Banning The Pledge Of Allegiance Essay

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

To many people?s surprise, it is not necessary for children to recite the pledge of allegiance at

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.

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,

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

The allegiance was originated in August, 1892 but did not include the words “Under God”, which was added in 1933. There was some concern of the change, considering separation of church and state. By forcing students and American citizens to cite the allegiance, you’re there by forcing them into a certain religion, which violates the first amendment, “Freedom of Religion”. By forcing them to stand during the allegiance they are there by betraying their own beliefs of where they come from or who they are. Some may look at it, as disrespect towards America or our war veterans, but it also shows disrespect towards those individuals. We are not only ignoring their beliefs but we are disrespecting their history, their family, and where they originally come

The father, a nonbeliever, fought that the words "under God" in the Pledge abused the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment and that the school region's recitation arrangement was

They stated that religion unifies many people and puts faith into America. The State believed that the prayer would help bring out the spiritual side of children. The parents argued that the prayer quite simply violated the first amendment, the separation of church and state and requires that the government stay out of the business of prescribing religious activities of any kind. They argued that because not all students shared the same religious beliefs, the public schools should not be a place to preach religion, and believed that religious freedom of the students was being corrupted by providing time during school for prayer. The State rebutted that the prayer was completely optional, therefore was constitutional; if the prayer was against a child’s religion, or if they simply did not want to they did not have to take part in the prayer. A case very similar to this one took place rather recently. An excerpt from the pledge of allegiance states “one nation, under God.” A parent of a child attending pleaded that having said words in the pledge of allegiance is in violation of the Establishment Clause, and took it to the Supreme Court, this is the case of Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow. The Court's decision was that the excerpt did not violate the constitution because it is a symbol of our heritage and it is a

The original Pledge of Allegiance was meant as an expression of patriotism, not religious faith and made no mention of God. The pledge was written in 1892 by the socialist Francis Bellamy. He wrote it for the popular magazine Youth's Companion on the occasion of the nation's first celebration of Columbus Day. It’s wording omitted reference not only to God but also to the United States. “Under God” should be removed from the pledge for purposes of creating equality in different beliefs and allowing each American their right laid out in the constitution. These are the original words to the Pledge of Allegiance.

(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 think the Pledge of Allegiance is unnecessary and I do not feel that we should have to say it. In this country freedom of speech is considered more as a right than a privilege, and if this is true then the Pledge should not be such a “must”. It has lost its significance and what it stood for. It also violates the law of the separation of church and state and should be altered for that. There are some traditions that are out-dated and not needed any more and saying the Pledge of Allegiance is one of them. In this day in age must we really continue to repeat the same short verse every day? I feel we need to evaluate the reciting of

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

Recently, there has been great controversy about the words "under God" existing in the nations Pledge of Allegiance. Michael Newdow, a

Take a moment to recall some of the patriotic symbols that help embody the spirit of our nation: the bald eagle, the Statue of Liberty, or even the national anthem. Among others promoting the civic duties and democratic virtues prized by our American society, nothing has caused as much controversy as the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools. At the start of a new school day, every classroom of a government run school would be ringing with the chorus of America’s youth delivering the pledge in an almost autonomous way. The reason why this is such a big deal is due to the fact that to some, including myself, believe the words “under God” suggests a breach of the first amendment. As of late, our country has been in the