Not always true. Some schools actually say you have to or you can get punished
Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
"cross their fingers" - isn't that a Christian thing, too?"No one need say the Pledge, there is no law requiring it" - only because someone sued.There's also something upsetting about 1940's recitations, but I can't quite put my finger on it.
I always just pretend that "endowed by their creator" just was a reference to the size of- erm- a certain body part- was genetic. All joking aside though, I don't think we can conclude as easily as you do that including these references to God does no harm. It discounts the experience of Americans that are not of Judeo-Christian heritage, who are atheist or agnostic, ete. Yes, it doesn't preclude them from taking part in our society or choosing not to worship, but it does add to the untrue perception that they are somehow "less American" than those of Judeo-Christian faith.
@matchrestore Well, if true, then you denigrate all those who avow religious belief. (God, after all, can refer to Jews, Christians, Muslims, etc.) As noted, there is nothing binding or obligatory in the use of the words, "under God," and its use is consistent with the beliefs of a majority of Americans. In a nutshell, we make rules - and customs - on the basis of the rule and not the exception to the rule.
@goaded Quick questions?: When was the law requiring mandatory recitation of the pledge passed? What court ruling overturned that requirement?
P. S. Quick correction, meant to ask about "under God," and not the Pledge as a whole. Sorry for the type-o.
en.wikipedia.org/.../...School_District_v._Gobitisen.wikipedia.org/.../...d_of_Education_v._BarnetteBoth before the "under God" addition, if that's what you're getting at. Once the second judgement was made, the question of whether someone could be forced to say "under God" was moot.
@goaded Point is, it does not matter. You cannot be compelled to say the Pledge, ergo you are in no way obliged to betray your atheism. To be offended by that which you are not obliged to say seems odd, to say no more.Dear old grandma used to say, "If you go out looking for friends, you will find friends. If you go out looking for enemies, you will find enemies." My hunch is that is what it going on here. People are too quick to take offense - and that makes for a very unpleasant culture.
Essentially, your continued ability to ignore people you think are too sensitive is more important than the religious inclusiveness of your fellow citizens. Gotcha.
@HungLikeAHorsefly Essentially, the rights of minorities should not always be more important than the rights of the majority. Got it?
Yet, one of the founding principles of our nation is protection of the rights of the minority from mob rule. If the rights of the majority truly were more important than the rights of the minority... Donald Trump would not be President. And here we have a passage added to the Pledge only a year or two before you were born that caters to some people's need to have their religion formally codified within our civic culture. When others object, on the basis that it doesn't cater to *their* needs for their religion... they're snowflakes. Even though you're apparently just as upset about not getting your way as they are.
@HungLikeAHorsefly I understand the principles of our Constitution with respect to the rights of minorities. I also understand that every conflict should not result in a concession by the majority."Even though you're apparently. . ." When you say it is apparent, that is the part where you are simply fabricating something for the sake of the argument. Poor tactic.
I'm fabricating something? Are you not upset about the potential for not getting your way?
@HungLikeAHorsefly I am not heavily invested in the outcome. I don't need to be. Supreme Court jurisprudence is on my side.
@HungLikeAHorsefly "the religious inclusiveness of your fellow citizens". it is the militant atheists who are disrupting *that*.
And protecting minorities from mob rule is not in play in this question. It was not a mob that included "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance.
George Washington was elected by the Electoral college. Founding principles has got nothing to do with election process. That’s like saying if it’s a Nigerian Battleship, then it’s only “feels” right to have a Nigerian Warlord to Commandeer it.
@Curmudgeon Yes, the fact that there are Americans whose religion doesn't center around a singular God does disrupt this.@OlderAndWiser If you aren't heavily invested in the outcome, then why are you against it? As I said before, it seems like you're only against it to spite people who you think are being too sensitive.@sexyasianboi26 My analogy still stands. If protection of the minority weren't a foundational principle of the United States, it's reasonable to believe the Electoral College wouldn't exist. This line of reasoning is well documented in the Federalist Papers, if you're familiar with that. Now, you could make an argument based on the Hamiltonian interpretation of things, but then you'd have to confront a great many things that modern Conservatives find disagreeable.
@HungLikeAHorsefly As I explained previously, I don't need to care about this because the Supreme Court has taken care of this already, and if Trump gets to appoint RBG's replacement, I won't need to worry about it for the next 30-40 years. Plus, not feeling a great energy for the topic doesn't mean I don't care at all. Everything is not all black and white and there are many shades of gray.
If all 300+ million Americans including the millions of undocumented illegals, were to be distributed equally in all 50 states, then I’d be for the popular vote. Only 138 million Americans voted in 2016. A Majority of California voted for Hillary. My point is, if a single state has a 1/4 say in a Presidential election, it’s a straight highway robbery. This includes Texas. The election process has been this way for 243 years. The Trump derangement syndrome needs a vaccine, for real.
@sexyasianboi26 Hold up a minute. You seem to be laboring under the impression that because the Electoral College is an adequate example of minority rule, that anyone in this conversation thinks we should get rid of it. The "Trump Derangement Syndrome" you speak of is merely a case of you making undue assumptions. As is usually the case when people speak of things involving Trump.@OlderAndWiser I wasn't specifically talking about the legality of the "Under God" phrase in the Pledge; I've been thinking of it in terms of whether or not it *should* be there, as the OP's question asks. So far, the only reason you've given for why you think it should remain is a desire to spite other Americans you feel are too sensitive. The truth of the matter is that it benefits you and you just don't want to think about it. So, you dismiss the issue altogether by calling people "snowflakes".
I agree with you, OlderAndWiser. We should stop pandering to religious snowlfakes and take out those words that violate our constitutional rights. They're illegal, end of story, and government should stop pandering to those religious pansies.
It’s been adequate enough for 243 foking years! The electoral college is here to stay. It’s a fail proof system against snowflake meddling and any kind of political derangement.Why are people in Twitter and FB calling for the Hurricane to go hit Florida so that Trump’s Mar A Lago can be destroyed? Hmm? Never Trumpers have no after thought about the millions of people that live in Florida? Trump derangement syndrome is real.
@sexyasianboi26 Nobody is saying we should get rid of the Electoral College here. That's coming from somewhere else. Simmer down, man.
Unfortunately laws have been passed that violate the Constitution such as your right assembleLet's see if to assemble you need to get permission and a license or permitProtestors are often arrested for protesting without a license or permit protesting is assembly
So where do you stand on the 2nd amendment?
I'm pro second amendment every single gun law violates the ConstitutionEach constitutional amendment protects anotherYou can't have the first without the second they back each other. Having a gun is a form of free speech and expression
What's your view on the second amendment?
@Chadnelson1973 Right in line with your view. All gun laws are an infringement.
The founders of our country did not believe in separation of Church and State, that has been the biggest lie ever told by the controllers (establishment) . The fathers did not one religion (aka Catholic) and they did not want taxes either.
I'm glad that you recognize that your God is the same as in Judaism and Christianity. You don't know how many Christians that I've met who are ignorant of this fact.
no you don't Allah is not my God. My God is , Jesus and Holy Spirit.
You obviously are not christian but why is it awkward?Would it be better to say "one nation under the almighty dollar" instead of under God as the dollar is more peoples god now anyway?That is an accurate statement and better reflects the reality of current life. It is not promoting any religion and it is new not a remnant from the cold war. So would that be a less awkward statement?
@draconious It’s awkward considering that it is a Cold War remnant. It was used to contrast the Soviet opposition to freedom of religion, but consider now that the Soviet are gone and the wars we are at now are against terrorist groups who die in the name of God. And I mean it kind of does explicitly state God, not just any god. And I mean it is promoting the idea of theism.I’m just saying, it just seems a bit weird to me. It’s fine to keep if it’s too much work to take it out, I’m just saying it’s just a quirk we have.
@draconious no they like Satan, you can have all the sex you want , then have baby aborted , drink until you throw up , then free base drugs .
That was added in during the Cold War lol Not the founding of the country
@Agape93 Founding principles of the United States Section 5:1. Government acknowledges that there is a Creator2. Government acknowledges that the Creator gives specific inalienable rights to man3. Government acknowledges that it exists to protect God-given rights4. Government acknowledges that below the level of God-given rights, government powers are to be operated only with the permission of citizens – i. e., with the “consent of the governed”5. If government fails to meet the four standards above, the people have an inalienable right to abolish that government and institute a new one that does observe the four criteria above.The Gettysburg address under Lincoln declared it.It only was added to the Pledge in 1954, but it was well established that it was a nation under god upon it's founding.
Lol I hope you realize that it was never founded as a Christian nation, nor was the government to respect Any establishment of religion
@Agape93 Yes, it was.The Declaration of Independence; The Paris Peace Treaty of 1783, and the Constitution. These documents give conclusive proof that America is a Christian nation. One does not need a law degree or a degree in history to grasp this truth. It is obvious to anyone who does not have an agenda. he Constitution honors the Christian Sabbath. The President was given 10 days to sign a bill into law. The counting of the 10 days does not include the Sabbath. This is found in Article 1, Section 7, and Clause 2The Paris Peace Treaty was the document which formally ended the Revolution and granted the United States independence from Great Britain. In a real sense, the United States formally became a nation on September 3, 1783.When the United States became a nation, it was done in the “name of the most holy and undivided Trinity.” The preamble to this Treat states it is based upon the “Holy and undivided Trinity.” The concept of the holy Trinity is unique to Christianity. This statement means the United States was founded on the Christian faith. The God of the Bible is whom the United States is based upon. The unalienable rights of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness come from the Judeo/Christian God and no one else.Again, I'm not religious at all, I'm also not an idiot. Do your research before you spout nonsense.
Lol babe read the constitution. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the exercise thereof."Or perhaps from one of our founders, John Adams. The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.”Or Thomas Jefferson “The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus by the Supreme Being in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter. ... But we may hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away with all this artificial scaffolding...”Ah screw it. Just go read babe www.google.com/.../amp
The original pledge was written at the end of the 19th century by a national socialist, Rev. Bellamy, who wanted to get children accustomed to pledging their loyalty to an abstract government. The "Under God" was added during the Cold War, as pointed out above. Nothing about the pledge of allegiance has anything to do with this nation's founding principles, because it was written by a man who fundamentally disagreed with many of our founding principles almost a century after the fact.The Pledge of Allegiance, from beginning to end, is just propaganda. Of course religion would eventually get involved.
Those pesky facts 😂
@1truekhaleesi And that little girl grew up to be Albert Einstein.
Little girl? You're give years older than me sweet cheeks. Me Albert Einstein? No I just passed fifth grade history 👍
@1truekhaleesi SO far over your head it might as well be the space shuttle.Nice picture with nice quotes.Can you find those quotes anywhere in any recorded history book? If so, please show me because I can't, and I just looked.
I learned in fifth grade that we have religious freedom in the US and not one religion is placed in higher regard over other religions. Common sense.Bitch and be condescending all you want about it being a pretty picture. They're real quotes.
@1truekhaleesi Ok they're real, show me where they're real? You say they are, nothing else I can find substantiates that claim. I mean I'm sure you're a professional historian and all and would never use fake information to prove your claim, right? So, shouldn't be hard to back it up. I mean, I managed to back up with evidence my claims. Why can't you be asked to the same?
So now you're getting pissed about actual quotes? That's just too damn funny
@1truekhaleesi Not pissed at all, asking you to prove it.Such a lefty you immediately retreat to "lol u mad" when you're asked to prove something. Yeah, I'm all done talking to you. You'll never provide anything interesting or an exchange of ideas with proof to back it up, you'll just cry and accuse. Have a nice life.
No you sound pretty pissed because I showed facts 😘
Lol she can’t handle truth, khaleesi. I gave up trying despite proving her wrong as well.
You are an American and you don't know that the citizens ARE the government? ("of the people, by the people") We are a democratic republic. Citizens vote for citizens to be their representatives. And mentioning "God" is not about a religion.
@dandee55 for the people by the people, for the jews, for the christians, for the muslims, for the atheists for the buddhists etc etc
Right. But our laws are established according to general consensus. Or if it's a state law then it goes by the majority in that state. And since most people in the country call themselves Christians, most of the laws and such follow that belief. But it's not an "establishment" of the religion.
Atheists believe in the First Amendment, which is more than Bible-thumpers can say.
Good ole freedom of religion. So you wish to undo the first amendment?Does your statement "If Americans do not like God or believe in him , then they can leave America !" apply to all gods or just your god? Thanks
Dawn is unpopular!
@1truekhaleesi She is an old fruitcake who thinks facts are fake news
@NorthwestRider oh lordy. Another user got upset at me for the same reason.
They were Deists, at most, and wanted the country to be independent of religion.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_Bible"the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Tripoli
@goaded Yes, it doesn't mean they didn't believe in God. Separating Church and State doesn't mean they were atheists. If they didn't think there was something even close to the notion of God, that phrase wouldn't exist. Sincerely, we need to leave it be.
The phrase (two words) that was added in 1954?
@goaded Thanks for pointing that. I think there can be a referendum on it for sure. But I don't see why the effort in the first place. Alternatively, should the declaration say, "All men and women..."? That's the type of discussion I see this.
It has nothing to do with "separation between church and state." If it did, it wouldn't have been added in the first place.
@dandee55 really? Cause the founding fathers didn't want that. One religion shouldn't be placed higher than other religions. This isn't hard
Yes, really. Like I said...There isn't one religion placed higher than others - in the pledge or otherwise in the country. And mentioning "God" is not about a religion.
It is a secular country not a Christian country
@humanearthThe original verbiage from 1892: I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands; one nation indivisible, with liberty and Justice for all (https://www. britannica. com/event/Pledge-of-Allegiance-to-the-Flag-of-the-United-States-of-America)."... the controversial phrase “under God” was not always part of the Pledge of Allegiance. It was added by law on June 14, 1954..." (https://www. washingtonpost. com/news/retropolis/wp/2018/06/14/the-gripping-sermon-that-got-under-god-added-to-the-pledge-of-allegiance-on-flag-day/)."February 7 is a notable historical day for the acknowledgment of God in modern America: it is the day that a sermon was preached before President Dwight D. Eisenhower, suggesting that the words “under God” be added to the pledge... the American pledge as it then existed could just have been recited by citizens from any country, even those from communistic nations that hated God. The day following the sermon, U. S. Rep. Charles Oakman from Michigan introduced a Joint Resolution (H. J. Res 371) to add the words “Under God” into the pledge..." (https://wallbuilders. com/president-eisenhowers-one-nation-god/).Saying "it has always been there" is simply not true. It was added in 1954 as an anti-Communist move since we were in the Cold War.
@Ram0n83 well I believe in the anti-Communist movement.
Then explain why the founding fathers were against Christianly? me.me/.../founding-fathers-on-religion-benjamin-a-in-george-washington-thomas-3809210
"I have no respect for anyone who doesn't share my opinion"I think you need to read about loving your neighbor a bit more...
@NyfikenSyd I didn’t say that I don’t love my neighbors. I said I have no respect for anyone who doesn’t say “ONE NATION UNDER GOD” in the Pledge of Allegiance! “We live in this great country and salute the same flag created by the same God”. And instead of bashing Donald Trump and lying about him, we should pray for him.
If you don’t like God being in the Pledge, leave! I’ll help you pack!
Don't worry. I'm already in a secular country. And I respect your faith. I just disagree that it should be connected to your country. As opposed to you who seem to disrespect anyone who isn't exactly like you.
@NyfikenSyd I disrespect people who don’t follow our laws and come into the country illegally. The Pledge of Allegiance was written with ONE NATION UNDER GOD and no one should change it.
Not having respect for people who break the law is quite different from not respecting people who disagree with your religion. Which is what you started out saying.And for changing it. It's so "free" in the US so if the majority would want to change it you wouldn't be opposed, right? After all that is the law.
Don't use insults in your opionions. It often drives people to use the same insult towards you. Wether it is directed at anyone or not.
@Korand I'm too old, bitter, and crochety too care one way or the other. One of the privileges if being my she. You understand it once you survive this long. I stand by my statement.
It's just like old, bitter, and crotchety men like you that believe people my age don't understand. I know people your age have lived through a lot, and faced a large deal of stresses to get to the point where you are now. I don't have to survive as long as you to get that you've been hurt more times than I can count. But I also know myself as a person, and know when I get to be your age I won't share that same perspective. I believe in respecting others, and seniority doesn't give anyone the right to be disrespectful. One of the privileges of being your age is that you have much more experience than I do, and frankly much more than the majority of the people on this app. Share that wisdom respectfully, not by being bitter.
@Korand being bitter is a privilege. I've earned mine.
Freedom of speech is a privilege we share, doesn't mean we should use that privilege to express hate in racism, and sexism. I can be cynical, and and I'm not nearly as old as you. All do respect just because you can do something, or be a type of way doesn't mean you should. And as old as you are you of all people should know that. Not being bitter requires self control and restraint. Failure to do so reveals something about you as a person. If you want to be the grumpy old men that get portrayed in television go right ahead. But I assure you it's not a privilege you should be taking advantage of.
The founding fathers were against religion. www.google.com/search
Or Animal Farm