Pledge Of Allegiance Essay

Allowing the government to remove this part of the pledge does not only allow for everyone being able to say it but it also still allows students to say it in schools. The main reason why the “Under God” should be removed is to allow everyone in this country to be able to say the pledge. For the main reason this pledge should still be said in schools is to have the students be able to practice their patriotism in this country. Some might still say that the pledge takes up too much time or it brainwashes the students, but in reality this pledge is good for the students to say. As long as the religion aspect of the pledge is separate from the pledge itself, there should be no problems with anyone saying the pledge. This is a great compromise between the two different views on this topic. If this change is made the American people will have one less issue to worry about. This is a country made by the people, for the

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

The Founding Fathers created this country on the concept of separation of church and state; the line “under God” is found in, however, implies that America is one nation kept together by the will of God, which does not uphold the Fathers’ principles. The First Amendment’s Establishment Clause prevents the government from making any laws that hold one religion over another (Procon.org). Based on this clause, the Pledge should not have been able to have “under God” added to it, so it is only rational that the phrase is removed. Though at least 80% of Americans support keeping it in the Pledge, one of the key components of American democracy is upholding the rights of the minority as well as the majority (DemocracyWeb.org). As shown, the will of 80% of Americans, who are presumably Christian, should not be able to silence the will of the other 20%, especially considering all people are supposed to recite the

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,

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 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.)

(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

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.

In public schools all across the nation, children and young adults place their hands over their hearts and recited “The Pledge of Allegiance” every morning before class begins. Now people are speaking up and demanding they stop The Pledge of Allegiance or remove the word “God” from its text. The Pledge, which has been said by children and young adults since 1892, was beginning to be scrutinized because people with different religious beliefs did not want their children to say “under God”. Throughout the last 100 years several court cases have been filed to argue religion in The Pledge of Allegiance; Minerals School District v. Gobitis, Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, Newdow v. Rio Linda Union. The Pledge of Allegiance should be recited by all public schools in the US and should also include “God” in its text.

There have been several versions of The Pledge and the one that we currently recite today was revised back in 1954 when president Eisenhower reacted to the communist threat. The original version was written by Francis Bellamy in 1892, who had hoped that countries around the world would recreate their own versions. Now, in most states reciting The Pledge at school is a state law. The Pledge consist of students standing up, facing the American flag, placing their right hand over their heart, and saying the words “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.” In other places when The Pledge is being recited its considered

This has become a very controversial topic these days because of one line in the pledge, “under God” This is a “questionable religious reference” (Tucker 1). “Congress and President Eisenhower add “under God” to the pledge” (Tucker 4) in 1954, this is completely unnecessary because it brings religion into the pledge of the country and some groups of people do not believe in god, yet they are being forced to say excluding California. Such as Jehovah’s Witnesses, a group of people that do not believe in serving the country, but believe in serving god. Ultimately, our counties schools should not be obliged to recite this pledge. It is “outdated and unnecessary” (Tucker 1). Using California as an example, it does not affect the performance of students, but does affect

In the work “Why the Pledge of Allegiance Should Be Revised,” the author, Gwen Wilde expresses her feelings of why the words “under God” are inappropriate and needlessly divisive (56). Wilde begins the essay with giving the readers a history on the pledge. She begins by telling the readers that the original pledge, that was published on September 8, 1892, did not include the words “under God.” She also gives the point of how in 1923 at the first national Flag Conference, it was argued that immigrants could get confused by the wording of the pledge. The pledge was finally sanctioned in 1954 after President Dwight D. Eisenhower approved adding the words “under God” (56).

“…one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.” And so finishes the Pledge of Allegiance for the United States of America. Whether or not a person would wish to identify our nation as a Christian one, there is certainly no doubt that the very oath that binds a person into serving it includes serving God. As it follows, many of our laws are centered around our understanding of the Bible, and the morality that can be gleaned from it. Even in our modern time, where the lines are becoming more and more blurred, eighty-three percent of Americans still identify themselves as Christian. A common national ideology is that our country has a favored nation status with God; thus it is our responsibility to ‘sow the

Unfortunately, my fear is being realized. There was been very serious talks about removing “under God” from our pledge and removing the pledge entirely because “some might be

President Dwight D. Eisenhower authorized the change so that the United States would be separated from our Soviet Union enemies who were purely Atheist. (Borja, 2002, paragraph 17.) To many people, the pledge is a constant affirmation of unity and love, and to many it is seen as just a giant cult-like prayer.