The Pledge of Allegiance

YamiB. · Aug 31, 2006

I'm sure a topic has already been done on this. But I haven't seen one specificly for it recently.

Do you think that having Under God in the pledge violates the first ammendment of the US Consitution? Do you think it should be taken out?

c0da · Aug 31, 2006

Tricky one. I don't think it violates the first ammendment. I can see why people would feel uncomfortable or not particularly commited when reciting the "under god" bit of the pledge, but I certainly wouldn't say it is a violation of the first ammendment.

SPLogan · Aug 31, 2006

YamiB. said:
Do you think that having Under God in the pledge violates the first ammendment of the US Consitution? Do you think it should be taken out?

"Under God" does not discriminate against any particular religion (except for maybe Atheism, but most Atheists do not even consider Atheism a religion).

"Under God" basically stands in opposition to "under human tyranny." In the United States, we pledge that we are one nation that is not under human tyranny. We are rather "under God." In my opinion, that is merely a theistic stance and does not carry any real government imposed religious doctrine. It just means that authority does not finally rest in mere human opinion.

YamiB. · Aug 31, 2006

SPLogan said:
"Under God" does not discriminate against any particular religion (except for maybe Atheism, but most Atheists do not even consider Atheism a religion).

"Under God" basically stands in opposition to "under human tyranny." In the United States, we pledge that we are one nation that is not under human tyranny. We are rather "under God." In my opinion, that is merely a theistic stance and does not carry any real government imposed religious doctrine. It just means that authority does not finally rest in mere human opinion.

I think it is a clear referal to the Abrahamic religions as they are really the religions that use God. Not to mention the fact that it was pushed in by the Knights of Columbus.

It is excluding Buddhists, Hindus, Shintos (?), Jains, and various Pagan religions.

Booko · Aug 31, 2006

YamiB. said:
I'm sure a topic has already been done on this. But I haven't seen one specificly for it recently.

Do you think that having Under God in the pledge violates the first ammendment of the US Consitution? Do you think it should be taken out?

I'm a traditionalist.

I say we keep the pledge the way our Founding Fathers gave it to us.

YamiB. · Aug 31, 2006

Booko said:
I'm a traditionalist.

I say we keep the pledge the way our Founding Fathers gave it to us.

I'm sure glad that smilie was there. XD

PetShopBoy88 · Aug 31, 2006

YamiB. said:
I'm sure a topic has already been done on this. But I haven't seen one specificly for it recently.

Do you think that having Under God in the pledge violates the first ammendment of the US Consitution? Do you think it should be taken out?

Only if somebody is forced to say it, or not allowed to put in their own word or phrase instead of that.

Booko said:
I'm a traditionalist.

I say we keep the pledge the way our Founding Fathers gave it to us.

:biglaugh:

YamiB. · Aug 31, 2006

PetShopBoy88 said:
Only if somebody is forced to say it, or not allowed to put in their own word or phrase instead of that.

Why should it be that the offical version has this non-inclusive phrase. Shouldn't it be that if somebody really wants to have Under God in there they can just add it?

PetShopBoy88 · Aug 31, 2006

YamiB. said:
Why should it be that the offical version has this non-inclusive phrase. Shouldn't it be that if somebody really wants to have Under God in there they can just add it?

Sure, why not? Last time I looked, however, the Pledge of Allegiance was essentially just "tradition". It's not like it's an "official" document of the United States Government or something.

YamiB. · Aug 31, 2006

PetShopBoy88 said:
Sure, why not? Last time I looked, however, the Pledge of Allegiance was essentially just "tradition". It's not like it's an "official" document of the United States Government or something.

Well it does have some government involvement as it was Congress that added the Under God part in the 50s.

PetShopBoy88 · Aug 31, 2006

YamiB. said:
Well it does have some government involvement as it was Congress that added the Under God part in the 50s.

Yes, that's true.

Booko · Aug 31, 2006

SPLogan said:
"Under God" does not discriminate against any particular religion (except for maybe Atheism, but most Atheists do not even consider Atheism a religion).

Some Mahayana Buddhists might disagree with you on that.

Quite possibly some pagans might as well. That I'm not sure of, but I'm sure they'll pop in and answer for themselves anyway.

Booko · Aug 31, 2006

PetShopBoy88 said:
Sure, why not? Last time I looked, however, the Pledge of Allegiance was essentially just "tradition". It's not like it's an "official" document of the United States Government or something.

Yeah, but kids are "officially" forced to say it in schools.

That's a problem with some groups. Don't JWs have a problem with it, because they don't believe in pledging allegiance to anything but God? They will obey the gov't, but their allegiance is not there. May would know for sure.

Booko · Aug 31, 2006

YamiB. said:
Well it does have some government involvement as it was Congress that added the Under God part in the 50s.

:yes: As a slap in the face against those nasty atheistic commie gov'ts.

Well, that's all kind of "old news" now, isn't it?

PetShopBoy88 · Aug 31, 2006

Booko said:
Yeah, but kids are "officially" forced to say it in schools.

I never was, and I've never met anyone who was.

That's a problem with some groups. Don't JWs have a problem with it, because they don't believe in pledging allegiance to anything but God?

Yes. And quakers do because they don't believe in making promises or pledges, and many other people do because it's just plain wrong.

CaptainXeroid · Aug 31, 2006

Yes, it's been discussed a few times.

No, I don't believe it violates the First Amendment because the establishment clause was intended to prevent the government from favoring one denomination over another. Its purpose was not to eliminate religious references from public life.
No, it should not be taken out, and most important....
It is not going to be taken out any time soon. :clap

If Michael Newdow or some other atheist insists on pressing a court case to try and remove it, there would be enough of an oproar among Christian evangelicals to show up at the polls and vote for Republicans who will vote to approve conservative judges to replace the activist liberal judges.

I know...more than you asked, but since I'm on vacation and not at the computer too much, I probably won't be around for the follow up questions.

Smoke · Aug 31, 2006

Booko said:
That's a problem with some groups. Don't JWs have a problem with it, because they don't believe in pledging allegiance to anything but God? They will obey the gov't, but their allegiance is not there. May would know for sure.

Jehovah's Witnesses will not say the pledge. They consider it idolatrous to pledge allegiance either to the flag or to the Republic. I agree with them about that, and I also think that nationalism and patriotism are strange and divisive ideas. All people are our brothers and sisters, even if some of them were born on the other side of an imaginary line; our homeland is not defined as the areas that pay taxes to the same people we do.

It's always risky to make any blanket statement about Quakers, but Quakers generally reject pledges, oaths and vows because they imply that we accept different standards and levels of honesty. Let your yea be yea, and your nay be nay.

What are we, anyway? A lot of erstwhile traitors who must bind ourselves by a loyalty oath?

Rather than restoring the pledge to its pre-1954 form, why not just drop it altogether?

Booko · Aug 31, 2006

PetShopBoy88 said:
I never was, and I've never met anyone who was.

Maybe they stopped being strict about it to avoid lawsuits.

You just met someone who was.

And if I didn't, I would be sent to the Principal's office and my parents called to take me home for disobedience.

That was the way things were at the time.

Booko · Aug 31, 2006

MidnightBlue said:
I agree with them about that, and I also think that nationalism and patriotism are strange and divisive ideas.

Oh, I think patriotism is a fine idea. The problem is that what's labeled patriotism is so often jingoism.

Rather than restoring the pledge to its pre-1954 form, why not just drop it altogether?

That's why I said what I did in my initial post in this thread.

Smoke · Aug 31, 2006

Booko said:
Oh, I think patriotism is a fine idea. The problem is that what's labeled patriotism is so often jingoism.

Sometimes it seems to me that everything that's labeled patriotism is really jingoism. I think I've lived in South Carolina too long.

Booko said:
That's why I said what I did in my initial post in this thread.

I know; that's why I fruballed you for it.

The Pledge of Allegiance

Active Member

Active Member

Member

Active Member

Deviled Hen

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Deviled Hen

Deviled Hen

Deviled Hen

Active Member

Following Christ

Done here.

Deviled Hen

Deviled Hen

Done here.