God, Pledge, WTF

[Mephisto]

This reveals a lot of pettiness in most of you, or at least, the devils advocate :x I don't recall anyone ever having a problem with the nation's pledge before that person brought it up. Why the big fuss?

We aren't all Christian Bible thumping believers like you.

[Topaz]

I'm not Christian, actually. Try devils advocate instead.

Since there was some confusion over my post, let me rephrase it:

I don't recall anyone having the balls to complain about this before it was brought to the courts, so why the big fuss now?  If it bothers you so much, then move to another country - the pledge isn't going to change.

There's also the fact that you can choose to stand and not say the pledge, this has been in effect for a while now - or at least, in my school district.

[Topaz]

On another note, what effect is this having on you? Is it causing you pain, or some kind of mental suffering to you when repeating a few words every schoolday? I can tell you that most schoolchildren don't contemplate the meaning of the pledge, and this is mostly affecting them. If you're old enough to understand the meaning, you're old enough to make your own decisions about religion. Mindless droning of a pledge every day is unlikely to affect your choices.

[shout]

On another note, what effect is this having on you? Is it causing you pain, or some kind of mental suffering to you when repeating a few words every schoolday? I can tell you that most schoolchildren don't contemplate the meaning of the pledge, and this is mostly affecting them. If you're old enough to understand the meaning, you're old enough to make your own decisions about religion. Mindless droning of a pledge every day is unlikely to affect your choices.

That is not the point. The point is there is religion poking into places where it does not belong.

[JTN Designer]

It's a pledge for patriotism, quit trying to break it down and over analyze a ruling. It does't specifically mention a "God" or what religion is refers to. The word is synonymous to any religion.

[Topaz]

Religion brought this country into existence.

[Adron]

Whether we have the balls to complain or not, you cannot tell from whether we complain. There are endless things that are wrong in the world. One cannot point them all out at the same time. Right now we are pointing at the wrong in the pledge, other times we will be pointing out other wrongs.

Does a particular wrong have to be causing me pain for me to shine a light on it? Of course not. When ignorance, stupidity or just plain evil walk the world, we must all do what we can to banish them.

If you live in a place where religion is not forced upon you, be glad. Not everyone is as lucky as you are.

[Topaz]

There are very few places now where people are persecuted for their religion.

[dxoigmn]

There are very few places now where people are persecuted for their religion.

We went to war because someone believed according to their religion it was their right to attack America. Is that not persecution?

Concerning your arugment about "what effect is this having on you," that same argument can be said against you. Why do you care that it is not in there? As some have already pointed out, the phrase "under god" wasn't always in the pledge of allegiance.

It's a pledge for patriotism, quit trying to break it down and over analyze a ruling. It does't specifically mention a "God" or what religion is refers to. The word is synonymous to any religion.

You didn't read any of this thread, did you?

Edit: Regardless of the problems with the "under god" part, the act of asking children to recite some pledge is questionable and reeks of brainwashing. Some more history, orginally the pledge was recited while extending the arm out and upward until Hitler came into power.

[Topaz]

We went to war because someone believed according to their religion it was their right to attack America. Is that not persecution?

How do you know what their motives were? Have you even seen the videos released by Osama? You know nothing.

You could also say that I don't care, this is all mostly for the sake of arguing. I'm also -quite sure that the pledge of allegiance has been unchanged for... at least two hundred years.

dxiogmn: I suggest you read some more of the thread - I typed something relating to "reeks of brainwashing".

[dxoigmn]

How do you know what their motives were? Have you even seen the videos released by Osama? You know nothing.

Yes. In fact, those videos were plastered on the screens of American television for a year or so, post 9/11. Therefore, I have some sort of insight into what their motives were and are.

You could also say that I don't care, this is all mostly for the sake of arguing. I'm also -quite sure that the pledge of allegiance has been unchanged for... at least two hundred years.

What you just wrote totally discredits you and goes to show that you know next to nothing about the history of the pledge. Read and think. You won't get very far otherwise.

Key facts to note:

• The pledge hasn't even been around for 200 years. It was written in 1892 (2005-1892=113), only to be officially recognized in 1942 (2005-1942=63) by Congress.
• The pledge has changed 2 times since it was written. Those changes include: "my Flag" to "the Flag of the United States of America"; and adding "under God" (a campaign initiated by the KKK!)

dxiogmn: I suggest you read some more of the thread - I typed something relating to "reeks of brainwashing".

You didn't type anything relating to "reeks of brainwashing." The closest reference is you saying children are not affected by the pledge because they do not understand it, which has no basis and is total speculation. In fact, it does have an affect (effect? help me grammar-nazis!) by your very words: it is used to incite patriotism. Although, I'm sure it has more than just the affect of inciting patriotism.

[hismajesty]

Regardless of whether it's optional more over, it is being excercised in a public sanction, therefore violating the first ammendment.

Are you not familiar with the Establishment Clause of the 1st amendment which defines the criteria for this?

Here's a bit of education for you all to which formulates into my opinion on the matter.  The phrase "under God" was put into the pledge due to factors of the 1950's where the Cold War was in its peak.  Atheism was becomming a popular term in America with speculation on the Cold War and due to fears regarding Communism becoming a potential influence in America it motivated legislators to add the phrase into the constitution.  The fear of Communism/Atheism was a concern for the Government in maintaining what they interpreted "American Patriotism" and declared that "God -> Christianity" was a symbol of America Patriotism against Communism which they were struggling to promote in their campaign against Communism (Korean War, Vietnam, etc.).

I'm pretty sure we already know when the words were added into the pledge, but thanks for wasting my time anyway.

I think it's time that the phrase "under God" be removed from the pledge, for obvious reasons.  It was added for a reason, and that reason has ceased to be relevant to this day.  Moreover, it was as equally unconstitutional back then as it is now, but only now it has no reason for being.  It is simply an exercise of relgion in a public sanction, optional or not, which is clearly stated a violation in the U.S. Constitution; and last time I checked, the term God related to religion, and the reason for the phrase as explained above clearly identifys "God" as the "Christian God."

God is a general term that can be applied to any monothesistic religion - Muslims say God to refer to Allah. God can also be applied to polythesitic religions as well, which adds more substance to why this is not unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause.

[Soul Taker]

The option to not say it is in no way an excuse.  By the schools having a sanctioned time to recite a pledge stating you believe the country was founded under a God, and *not* having another sanctioned time to pledge to the country being founded without any type of godly reference, is placing the belief in a God over the belief in no gods.  This is against the constitution if you ask me...

[Eric]

God is a general term that can be applied to any monothesistic religion - Muslims say God to refer to Allah. God can also be applied to polythesitic religions as well, which adds more substance to why this is not unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause.

The true meaning of the clause is unclear, however Thomas Jefferson specifically stated that we needed to establish "a wall of separation" between church and state.  Jefferson's views, however reputable he may be, are not credited because Jefferson was in France when the first admendment was written.

Personally, I think the meaning of the admendment is perfectly clear — a wall of separation between church and state and I think it's ridiculous that people don't understand that.

[shout]

God is a general term that can be applied to any monothesistic religion - Muslims say God to refer to Allah. God can also be applied to polythesitic religions as well, which adds more substance to why this is not unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause.

But how is that fair to me? I believe in no god/gods. You are making an assumption that everyone is religious, and *not* all religions involve a god.

Edit: Forgot a word