetition and tradition rather than true worship of a religion. I'm not Christian and I don't mind the phrase at all, it is just something people have been doing for a rather long time, and so it has become natural to say it. Also, if one is truly offended by the phrase, then they shouldn't say it. Nobody is forcing them to, and that would a be a violation of the first amendment.

Daniel Shang said...

I believe that the pledge of allegiance does not violate the first amendment and it should not be changed to remove the “under God” phrase. The “under God” phrase was added in 1954 to distinguish our pledge from Communist nations because originally, the “United States of America” was the only distinguishing factor, and without it, the pledge could be to any republic. Also, reciting the pledge is not a law, it is a decision. When the pledge is recited every morning at school, not everybody gets up, and if somebody wants to say the pledge, but the “under God” phrase violates their religious beliefs, they can omit it. In addition, if we change the pledge to remove the “under God” phrase, then should we change our currency because it has the phrase “In God We Trust”? So changing the pledge could pose major obstacles with our money as well. Moreover, even if the “under God” phrase violates a student’s religious beliefs, they should at least listen to and respect it because it is our pledge of allegiance to our country. In conclusion, the “under God” phrase in the pledge doesn’t violate the first amendment and it definitely should not be removed.

JWagers said...

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion... " The first amendment to the constitution is stated very clearly. Although the "Under God" portion of the pledge of allegiance is not law, It is implied that it was not wanted that religion interfere with government. The pledge of allegiance is just one small thing, but if we allow this then when does it stop? Religion should be separate from government, or we risk interferences in law making, or even people feeling unwelcome.

While religion is not supposed to interfere, these days it happens everyday. I believe it is time that this should come to an end. People of all religions are supposed to be welcome in our country, and they should not feel unwelcome in any way, whether it be discrimination or simply a couple of words that we might say everyday. I think that the "Under God" portion of the pledge of allegiance should be permanently removed, and this will begin the real separation of church and state.

t.pfromer said...

I believe that saying "Under God" should be up to the child to say based upon his/her family's belief. I don't think the the 1st admendment is being violated because no one (that I at least know) is being forced to say "under God" much less to recite the pledge. Many of the kids I know choose not to say it at all, and the teacher is fine with that and lets it be.

I also do not believe that the argument 'seperation from church and state' could be argued here becasue there are many religions that have a gof. The pledge just staes 'under god'. It does not specify which god, therefore, it could imply to mostly everyone who has a religion. (And if someone is atheist, they can choose to omitt saying it.)

Taylor Pfromer

kelly said...

I believe that students in schools should not be made to say the Pledge of Alliance in school. If you think about it - adults are not required to say it in public, therefore, this should be one right that applies to all people, of every age.

The first amendment, that Congress should make no law that violates ANY religion of ANY people in America, should apply to all Americans; it's almost just common sense. I believe that "one nation, under God" can violate a person's religious beliefs if that person does not believe in God or believes in many gods even. It really depends on the way you look at it. Different people have different views on the subject and therefore, everybody should have the freedom of expression, even children. That is one of an American citizens' right.

m.turner said...

I think that everyone should be able to decide if they want to say the pledge in school. I also think that it should be said in school for those who want to say it .It should be up to those who are saying the pledge if they would like to include the "under God" part. The Pledge of Allegiance, I do not think goes against the first amendment because its what we have been saying for years. Although it is up to the person who is saying the pledge. I think that kids should hear the pledge because they are in the U.S. and they don't have to day it if they do not want to. Overall the pladge should stay just the way it is because there is nothing wrong with it and if you don't want to say "under God" then you do not have to.

ewinegardner said...

Nobody is required to stand change their beliefs because of the pledge of allegiance so why does it matter. In my class when the pledge of allegiance is happening people don't even pay attention most of the time and just carry on their discussions. I don't think that the the phrase "under God" should be deleted from the pledge because if it really affects someones beliefs then they have the right to leave the classroom for that part of the pledge.

CMorley said...

I'm of the opinion that people should be able to omit the phrase "under God" should they choose. I do not agree with j.epstein and g.jeong in that removing "under God" would violate no incredibly old, written at the start of the country-type traditions. That phrase was added in 1954, right during the middle of the Cold War. It was added to differentiate us from "those Godless commies," so as to give more people more reasons to hate them. It is no longstanding tradition, and the Pledge has been altered four times since its writing in 1892, so re-writing it would not be anything new, and changing it would be nowhere near as crazy removing "In God we trust" from all of our currency. That would be insane, because that really is a fundamental part of our country.

But regardless of what people say, I do not really care weather or not we remove that phrase from the Pledge, because it does not violate the 1st Amendment, as it is not a law, and establishes no particular religion. Say what you want, the 1st Amendment lets you.

-Christopher Morley

k.rosmarin said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
k.rosmarin said...

I believe the phrase "to each their own" applies to this situation. I don't think that we should force people to say "under God," but others who are comfortable saying that and want to, may say that phrase. I don't think that this phrase should be a big deal. Say it if you want, don't say it if you don't want to. It's as simple as that. And, in many cases, people don't even listen to the pledge. They carry on with their lives. But, if the phrase "under God" is against religion or in some way offensive, those people should either just not say it or be able to leave the room for that part.

Personally, I really do not care all that much, if we leave in or take out that phrase in the pledge. But, people just need to have the option of saying it or not. I do not think that this violates the 1st amendment, because nobody is really forcing a person to say that part of the pledge.

rdivine said...

I believe that the Pledge of Allegiance technically is violating the 1st Amendment but also an amendment is not a law. In schools, when they play the Pledge of Allegiance, i think that the kids should be able to choose whether or not they say "under god" or not depending on their personal beliefs.

If they decided to change the Pledge of Allegiance and leave out anything to do with religion there would not be this controversy over this small issue. I simply believe that if a person does not wish to say "under god" or the pledge at all they should not have to.

j.mcgarity said...

I think that this is something that should be optional, though it is what this country is founded on, ther are many different "gods" of which to speak. i believe this has personal value more than anything, and should be optional. i do not agree with the decision to let a student choose whether or not to say the pledge of allegiance. at the very least, they should stand for it, as a sign of respect for the country they live in. saying it is a confirmation of your loyalty to the united states. this is something that we should be reminded of, of how lucky we are, and that we need to remember that we are or should be a functional part of the nation. all in all, this is something that should be optional and should not even become a major problem like it has become. this is a small moral debate, not something that we should be fighting for, or being worried about "in god we trust" on our currrency.

Cmocek said...

I think when it comes to this subject the decision could go either way. On one hand I believe it does violate the first amendment if the people were forced to say "under god", but to just have to listen to people saying it does not violate the amendment. I do not think it matters if they are required to listen to it, but by under no means should they be forced to sing it.

I also believe that the pledge should stay as it is. It is a tradition from the beginning and I think changing it would be wrong, although I think that making other slightly different versions that people in other religions could say is a good idea, or they could just not say the under god part of it. It seems to me like people are making a far bigger deal of this than they should be. There are many easy solutions for this problem and bigger problems at hand.

SReaves said...

When it comes to talking about the pledge of allegiance I am really not on either of the sides; whether it is saying we should change the plegde, or let people who do not believe in god just not say/hear "under god". On one side, I believe that it is unfair for those who do not want to hear/say the pledge. My reason for this is just because they do not want to hear/say the "under god", does not mean that they cannot say the whole pledge. I am sure that even though people might not believe in god, that they are still proud of their country.
On the other hand, I feel as though it would be a large hassle for the country and government to change what we have on our currency, ("In God We Trust", as well as changing the pledge. I think one solution that might be possible, would be people that do not want to hear/say the pledge could leave the room or not stand up for it.
In the end, I think that we should not change the pledge because it is a lot of work, as well as just let Americans have their own freedom with saying the pledge of allegiance. Therefore, I think since people that do not believe in god do not have to say the pledge, this does not violate the first admendment.

-Shelby Reaves

b.artinger said...

I don't think that the pledge of allegiance violates the 1st amendment because the government isn't requiring anybody to say it. The 1st amendment specifically says that "congress shall make no LAW..." If the pledge of allegiance was a law I was say that yes it violates the 1st amendment, but since it's not, I don't think it does.

On the other hand, I don't believe that teachers should make students say the pledge of allegiance. My science teacher makes the whole class stand and I don't really think he should make us do that. I, for one, do not believe in god, so saying the words "under god" feels like i'm going against my belief. In the morning when the pledge comes on, I never stand. This does not mean that I have no pride and respect for my country, it just means I don't believe in what it is saying. I believe that our country should be united under peace, not under god.

kchenL said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
kchenL said...

I think that no one should be forced to do the Pledge. I think that if a person does not want to say the pledge, they should be forced to say it. Also it is not violating the first amendment because the Pledge is not a law. I don't think there should be changes in the pledge because a person is not required to say it and no one should be forced to say it.
I also think that our currency would also potentionally bring up problems if we are talking about the "under God" part of the pledge.
I agree with Gookhyun(i hope i spelled that right) and that if we were to change the pledge, does that mean we would have to change our currency? i do think that the pledge or the currency should have to be changed, i think that people should not have to say the pledge if they don't want to.
Kevin Chen

Aflynn said...

I beleive the phrase "Under God" in the nations Pledge of Allegience should be taken out. Even though no one is forced to say it, It represents the United States. It is the national "commitment" for all American citizens; and not all amerian citizens beleive in God.
If you think about what the Pledge says, it really is not necessary at all for there to be "Under God" or anything having to do with religion included in it. Infact, it could easily be taken out and nothing else would have to be changed! Typically, it would have the exact same message, for all American citizens.

E. Pancost said...

Well this country was founded by men with strong Christian beleifs. They created this country and asked god for his blessing on their country. Removing "God" from all government mottos and sayings our country would hit rock bottom. People would be in outrage.
I do believe people should say it, but if they don't well oh well i guess i love my country more. Go Patriotism!!!!

Mdoliner said...

Between 1924 and 1954, the Pledge of Allegiance was worded:

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands; one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

In 1954, during the McCarthy era and communism scare, Congress passed a bill, which was signed into law, to add the words "under God." During this time America was involved in the Cold War and communism. Adding the phrase gave people hope that America was "Free and Powerful" just like God. If it does violate the 1st amendment it will not get changed anytime soon.
Students in public schools have the same rights as every American citizen. They have the freedom of religion. If a student does not believe in "God" then they should not have to say the pledge. I do believe however, that as Americans it is important globally and locally to be proud of our country.

dsherwood said...

The phrase "One nation, under God" in our pledge of allegiance does not violate the 1st amendment because no one is forced to say it and therefore it should not be removed from the pledge. I can understand how there are certain connotations of the word "God" that may not fit into all religions. However, each person can decide what this phrase means to them, and more importantly they can choose whether or not to say it. Additionally, like mentioned in the question, "God" is repeated on our currency and in juries. It is a part of our nation and a part of our pledge, and should not be taken away. Lastly, "Under God" doesn't have to relate to only the Catholic religions, it could be interpreted as a figure of power in many other religions.

Overall, the Pledge of Allegiance is an important part of our history, and students should be able to recite it, but if they don't want to, they should not be forced to.

c.russ said...

I believe that it is a personal choice whether or not to say the “under God” portion of the Pledge of Allegiance. I do not believe that having these two words in the Pledge violates the Constitution’s First Amendment because there is no law stating that you must say the Pledge, and more importantly, a belief in God. Thus, there is no violation of the distinction between church and state.

Also, the Pledge is only one of the many spots that we find the word “God” contained in something that has to do with the government. Another example would be our currency, where it states “In God We Trust.” So if we decide that those two words in the pledge are such a big deal, then will those same people who wanted a change in the Pledge also want to change our currency? I do not believe that it is unconstitutional to have “under God” as part of our Pledge of Allegiance.

sparker said...

I do not think the phrase "under god" needs to be left out of the pledge of allegiance. I do not think that people who have a problem with it should have to say it, but hearing it should be okay. If someone has such a problem with the pledge, then they should be able to leave the room while it is being said.
No school should be able to make standing for the pledge, or saying it mandatory, and as long as it isn't, this should not infringe upon the establishment of religion clause.

k.headrick said...

The Pledge of Allegiance has been around a long time and has become a commonly accepted practice in our society. The United States has freedom of religion, and likewise the citizens of the US are aware that many people have beliefs differing from their own. It is simply the only way in a country with freedom of religion; different ideas are going to cross paths. The pledge said in schools does not require one to recite it and, if a person becomes offended by it, they can simply leave the room, it does not however violate the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” This amendment implies the use of laws to favor or hinder a group of people based upon their religion, but the pledge of allegiance does no such thing. It simply says the words 'under God' and does not act as a law.
I believe to change the Pledge of Allegiance would be to change an important tradition in our nation's history. If the pledge is changed where would it stop? It could become illegal to swear in on a witness stand, or into Congress on the Bible, because it would violate the First Amendment. I believe the Pledge of Allegiance should not be changed because how religiously free could our country be if one cannot pledge their loyalty to it using the name of their God?
By Kira Headrick

pdiller said...

I believe that government and religion are two different things which should be kept separately. When put together, I believe they will always create conflict. These two things should remain separate because America stands for freedom. The phrase “under God” signifies that everyone must believe in God which is contrary to what America stands for. People can choose what religion fits their beliefs best.

I believe that the phrase “under God” in our Pledge of Allegiance violates the constitution’s first amendment which states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." The Pledge of Allegiance is a pledge that unites all Americans. The phrase, “under God” is leaving out the people who don’t believe in God which is contrary to our constitution. I believe the phrase “under God” should be omitted from the Pledge of Allegiance.

tfratkin said...

I think that the Pledge of Allegiance does not violate our First Amendment, for the following reasons. First off, the phrase "under god" does indeed propose that god does exist and has religious belief behind it, but if a person does not believe in god, they can simply just not say the pledge or say the pledge without that phrase if they do not believe in it. Secondly, there is no law currently in the United States of America that states that you must say the Pledge of Allegiance. So as long as no law states this, this phrase does not violate the First Amendment.

I personally do not stand up for the Pledge. Why you ask? Because of not the phrase "under god", but the phrase "liberty and justice for all". In America's past and present there has never been liberty and justice for all. Blacks today are still being discriminated against cause of the color of their skin, and in court are being served the Death Penalty more, just because of the color of their skin. This is not what I consider justice. Another example. Homosexuals. They are having their right of marriage denied, just because of their sexual orientation. Certainly not justice nor liberty for them.

In conclusion, I believe that the pledge does not violate the First Amendment, because people have the choice whether to say the pledge or not, and I personally choose not to, because I believe that the phrase "liberty and justice for all" is not true.
Tom Fratkin

Andy Wang said...

People choose whether they want to say 'under god' when saying the pledge of allegiance.It isn't like someone will force you to say 'under god'. On a lighter note, you don't even have to say the pledge. Yes, sometimes in my first period, I might just be the only one to stand up and say the pledge just as joke to others, but now in High School, no one says the pledge.
Anyways, back on topic: The Pledge of Allegiance had existed for nearly 100 years now. The 'under god' part has existed for 50 years now and remains as a prominent catchphrase in the pledge. People have the right to not say 'Under god', it is their decision, which is freedom of speech or rights.
If the pledge does change, it is like moving Washington DC to California, because the change represents an erased history.
Kids have the right to censor the 'under god' part. You have the freedom to censor out the 'under god' part. It isn't a felony or anything, because it is freedom of speech.
Also, isn't 80% of the American population religious? The pledge of allegiance has history into it, and how religion played a role in the U.S history.


P.S One more day till the olympics!!!!!!

lhill said...

I agree with some of the above comments. I am ambivalent on this issue. I do not feel that it is morally wrong to include the phrase "under god" in the pledge of allegiance. However I do feel it limits the freedoms of the people who say it. I do not feel like it should be a very prominent issue. Many religions worship a higher being similar to God. Also the words were created based on Christian founding fathers. It is a connection back to our roots. It also is not a binding pledge so it is not a huge issue whether this part is kept or not.

However, these words could be offensive to some people. It could give the wrong message saying that to be a part of the United States, one would have to be Christian.

Overall this should be a personal choice whether one decides to say "under God" or not. It should not be forced to be omitted or not. This issue should be dissolved. It does not help the nation develop further. The nation should be focusing on important issues. This issue is not very important in the well-being of our nation.

omcmahon said...

I don’t agree with the argument that the pledge of allegiance is violating the 1st amendment because “Under God…” has been in it for over fifty years. Not bothering anyone before, so I believe it shouldn’t bother people now. It is a personal choice whether or not you as an individual say it or not. Like how g.jeong stated, in Fairview we all have a choice to stand and say the pledge or not and if the person is absolutely against it, they may leave the room. I do not think it wouldn’t be very rash or helpful at all to take out this phrase. This decision should not be this big of a federal issue, I mean if people are offended by “Under God…” they don’t have to support it. No one is making them say it or believe in it. I don’t think that the argument that this goes against separating the church from the state, simply because our Founding Fathers made this a long time ago, not to purposefully offend people. Also, Who says that “God” isn’t for a different religion besides catholic? So I say that this phrase stays in the Pledge of Allegiance.

KHunt said...

Though the First Amendment of the Constitution does say that government and religion should be separate, when has that ever really been the case? People are against abortion and gay marriage for religious reasons, not because these issues actually affect the government. Though I definitely don't believe that people who don't believe in God, or the one referred to in the Constitution anyway, should have to say "Under God" when reciting the pledge of allegiance, I also don't think that it should be such a big deal. To some extent, the pledge of allegiance is tradition, and most people say it numbly anyway. I respect that people who actually think about what they're saying don't wish to say "Under God", but I also think that if you feel that strongly you can either not say those two words or not say the pledge. It is a free country after all so you are fully entitled to do that.
There are a lot of little details that mention religion in everyday life that have just become normal, and that is just part of America. When you say the pledge of allegiance you are merely pledging to one united nation, and I believe that the "Under God" part is only reiterating that. It is more about unity and having some "good" force protecting you than actually believing in a God. No country is going to be perfectly religion free, but the US comes as close to it as possible, and I think people need to recognize and appreciate that and stop complaining. Even if that sounds insensitive.

s.harvey said...

The first amendment to the constitution clearly states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion... " . Even though "Under God" of the pledge is not law, it is implied that that government and church are not separated. This portion of the pledge is just one small thing, but if this goes on where will it end? If religion is not separated from government our nation could have problems with creating law and make people feel unaccepted.

The United States of America is supposed to welcome people of all religions into our country. Nobody should feel unwanted or unwelcome here, no matter what it is, a couple of words that we might say everyday might offend someone. I believe that saying "Under God" in the pledge of allegiance should be removed permanently, this beginning the true separation of church and state.

ikalra said...

I think that with this issue it really depends on how you take the pledge of allegiance. I mean it really depends on whether you say it as an oath like statement or if you're saying it as more a tradition. It also doesn't really specify any deity it just says "one nation under god, indivisible with liberty and justice for all" and so its not really tied to one god. Also if the person is against saying that part then they can always skip over it, because its not like really taking an oath. Also nobody is making you really stand to say the pledge its more of a tradition that many kids were just raised standing to say it, even if you really just kind of stood up and mumbled.
Another thing is I don't believe it violates the first amendment because you aren't forced to stand for it which really gives you the freedom to choose or not. The under god bit is also just really saying that we're watched over and protected by god(s) or a higher power for agnostic people, which in no way goes against the first amendment. So I think that by taking the "under god" bit out of the pledge will bother people just as much as keeping it in, so it shouldn't be effected by any of this. So in conclusion I believe that it does not violate the first amendment and that since the people have the right to say it or not and to say the whole thing or not (because you could just choose not to say that part) it is really depending on how you want to say it, and that its over all meaning is that we are one nation together and we will always stand together.

Stuart Turner said...

I do not believe the "under god" portion of the pledge of allegence should be cut out in any way. I dont think this violates the 1st ammendment at all because it is not a law requiring that you recite the pledge every morning. I believe that if people do not believe in a god or the pledge of allegence they should simply just not say the pledge or at least the part that they disagree with.

taust said...

i believe that the words "under god" are not offenseive. in most religions there is a central being that is either the single god, or the king or queen of the gods, and whoever is saying the pledge, can know that when they say "under god" they are talking about their own personal god. also, i think that "god" also serves as a unifying word. and at this time, as well as many others in our country's history, we need to come together and be unified.

i do think however, that if a student feels uncomfortable about saying or hearing the pledge, they should not be required to stay in the room. but if it becomes a situation where everyone is leaving and just haning out in the halways, then they should stay in the rooms.

j.vanzeghbroeck said...

I don't think that it is a big deal that "under god" is in the pledge. People aren't forced to say it if they don't want to. The amendment separation of church and state doesn't play a major role in this situation because it is not affecting a law which is what the amendment was supposed to prevent.
Most people do not even say the pledge. This shows that most people do not really care about the matter and a change would take a lot of effort for not a very large issue. It is also one word which is very minor. If the whole pledge was about god then it would be a different story, but it is not so i don't think its a very big deal.

k.chend said...

I don’t think that it is a big deal if the ‘under god’ is omitted in the pledge of allegiance. The pledge of allegiance does not violate the 1st amendment because it does not interfere with religion. Those who do not want to say the phrase or the pledge may simply not say it and so there is no need to change the pledge of allegiance.

Also, like many people said, omitting ‘under god’ would prompt us to question other phrases involving God. I don’t believe that this affects many people and there are much more important things to worry about in the world.

Katt Bragg said...

Frankly, I don't think it matters. People aren't required to say it, and if you take offense at just HEARING a reference to someone else's religion, then you've got a problem. Also, I disagree with g.jeong's reasoning. He says that america was founded under the christians. This is not true because, while the founders were christian, they specifically founded the united staes to have NOTHING TO DO AT ALL with religion. Also, he claims that we have no particular reason to change it. This is no at all true, because many people find it offensive and think that it violates, if not the first amendment, then the spirit with which our country was founded (these reasons were stated in the prompt).
Also, just getting rid of the word "god" from our government by no means signifies that we would abolish money. The dollar bills would just be reprinted with the phrase omitted. Currency design changes a lot; this would not, in any sense, change the way our economy works or make it worse. Finally, just because something does not violate an amendment does not mean that it should not be changed. The constitution says nothing about gay marriage or abortion, and these issues are hugely controversial and very important. Anyway, I don't really care at all whether it is changed or not. No one is forced to say it, and while it does seem really old-fashioned, it doesn't really have an impact on our lives. So I guess, even though I disagree with g.jeong on some of his reasons, overall I'm kind of a Switzerland on this issue. Except for the minaret thing.

P.S. I really don't like it when people use the phrase "when will it stop?!" as an argument. That is just ridiculous and a poor cop-out to avoid thinking of a real argument. Copy and paste this into your browser bar to see what I mean. http://www.xkcd.com/605/

Unknown said...

I don't think that the "Under God" Part of the pledge is violating the first amendment. We aren't forced to say the pledge, at least I'm not. That way, if a student doesn't like it, they can just not say the pledge or leave the room.

Another thing is America was founded under Christianity. I think, even though i'm not religious, that it would be wrong to remove something from the pledge that was so important to our past. Also, someone below me brought up a good point. If we change "under god" are we going to have to change "in god we trust" too?

gkerber said...

I believe that forcing students to say the Pledge of Allegiance in school doesn’t violate the First Amendment; it is an example of coercion. When teachers tell students that they should stand up as a honor to their country, some students feel that they have to stand up to be able to pass the class. There is a difference between traditional ways people have honored their country, and the way teenagers wish to now days. Teenagers honor their country, even if all they do is proudly claim that they are American. Saying a pledge to the Flag, is a traditional honor, but in today’s modern world, seems a bit old school.
I don’t think that the pledge violates anyone’s beliefs, no matter what religion they declare. Even if someone was an Atheist, they could still say “under God” with pride, because the word God doesn’t have to imply a religious figure. God could be someone they look up to, or even something that they believe in. Some Atheists don’t believe of some power that is greater, as in a God, so they can take the phrase to mean, ‘one Nation, doing the best it can’. When something is ‘under God’, it can mean perfect, or wonderful, and so someone could translate the phrase to mean that the USA is only meant to be a country striving to be the best it can be. Even though being forced to say the Pledge of Allegiance in school is wrong, since schools shouldn’t force students to do anything they don’t want to do, the Pledge does not violate a citizen’s Constitutional Rights.

By: Grace-e Kerber

lpeck said...

I believe that children that do not believe in god should not be required to say the pleg. They should have the option to not say "Under God" or stand quietly and respectfuly durring the pleg. People should not be required to say the phrase "under God" no matter what their belifs are, although i dont think that it sould be permanatly removed from the pleg. That is what our founding fathers came up with.

t.meyers said...

I think that it is up to the individual whether to or not to say the "under god" section of the Pledge of Alliegence. I think that it in some ways violates the First Amendment but in other ways it doesn't. It does violate it because it is making a distinguishment between religions and everyone may believe in what they want. However, "God" could be any god in any religion.
I don't think it should be removed from the pledge but I do think that people should be able to choose whether to say it or not. I also think that if it bugs a person that much that they can't listen to it, they should be allowed to leave.

m.lindgren said...

Change is hard, and that is why I think it is worthwhile for the Pledge of Allegiance to remain the same. Numerous sections and trademarks of American history will become distorted if this change is followed through, impacting millions of lives directly.

A solution to this issue if someone has a problem saying "Under God," is just to skip it, or not recite the words at all. Taking an initiative can be effective in various circumstances and I feel as if "God" will stay a constant and not be subject to reform because of its "omnipresent" role in our culture.

k.mcgill said...

In my opinion everyone should have a choice to say the pledge. If its their religion then they must have a say in whats right or wrong with something they are doign and should have an option wether to say it or not. I definitely do not thinkt hat we should change the whole pledge for this! I mean this has been around for such a long time, why would we change it? Just let the people decide whats best for their religion and what their beliefs are.

a.hickey said...

Students should have the choice whether or not to hear the pledge and whether or not to say it. The constitution says that by law the government is not allowed to make people have one religious belief, but it isn't a law to say the pledge. I think that if someone chooses not to put their liberty under god, then they shouldn't have to.
Same thing goes with court, in court now a days some cases are sworn in under different important documents, based on standards of our country and their religions, instead of a bible. So, I do not think it violates the amendment because one can choose with their freedom of speech whether or not to hear and say the pledge.

b.knud-hansen said...

I believe that this does not violate the first amendment because no one is forced to say it. Also people in our country predominately believe in a god. Our nation was based upon people that believed in god so in general and the majority of the people in the USA believe in one god or another. When someone says this is violating the bill of rights they are wrong because it says the freedom of speech people can choose not to say it.

Now when people says it violates the freedom of religion part of the first of the amendment. Then there could be a argument but it is no binding contract that makes you break your religion also it is a chose to say the pledge but if you still want to say the pledge then leave the "Under God" part out and skip it.

b.knud-hansen said...

I believe that this does not violate the first amendment because no one is forced to say it. Also people in our country predominately believe in a god. Our nation was based upon people that believed in god so in general and the majority of the people in the USA believe in one god or another. When someone says this is violating the bill of rights they are wrong because it says the freedom of speech people can choose not to say it.

Now when people says it violates the freedom of religion part of the first of the amendment. Then there could be a argument but it is no binding contract that makes you break your religion also it is a chose to say the pledge but if you still want to say the pledge then leave the "Under God" part out and skip it.

l.halpern said...

I believe that it doesn't matter if the pledge of alligence says "God". It only says it because it was tradition and thats all. It doesnt refer to any religion, maybe before, but now it is just a saying that shows we respect our country. Because of this, it doesn't violate our first Amendment. Church and state is still seperate in every way, the things that still say "under god" and other things are just tradition like the pledge and doesn't stand for a specific religion.
If we really had to change every phrase that used "god" we would be spending millions of dollars, that has the word god on it, for something people need to get over. No one is being force to use any of these phrases, for example most boulder valley schools let you choose whether or not you want to say the pledge or not. This "conflict" seems to be a pointless one that doesn't need to exist and only does to waste time.

PBrunsgaard said...

I believe that the phrase "Under God" in the pledge of allegiance is unconstitutional and should be removed from the pledge. This verse is crossing the line between religion and government.
Even if the word "god" is used in other practices of government in the U.S., it is required to listen to every morning unlike the use of it in other government affiliations. The phrase should be removed from the pledge or the pledge should be no longer required to listen to every morning.

spollack said...

I do not think that “Under God” needs to be taken out of the pledge of Allegiance. It does not violate the 1st amendment. The seperation of church and state does not require no expression of religion. Under God has been part of the pledge of alligence for a very long time, and is, in a way, part of American history. No one is fourced to say the pledge, or to say the words “under God.” It is not a violation of someones religious frredom for them to hear someone elses beleifs.

While I do not believe “Under God, ” needs to be taken out of the pledge, I also think that absoloutly no one who doesn’t want to say the pledge should have to. Even no one is allowed to make someone else say the pledge, it doesn’t mean that they don’t. A lot of teachers at my Elementry school forced us to say the pledge, which is unfair to people who don’t believe in the values in it.

s.codrescu said...

I do not believe that the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance violates the First Amendment of the Constitution. There is no law that states that student must recite the pledge, so it is up to the student in the first place whether they say the Pledge of Allegiance or not. Even if a student chooses to say the pledge they are free to leave out the phrase "under God". Since the state is not forcing people to say the pledge, it is not making any connection between state and religion. I think that the phrase stands more for tradition and a reminder of our past.

I do not think that the Pledge should be changed. It has been around for a while, which is part of what makes it tradition. Also as Matt pointed out, changing something like the Pledge, which many people think of as a piece of tradition of the nation and which has been ingrained in peoples memories since they were children, is very challenging.

bkrahenbuhl said...

In the pledge of alleigance, there is a big problem. I really don't like the use of under god in the pledge. It clearly violates the first amendment because some religions may not think of god like most people think about it.

If a religion has many gods, just saying god may be offensive.
Also, people who don't believe in god are obviously being treated unfairly. In god we trust, under god, these saying are against this religion. Therefore, the first amendment is being violated. I am okay with kids having to listen to it, but i would be more okay if the pledge was changed so these kids would'nt have to listen to it.

E.Kronenberg said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
E.Kronenberg said...

In my oppinion saying "under god" in the pledge of allegiance does not violate the first amendment. It has been part of the pledge for a very very long time and should be kept for historical resions also.

I think if kids dont say "under god" it is fine. No one is forced to say it. They can remain silent and if it really bugs them, plug their ears or try to block it out.

Admiral Niedringhaus

Admiral Niedringhaus