Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
role of religion in politics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: role of religion in politics
Have you ever thought about what it truly means to be a patriotic American? Does a patriotic American simply support his country no matter what the cause; or does this patriot passionately reprimand his country’s injustices, no matter how small or big? Consider the Pledge of Allegiance. This oath of loyalty binds us as Americans and should unite us. The keyword being unite, for the essay I’ll respond to thinks otherwise. Indeed, Gwen Wilde is against the inclusion of a certain phrase: “Under God.” Her primary belief being that the phrase in the Pledge is, as she puts it, “needlessly divisive.” Is she right? I believe she is, for the Pledge as it stands today is discriminatory and you’ll soon find out why.
We first look to Gwen’s essay entitled “Why the Pledge of Allegiance Should Be Revised.” The main idea is her rejection of the words “Under God” included in the Pledge of Allegiance. She adamantly believes it to be divisive, and even un-American. With this in mind, she begins her essay by providing us with a little history on the matter. It’s explained to us that the Pledge did not originally include the aforementioned phrase, and in fact contained no reference to any deity. As Gwen believes, the inclusion of the phrase is “an odd addition indeed to a Nation that is said to be ‘indivisible’.” She questions what it means to be a patriotic American. According to her, patriotic Americans aren’t all religious. An important note to her, as she then goes on mention how silence during the Pledge can lead to accusations of being unpatriotic. These accused are, as Gwen says, “somehow not fully an American, maybe even un-American.” Yet her argument is not so much about the constitutionality of the Pledge; an assumption she specifically r...
... middle of paper ...
...rent religious ideals and the Pledge should reflect this.
Overall the Pledge must be revised in order to be a truly patriotic oath. I share Gwen’s sentiments and believe the pledge of allegiance should be a religiously neutral and all inclusive oath. One in which every single Americas from every walk of life can participate in; a Pledge to take pride in regardless of your religious beliefs or otherwise. We must remember our Nation was founded on the basis of unity. Even though religion was used to unite us in the past, in the future our diversity should be used to unite us instead. For America is a rich and diverse country yet in that diverseness we share common American traits. I challenge the notion that the Pledge is of trivial importance for the opposite is true. The Pledge of Allegiance needs to be the Oath that binds us, despite our religious beliefs.
...eings act so self-centered, arrogant, and pride that we don’t care about anybody but our selves. When we say the pledge allegiance we don’t mean want were saying…I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. When you say the pledge you should mean every word were saying because it only a pledge but a vow to God. When we talk about justice and liberty we don’t just mean to Americans but the whole world.
The Supreme Court case in Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow result in a unanimous ruling that the phrase “under God” may remain in the Pledge of Allegiance as narrated in public school classrooms. The court made the decision because the atheist father did not have grounds to sue the school district on behalf of his daughter. While the ruling was made on the Flag Day, it did not meet the clear endorsement of the constitutionality of the pledge as sought by President Bush and leaders of Republican and Democratic Parties in Congress. Notably, the eight judges who participated in the case had voted to turn over a federal appeals court decision in 2003 that would have prohibited the use of the phrase in public schools as an infringement of the constitutional outlaw on state-sponsored religion. A majority of these justices i.e. five made that ruling on procedural grounds in which Michael A. Newdow, the atheist, did not have legal reasons to sue the school district (Lane, 2004).
In the 2008 the United States Census Bureau, Self-Described Religious Identification of Adult Population, The Christian faith proved to be the more dominating religion out of all religions. So it would seem the words “Under God” would be beneficial for the majority, the Pledge of Allegiance allures and supports the loyalty of the majority of citizens. The nonbelievers of religion have had the right to not recite the pledge since 1943 but have been asked to quietly stand while the believers recite the pledge in its entirety. Even though leaving out “Under God” is not a difficult task we can clearly see a division has now developed, opposite of bringing the people together. Another example that shows the pledge allures and supports a loyalty to the majority of citizens, the acceptance and encouragement to keep ...
The Pledge of Allegiance has become a major issue for students, teachers, parents and lawmakers. The original intention of the pledge was not to stir up trouble, but for a celebration of Christopher Columbus discovery of the new world. The pledge is no longer thought of as a celebration, but an infringement on children's religious beliefs. Do you believe that children's rights are being infringed on? Some people believe that the pledge is a great honor for our country. It has shown, and provided us with great pride just like our American flag. The Pledge of Allegiance being recited in the public school system does not infringe on the students religious beliefs, but is a way for us to honor our country and everything that we have done to get to this point in history.
Research on the Pledge of Allegiance. In the last thirty years, there has been surprisingly little study of this particular ritual in democratic participation. The majority of this work tends to focus on the legal issues concerning refusal to say the Pledge (Knowles, 1992; Urofsky, 1995). This work effectively summarizes the current legal understanding of the relationship between state law and local school governance, that while states have a compelling interest to encourage democratic education in schools, their ability to mandate such participation is effectively limited by the Constitutional obligation to protect freedom of religion (Minersville School District v. Gobitis, 1940; Urofsky, 1995).
Many students all across America stand and salute to the flag every morning and repeat these words, “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, To the republic for which it stands, one nation, Under God, Indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.” There are controversy behind these words of historical allegiance, and that is why many people are refusing to stand for the pledge. This nation was founded upon freedom and liberties, and with those liberties comes with the freedom to choose your religion. The words “Under God”
Before analyzing the above described controversy, we must first examine the history of the Pledge itself. Written by Francis Bellamy, it was originally titled the “Pledge to the Flag” and was created in the late 1800’s to celebrate the 400th anniversary of the discovery of America. It originally read: “I pledge allegiance to my Flag and to the republic for which it stands, one Nation, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all” (McCarthy, 2005). Changes were later made to include the words “of the United States” and “of America” to indicate which flag was being referenced. The final changes to the Pledge came in 1954 when it officially became titled the “Pledge of Allegiance” and the words “under God” were added after “one nation.” This addition to the Pledge was meant to support the United States as a religious nation. While signing the law to put this change into effect, President Eisenhower said, “In this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country’s most powerful resource in peace and war” (McCarthy, 2005).
The case Elk Grove Unified School District versus Newdow came about when a student parent, Michael Newdow, an atheist, has a disagreement with the Pledge of Allegiance. Elk Grove Unified School District is a public elementary school where teachers begin the day by reciting the Pledge of Allegiance, but it is considering being voluntary. Under California law, all elementary schools must recite the Pledge of Allegiance once a day unless those student object due to their religion. As stated before, in 1954 the Congressional Act added the words “under God” to the Pledge of Allegiance. Michael Newdow took it upon himself to review the School District policy referring to the religious portion. This caused Michael Newdow to sue in the federal district court in California, stating making students listen to the Pledge of Allegiance, even if the students do not choose to participate to the word “under God” violates the establishment clause of the United States Constitution’s First Amendment
Starting in kindergarten, we have allocated thirty seconds of every morning to reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. I remember hearing the announcement that we were going to do the Pledge soon, and sighing because I had to stand up and perform this “boring” task. As a little kid, I didn’t know what the Pledge of Allegiance really meant or why we had to do it. All I knew is that we would be performing the monotonous, fancy sounding, thirty-one worded stanza daily. While it was against the law for teachers to force us to say the Pledge, it was expected. This “patriotism” was assumed of us at a young age. It was givin with the mindset that we were the best country that should be loved.
In war-torn, impoverished, and communist countries, America is a symbol for freedom. In America, our flag that waves red, white, and blue, is a symbol for our freedom. The Pledge of Allegiance begins with the words, "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands..." This republic form of government is what grants Americans freedom: the power is invested in the people, and the government is responsible for protecting the rights of the people. A republic can only prevail if the citizens understand and properly practice the responsibilities that such power entrusts with them. For example, the first amendment of the Constitution protects freedom of speech; this liberty is meant for good, but can easily be abused. My responsibility is to use my constitutional rights for good, however, issues concerning responsibility seldom have just one correct solution.
In conclusion, The Pledge of Allegiance does the violate the First Amendment in the Constitution. Forcing students to recite the Pledge in school goes against their Freedom of Speech. Also, the students of certain religions who feel it is not right to say the Pledge based on the words in it, have the Freedom of Religion and should not be forced into saying it.
With sounds of youthful laughter, conversations about the students’ weekends, and the shuffling of college ruled paper; students file into their classrooms and find their seats on a typical Monday morning. As the announcements travel throughout the school’s intercoms, the usual “Please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance” becomes no longer usual but rather puzzling to some students. “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, indivisible, with liberty, and justice for all.” Confusion passes through some of the student’s minds. With the reoccurrence of “God” in the backdrop of American life, the relationship between church and state has become of little to no matter for American citizens just as it has with American students. While congress makes no law respecting an establishment of religion, the term “freedom of religion” presents itself to no longer be the definition of “free”, while also having its effects on debates today. According to Burt Rieff, in Conflicting Rights and Religious Liberty, “Parents, school officials, politicians, and religious leaders entered the battle over defining the relationship between church and state, transforming constitutional issues into political, religious, and cultural debates” (Rieff). Throughout the 20th century, many have forgotten the meaning of religion and what its effects are on the people of today. With the nonconformist society in today’s culture, religion has placed itself in a category of insignificance. With the many controversies of the world, religion is at a stand still, and is proven to not be as important as it was in the past. Though the United States government is based on separation of church and state, the gover...
Gwen Wilde wrote an essay on “Why the Pledge of Allegiance Should be Revised.” In this essay, Gwen believes that the words “under God” should be removed from the Pledge of Allegiance. Gwen informs us that the original Pledge did not include “under God” and the words were not added until 1942, therefore, the words can easily be removed. Although some changes have been made to make it clear that the Pledge of Allegiance is for the United States Gwen believes that the words “under God” do not show any support for our country and only make those who do not believe in God feel uncomfortable. Therefore, Gwen believes that “under God” is not appropriate for the Pledge and does not show that we are a Nation that is “indivisible.”
The pledge of allegiance violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. I believe that the pledge is mismatched with democracy and freedom which suggest that pledges of allegiance are features of dictatorial states like Nazi Germany.
In our current society it is established that faith is equated with a type of blind acceptance of all that the church or institution stands for. Having faith is still viewed as a wholesome characteristic, though it is more and more becoming correlated with negative connotation that is commonly attached to a thoughtless, dogmatic approach an absolute obedience of all tenets regardless of conscious thoughts and appeals. In a similar regard, patriotism has become an exemplar of modern faith because it calls for unchallenged compliance with both the laws of the government and their unjustified actions, especially during times of war. Primarily this absolute-authority mindset was instilled within the general population because of the principle of sovereign immunity that was instituted long before the United States was even founded. While widely accepted during the beginning of this country, landmark atrocities initiated by the government, regardless of rationale, emphasized this question of immunity to the people and the court system, eventually leading to revolutionary judgments against the government. Before this, especially during the Cold War, the government fought extensively to keep a jaded population through propaganda. When we view the history of both religion and government, the ideals behind true obedience are strongest when they allow for active engagement on behalf of the citizens, permitting them to question deeply and ultimately follow their consciences. One individual, who had the tragic benefit of being involved with an example of the landmark atrocities the government inflicted, came to the realization that, no matter what obstacles one faces, obedience...