Banning of the Pledge of Allegiance Hoax What could have been the most controversial move of Barack Obama’s presidency is the banning of the Pledge of Allegiance. This fake news story went viral sometime in December of 2016. This story caused an uproar nationwide, myself included because I did indeed believe this story. This story was published under a fake news source that looked almost identical to ABC News. As I am looking at the exact article it is almost hard not to believe this story. It identifies the executive order under which the president revoked the recognition of the Pledge of Allegiance. If this news story were true, it would be illegal for public schools to display or recite the pledge. Also, if anyone violated this order you could have a fine up to $10,000 and even serve up to a year in federal prison ("Obama Signs Executive Order Banning the Pledge of Allegiance In Schools Nationwide"). My initial interest in this topic traces back to elementary school and even high school. I remember every morning starting my school day reciting the pledge day after …show more content…
I would also like to make my audience aware of the truth behind my fake news story. I think it would be extremely beneficial if I could teach my audience how to identify fake news in comparison to real news. Our society needs a wake- up call when it comes to identifying real or fake news. It is extremely important for people to know the truth behind a story instead of jumping to conclusions. Our election this year is an excellent example of how fake news can alter such a serious matter like the election of the president. I am an international business major, and I also minor in pre-law. My major really does not influence my choice of fake news story. But, since I minor in pre-law I would be able to recognize which amendment this executive order would go
The driving force was the Catholic fraternal society the Knights of Columbus. In the early '50s the Knights themselves adopted the God-infused pledge for use in their own meetings, and members showered Congress with calls for the United States to do the same. In April 1953, Rep. Louis Rabaut, D-Mich., formally proposed the alteration of the pledge in a bill he introduced to Congress. The words "Under God" were inserted in the pledge for the express purpose of endorsing religion; the U.S. Supreme Court itself ruled in 1971 that this was unconstitutional. Also according to the Supreme Court's own rulings, it doesn't matter that students are allowed to refrain from saying the pledge; a 2000 high court decision said that voluntary, student-led prayers at school football games are unconstitutionally "coercive," because they force students into an unacceptable position of either proclaiming religious beliefs they don't share or publicly protesting. (http://www2law.cornell.edu.)
If you think about it, you have probably been saying the Pledge of Allegiance everyday since first grade. When you initially learnt it, you didn’t even know what it meant and by the time you did understand it, you said it by pure rote. No one questioned it, but why should they? It doesn’t take much energy to stand up and recite a short verse everyday. However do you say these significant words with any sincerity? But stop and think for a second, why are we required to start each school day by reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. Don’t you think it is about time to understand why exactly we say the Pledge? Is it to honor our country? Is it to respect our freedom? Is it to hail our
Gwen Wilde’s essay “Why the Pledge of Allegiance Should Be Revised” highlights key reasons why the Pledge of Allegiance should be changed to be less divisive towards Americans who do not believe in a God. Wilde begins her essay by informing the audience of the countless alterations the pledge has gone through over the years. The earliest version of the pledge, which was published in 1892, left out the words “under God.” The words “under God” were not added until 1954 when president Dwight D. Eisenhower approved the pledge we all know today. Wilde goes into detail about the hypocrisy illustrated within the Pledge of Allegiance. She explains how the words “under God” are needlessly divisive in a nation that is said to be indivisible. However,
Why the pledge of allegiance should be revised, by Gwen Wilde, is a very well written essay that the reader would most likely deem convincing. Gwen Wilde states that the Pledge in its latest from simply requires all Americans to say the phrase “one nation, under God,” when many Americans do not believe in God. She uses many different writing strategies to get her point across in a very precise and appropriate manner. Although there are some minor problems, this analysis will explain how Gwen Wilde uses certain writing strategies that are able to back her argument with a very convincing approach.
Across California, schools are no longer are required to recite The Pledge of Allegiance in public school, but outside its mandatory. Studies have shown that this has no effect on the children, no matter what test scores the school has. The choice of whether to teach it or not, is up to the principals or teachers of the school, nevertheless the school is still required schools are required to have a “patriotic exercise” everyday. There have not been any particular differences between schools that teach it and schools that do not. Parents do not seem to mind their child not knowing the pledge, for example Todd Davis. His fifth grade son knows the pledge by heart and in two languages, but his second grade daughter did not know what it was. David shrugged it of not caring because there is no necessity
For years American citizens have held respect for something important to veterans all over America, known as the Pledge of Allegiance. The pledge of allegiance is a solemn oath of loyalty to the US, declaimed as part of flag-saluting ceremonies. It’s tradition to stand during the allegiance, and place your right hand over your heart. Doing so, shows respect to America, and to the veterans who fought for our freedom. Recently, individuals have been speaking out as to why you shouldn’t be forced to stand during the Pledge of Allegiance.
Running through fields with explosions and all your closest friends that now feel like your brothers. This is what a brave United States soldiers go through on a regular day to day basis. If someone one can not stand for a few seconds to honor the brave men and women of their country they do not deserve to live in it. Although, I believe that the Pledge of Allegiance should remain voluntary because our country is founded on the belief of free choice. Although i also think for the most part people should say the pledge.
Summary: The division between church and state is a gray line that is often crossed and argued about. For example, Gwen Wilde, the author, argues that the words “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance requires people who do not believe in God to recite something they do not necessarily believe in. If a person chose not to say the full Pledge, including to utter the words “under God” they run the risk of being called unpatriotic. The author continually argues that the words “under God” add a religious doctrine that not all Americans believe in.
As a daily routine many schools have their students start by standing up, facing the American flag, and reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. This is something that most students have memorized since kindergarten and in some cases even preschool. The students recite the pledge every morning and most of them don’t know what it means or aren’t really sure why they have to say it. If students don’t know what the purpose or the history behind something is, they generally don’t take the matter seriously, which with The Pledge being a serious matter, students need to know the history in order to show respect. The Pledge of Allegiance should be said every morning by students at schools in the USA and they should be aware of its meaning.
(Harrison, Maureen. Gilbert, Steve. Landmark Decisions of the United States Supreme Court II.) The public schools systems are not trying to offend anyone. They are trying to uphold the system of educating American students. The views of a few people should not influence the greater good of the Pledge of Allegiance. It has been recited for many years and for many years people have fought against it. People are not fighting against the statement “In God We Trust” that is imprinted on each and every coin in the United States. There is no need to change the Pledge it is there for Americans to recite to show their appreciation to a grateful nation and as a way of saluting the American Flag. Mudhillun Muqaribu wrote a letter to the editor of the New York Times titled God and the Pledge: My Brother’s Quest. Mudhillun writes that he is a Muslim who grew up in America. When he was younger, other students made it clear to him and his siblings that “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance did not apply to them. He says that he began sitting out of the Pledge in the sixth grade. The main point of his letter was to applaud Michael Newdow for upholding religious diversity in America. (Muqaribu, Mudhillun. Letter. New York Times). Mudhillun was not persecuted by anyone for his decision in sitting out in the Pledge; it was his decision and he was respected for that. Michael Newdow and the others who argue against “Under God” in the Pledge have the right
In President Eisenhower’s own statement “FROM THIS DAY FORWARD, the millions of our school children will daily proclaim in every city and town, every village and rural school house, the dedication of our nation and our people to the Almighty. To anyone who truly loves America, nothing could be more inspiring than to contemplate this rededication of our youth, on each school morning, to our country's true meaning. Especially is this meaningful as we regard today's world. Over the globe, mankind has been cruelly torn by violence and brutality and, by the millions, deadened in mind and soul by a materialistic philosophy of life. Man everywhere is appalled by the prospect of atomic war. In this somber setting, this law and its effects today have profound meaning. In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country's most powerful resource, in peace or in war”. President Bush was also quoted in saying “America is a nation that values our relationship with an almighty. Declaration of God in the Pledge of Allegiance doesn’t violate rights. As a matter of fact, it’s a confirmation of the fact that we received our
"I pledge allegiance, to the flag, of the United States of America, and to the Republic, for which it stands, one nation, under Congress, the Supreme Court, the Declaration of Independence, our founding fathers, and the President, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
Every morning over 75 million students around the nation recite the Pledge of Allegiance verbatim (Digest of Education Statistics). If one walks up to one of these students and asks them about the meaning and the origin of this pledge, what would they say? Nothing. However, even though more than a million students recite these words every day, not more than half probably know the true meaning behind these words. One cannot deny the fact that most of these children just want to get this pledge “over with” to continue talking to their peers. The Pledge of Allegiance has gone through several changes since Francis Bellamy, a Baptist minister, wrote it in 1892. The pledge acts as a source of patriotism, national pride and controversy. The
Socialist minister Francis Bellamy wrote the Pledge of Allegiance in August 1892. In 1923, the words, "the Flag of the United States of America" were added. Then in 1954, President Eisenhower encourages Congress to add the words "under God." Communist threats during that time period lead to the issue of whether those words should be added. This resulted in the pledge that many American citizens know and say today: "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." This pledge states the federal government’s promises to all American citizens. Since our Founding Fathers declared the United States’ independence from Great Britain on July fourth, 1776, American politicians have hailed our country as both a beacon and leading exemplar of individual liberty and freedom. Although the pledge states “...liberty and justice for all,” the United States has not lived up to the promise of freedom and the claim in the Pledge of Allegiance because it does not apply to every citizen, even though that is what the Pledge of Allegiance promises; immigrants were, and still are, mocked and discriminated against, and certain genders, races and religions are not given the same rights as others and are treated differently.
While the pledge of allegiance is meant to enlist pride in students, people should have the right not to deal with this kind of patriotic ordeals. When we pledge “allegiance,” we are promising to be loyal and honest to our nation, the United States, and while these important ideas are beneficial, we should not be forced to pledge loyalty to a nation. The Declaration of Independence clearly says that people have the "right and duty" to go against an unfair as well as a corrupt government. While this should only be thought of when things go out of control done many do not approve of the government, and they should feel comfortable saying so. As things are, right now students and anyone for the matter should not be required to say the pledge of allegiance. There is, in some areas, pressure to "give in" and say it just because everyone one else is already doing so. People should be all for the educations of the nations students and the importance of voting in election polls to practice democracy, and student s should be well informed about the issues that the nation is