In the Pledge of Allegiance, the phase “Under God” was added in 1954. Is it me or it seems that in the Pledge of the Allegiance is more than pledging allegiance to the United States? It shows that you believe in God or if you don't, then you don't pledge your allegiance to the US. It seems another way how people are intolerant or at least not aware to other people's beliefs.
-Kelly

quote:

---

I think the phrase "In God we Trust" shouldn't be our motto,

---

"In God we Trust" is NOT our motto.

That would be "E pluribus unum" ...

I think the phrase "In God we Trust" shouldn't be our motto, and therefore not on our currency either. That seems a lot less attainable though. And it's obviously a lot easier to stop saying something than, in todays world, to stop using money. If there was currency without that on it then, yeah, I'd rather use that.

In court, for when people swear in, do they have all sorts of holy books from different religion? And what do atheists and agnostics swear on? Surely not God; how would that hold them to their word? Or maybe it's just symbolic. But if I was actually inclined to lie, I would be more likely to if I had to swear on a Bible to tell the truth first. Well, no I wouldn't, because that would be disrespectful of their religion, but I can see how some people would.

If you all don't want to say the Pledge of Allegiance because it has "Under God" in it, then I suggest you don't spend money either (In God We Trust)

What's the big difference, my U.S History teacher says that part is left out in some states so why can't the people who refuse to say it with that phrase, just say it without.

It's not that big a deal, don't make a swimming pool out of a puddle.

*Star*

quote:

---

This country was founded by christians. Not totally on the christian beliefs, but it was founded by christians. if it isnt prove me otherwise...

---

I find this to be really ridiculous. So you're saying we should have references to God in our pledge and on our money simply because the founding fathers were Christians? ... the founding fathers were also wealthy white males, yet these are not the only groups our country represents.

Why can't you just leave out the under god phrase. It really bothers me when people make a mountain out of a molehill

Why cant you just not say "Under God" when you say the pledge? it really does make me angry when people make a mountain out of a mole-hill.

This country was founded by christians. Not totally on the christian beliefs, but it was founded by christians. if it isnt prove me otherwise...

joey: all i have to say is..............ugh!

there is not enough words to describe why your statements should not have been said.

a) we're not SICK just becuase we are liberals. this board is a board for discussion, not for insulting each other.

b) PLEASE stop saying that this country was founded by christians. If "under god" is such a historical statement then why didn't they add it to the pledge when they founded this country? Why did they wait until 1954? I'll tell you why, because the founders of our country( christians or not) all believed in seperation of church and state. You want some history? It's a fact that the reason they put "under god" in the pledge in the first place was because we hated communism and we thought that by making our motto "In god we trust"( which was added at the same time) and by putting "under god" in the pledge we were somehow fighting communism. Did you understand that? They believed that god is the opposite of communism. And that itself is a religiosly biased statement. It's saying that anything not related to god or perhaps christians is communist.So please don't come around saying it's a historical statement, it's an anti-communist statement and it's only purpose was to fight communism. That's it.

c) i agree with dante. I bet anything germany would be pretty pis*ed off if their anthem said "one nation under hitler."

Joey, I'll post this site again in the assumption that you didn't see it the first time: http://members.tripod.com/~candst/

(Does tripod allow direct linking? I'm not sure, so you might have to just type it in.)

It gives pretty much the entire legal and historical basis for separation of church and state.

i STILL cannot get over the fact that God is printed on our money. who worships money?!?!

anyway, why pledge allegiance to the nation under God; why not pledge ourselves to God and leave the matters of the state up to the state?

quote:

---

It was founded under a Christian God - you don't have to believe in God or Jesus or the Holy Trinity if you don't want to.
But the fact is, this country was founded as a nation Under God.

---

The country was founded by a diverse group of people. Exactly the reason why there wasn't state-sponsored religion.

quote:

---

Well, I personally believe it's up to the states to decide what they will, won't allow in their schools.
The federal government shouldn't FORCE states to abide by any laws that aren't included in the Constitution.
Becca, that's "basically" bull****. Nowhere in the United States Constitution does it state a separation of church and state.

---

Nor does it state the word "capitalism" yet we take that as some sort of staple of US politics.

quote:

---

The U.S. Constitution outlaws a State-sponsored religion.
Having the words "Under God" in the pledge is NOT establishing a religion; nobody is FORCING you to worship that way and nobody is FORCING you to believe in God.

---

Through military service, taxes, or being a citizen I am suppsedly suporting what this country puts out. It is our one-voice. When its currency, motto, pledge, oaths, and other things include religion I am implicitly endorsing this expression of religion. Taxes pay for the writing of it, the currency it's printed on, the schools it's said in, and so on. That is me funding religoin, sponsoring religion. That is forced worship. And on a more direct basis it's state sponsorship.

quote:

---

The whole separation of church and state came about in the 1940s, when some non-believer stood up in court and mentioned it.

---

Actually the term came about in Jefferson's term as president over a hundred years prior.
Even earlier the concept was expressed by Paine and Madison (the author of much of the Constitution) among others as a principle the country should follow.

quote:

---

Posting of the Ten Commandments is not the establishment of a religion.
It's a symbol of where the U.S. legal system gets its basic laws.

---

Where is the US law against holding idols? Or adultery? Or coveting? What about "honoring" your parents? The sin of blaspheme would seem to fly in the face of the Constitutional protection of free speech.

In fact none of the Ten Commandments are actually mentioned in the Constitution nor refrenced as a basis of anything.

One has to wonder where we really got these ideas. It would seem comon sense told us to have laws against stealing, murder. A working legal system would probably have to make purjery a criminal offense as well. No biblical basis necessary.

Because this nation wasn't founded under Stalin or Hitler.

It was founded under a Christian God - you don't have to believe in God or Jesus or the Holy Trinity if you don't want to.

But the fact is, this country was founded as a nation Under God.

Well, I personally believe it's up to the states to decide what they will, won't allow in their schools.

The federal government shouldn't FORCE states to abide by any laws that aren't included in the Constitution.

Becca, that's "basically" bull****. Nowhere in the United States Constitution does it state a separation of church and state.

The U.S. Constitution outlaws a State-sponsored religion.

Having the words "Under God" in the pledge is NOT establishing a religion; nobody is FORCING you to worship that way and nobody is FORCING you to believe in God.

The whole separation of church and state came about in the 1940s, when some non-believer stood up in court and mentioned it.

Posting of the Ten Commandments is not the establishment of a religion.

It's a symbol of where the U.S. legal system gets its basic laws.

If this country was founded under an Indian Spirit, then it would be HISTORICALLY correct to put "under the great Indian Spirit," because the country was founded under such a thing.

But it wasn't; it was founded as Christian nation.

I have respect for most libertarians. While I disagree with their economic views, I prefer libertarians to authoritarian members of the left. I used to be a libertarian. But Joey , you are no libertarian at all; just a Republican with *slightly* more moderate views on personal freedoms. Keep under God in the Pledge fine; but in that case, don't use it in schools. Having a daily pledge which includes the words "under God" is a promotion of belief in God. Most people once believed that not allowing prayer in schools was a bunch of PC bull, but now only the rednecks and born-again Christians really object to not allowing it. If "under god" is a historical footnote, why is the same not true of "under Stalin" in Russia or "under Hitler" in Germany?

quote:

---

Therefore, instead of a nation-forced religion, the phrase "...under God" is a historical note, not a religious one.

---

That is NOT merely historical! Under God MEANS we are under a God, who is looking down at us. Understand?? The phrase admits the existence of a God, which may or may not be true! That is religious if anything in the world is religious!

First of all, if the Constitution was perfect we wouldn't have to amend it.

quote:

---

The Framers of the U.S. Constitution did not include a phrase that states, "separation of church and state."

---

Amendment I[Religion, Speech, Press, Assembly, Petition (1791)]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

~http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html#amendmenti

AKA basically 'Seperation of Church and State'

There you have it.

~Becca

You people are completely, utterly, ridiculously ignorant of any historical, factual thing ...


...if you don't want to say the pledge, fine.

But stop going off on this whole politically correct bull****.

It's bull****. 100 percent bull**** that you people espouse and it's disqusting.

The Pledge of Allegience shouldn't be forced upon anyone, but damn, learn the historical facts of our country before you go spouting off.

You people are just ...it's beyond disbelief. The liberal propaganda has just entrenched you all and that's sick.

The rights given to each American are given to us at BIRTH; whether you believe in God or not, they're your rights.

The New Englanders who founded this country were Christians. They thanked God for landing here.

The Framers of the U.S. Constitution did not include a phrase that states, "separation of church and state."

Therefore, instead of a nation-forced religion, the phrase "...under God" is a historical note, not a religious one.

You people are being deceived and you're going right along with this PC bull****.

Someone please, just grow a brain and learn to accept historic fact.

First of all, I reiterate everything in aroseindec's first post.

I have had someone tell me that I should move to another country just because I do not (necessarily) believe in God. Our country is supposed to be about religious freedom! If I can't be free here, then where can I?

I have thought for a long time, since before I myself was agnostic, that it was wrong to have "under god" in the pledge. Every morning in school, I say the pledge with all my heart, but I leave out those two words. If I said them, the rest of the pledge would also be completely null for me.

I assumed those words were there because they always had been, that it was tradition. Not that it was a good enough excuse, but at least it was one. They were added in 1954?!!!

The way the pledge is right now is essentially saying that people who do not believe in God (atheists, buddhists, or anyone else, those just come to mind) are not a part of this country. This country was founded by people who believed in God, but there is no need to live in the past. Obviously not everyone now does.

Wasn't the phrase ruled unconstitutional, anyway? Why do they still say it??? People who believe in God or some other Divine Being can pledge their allegience to him/her in their prayers, but it is not fair to make everyone do so.

norrow: Yes, I feel that if the pledge said "under no God" that it would still be a form of acknowledging a specific religion. The people who are athesist, while they don't believe in a God, that is still a beliefe that no everyone in the US shares.

Also, you said that part of our national heritage is slavery and this is very true. Slavery is a huge part of the history of the US. And as you more or less stated, many, if not all the people in the US feel it was evil. But there was one point in time when the people of the US, our ancestors, thought that there was nothing wrong with owning and control people. That view changed, just as at one point in time people thought that God HAD to be said in the pledge, but now some people feel it is wrong to say that.

To Nobody In Particular…

What if the pledge said "under NO God?" Is that all of a sudden a religious statement when "under God" was not?

The "national heritage" argument will get you nowhere. Slavery is also a part of our national heritage. (Not to say that belief in God is evil like slavery, just that using the "historical signifigance" argument doesn't work)

I think that some people might be confused. This nation was not founded because of God. It was founded so that any person, no matter what race, religion, culture or anything would be free to believe whatever they want to believe. Personally, I feel it is wrong to have the name 'God' in the pledge, souly because in America, one is free to believe whatever religion they choose to believe in. Some religions do not use the name 'God' to refer to a higher diety. There is Yahweh, Budda, and there are people who are athiest. I feel that because the Consitiution states people are free to practice any religion in America regardless of what it believes and who it prays to, having 'God' in the pledge is being biased and close minded because it is only acknowledging one of many higher dieties. If the pledge were to be changed it needs to include all of the dieties that anyone in America could or does pray to rather than only allowing room for one religion.