President Obama sat down with the President of Turkey and told him “We have a very large Christian population, we do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation; we consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values” (White House Press Release). Although the United States has a large Christian following we also have many religions within our culture; with an ongoing conflict against citizens that are nonreligious, Atheist, Agnostic, etcetera. The two words that were added to the Pledge of Allegiance proves the favoring of religion in a secular government. Even though the pledge does have a loyalty amongst the majority of citizens, we should remove the words "Under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance because by removing the words "Under God" it will give equality to everyone, hold us to be a Secular Government, not a Christian Nation and ? 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 ... ... middle of paper ... ...ar. 2014. . Sifton, Elisabeth. “The Battle over the Pledge” [“p11-16. 5p. 1 Illustration”]. Nation: 11-16. 5p. 1 Illustration. Ebsco Religion and Philosophy. Web. 22 Mar. 2014. . United States Census Bureau. U.S Department of Commerce, n.d. Web. 22 Mar. 2014. . The White House. N.p., 6 Apr. 2006. Web. 23 Mar. 2014. .
The reasoning behind the Constitution of the United States is presented as 'based upon the philosophy of Hobbes and the religion of Calvin. It assumes the natural state of mankind in a state of war, and that the carnal mind is at enmity with God.' Throughout, the struggle between democracy and tyranny is discussed as the Founding Fathers who envisioned the Constitution in Philadelphia in 1787 believed not in total democracy, but instead saw common man as selfish and contemptuous, and therefore in need of a 'a good political constitution to control him.' Being a largely propertied body, with the exception of William Few, who was the only one who could honestly be said to represent the majority yeoman farmer class, the highly privileged classes were fearful of granting man his due rights, as the belief that 'man was an unregenerate rebel who has to be controlled' reverberated.
Near the start of her letter, Ms. Porter establishes herself as a credible source on the subject of signing an oath of this kind. “My memory goes back easily thirty years to the time this law was passed in Colorado, in a time of war, fright and public hysteria being whipped up by the same kind of people who are doing this work now. (Porter 617)” The author uses ethos in this statement to show that she has personal memories of the Original Red Scare which happened around 1920. She supports her claim with pathos in her statement “I believed then, and still do believe, that this requirement of an oath of allegiance was more of a device for embarrassing and humiliating honest person than an effective trap for traitors and subversive people. (Porter 617)” The author is appealing to our sense of pride, and the embarrassment felt when people attack our honesty.
Holton, Woody. Unruly Americans and the Origins of the Constitution. New York: Hill and Wang, 2007.
“In God We Trust” is the phrase upon which we base our country. It can be seen on our money, in our justice system, and even in our Pledge of Allegiance. By recognizing God as the foundation of truth and justice which most people were inclined to accept, both Paine and Henry formed successful arguments based partly upon transfer. Because God is considered the truth, the right way, and the fair judge of the world, it only made sense to use His influence to give credibility and the positive connections associated with God to the American Revolution. As intended, both audiences freely a...
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).
A popular notion among many religious conservatives is the rejection of what is commonly referred to as the separation between church and state. They maintain the United States was founded by leaders who endorsed Christian principles as the cornerstone of American democracy, and that the First Amendment prohibition against government establishment was not intended to remove religion from public life. As a result, a number of disputes have made their way through to the courts, pitting those ready to defend the wall of separation, against those who would tear it down. Two recent cases have brought this battle to the forefront of political debate. The first involves an Alabama Supreme Court justice, who, in defiance of a Federal judge, fought the removal of a granite display of the Ten Commandments from the rotunda of the state courthouse. Also, a California man has challenged the constitutionality of the phrase “under God” in an upcoming Supreme Court case involving student recitation of the pledge of allegiance.
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.”
Foner, Eric. "Chapter 9." Give Me Liberty!: An American History. Brief Third ed. Vol. One. New York: W.W. Norton, 2012. N. pag. Print.
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...
First, I would like to talk about the history of the Pledge of Allegiance. Many people today recite the Pledge of Allegiance but do not know the history that took place behind it. The Pledge of Allegiance was originally written more than a century ago. The original pledge was: I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic, for which it stands, one Nation, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all . The flag serves as a symbol of our country and its proud traditions of freedom and equal opportunity. In the 1920s, the National Flag Conferences replaced the phrase “my Flag” with “the Flag of the United States of America.” In 1954, Communist threats occurred causing Congress to add the words under God to the pledge. Then 12 years later, Congress reviewed the Pledge of Allegiance and added the words “Under God .” While reciting the Pledge of Allegiance it should be recited by standing placing your
The Pledge of Allegiance was introduced, “Under God” in 1954 during the McCarthy hysteria. Brooke further says that the Treaty of Tripoli of 1797 is very clear that the US nation was not founded under the Christian religion. Timothy Pickering, the Secretary Of State’s endorsed this treaty as well as President John Adams. When it was sent to the senate for ratification, it received a unanimous vote, which is among the few documents passed unanimously in the American senate. In fact, the document did not attract any debate or dissent.... ...
and religion. Should there be any real entanglement between “Church and State” at all? In a letter to a Baptist minister, Thomas Jefferson stated that, “the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and State.” (http://www.free2pray.info/Danbury.html). The phrase, “a wall of separation between church and State”, is often quoted or referenced during discussions concerning the mixture of religion and politics. Politics and religion are generally perceived as two of the most controversial conversation subjects, often leading to heated debates over different issues. Yet, matters are certainly not any lighter, whenever you combine the two topics in a single discussion of their relationship to each other.
Holton, W. (2008). Unruly americans and the origins of the constitution (1 pbk ed.). New York: Hill and Wang.
What about the Pledge of Allegiance? This is stated every single day in the classroom? “One nation under God…”. An addition to the U.S. Constitution in 1954, “Under God” became a part of the Pledge of Allegiance. In 2004, after being challenged in Elk Grove Unified School Dist. v. Newdow, the Supreme Court ruled, on Flag Day, that the patriotic oath could not be challenged in his fight of separation of church and state.
Averroes, and Charles E. Butterworth. Decisive Treaties and Epistle Dedicatory. Provo: Brigham Young UP, 2001. Print.