How The Civil War Affect The Pledge Of Allegiance

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.

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

Most children that attended grade school can remember reciting the Pledge of Allegiance at the beginning of every school day, but few actually know the origin of it. In August 1892 a socialist, Minister Francis Bellamy wrote the Pledge hoping it would be utilized by citizens in any country. Since then it has had parts added to it and the way it was practiced has been changed, now placing a right hand over the heart and facing towards the flag of the United States. Little did he know the impact it would have on America in the late 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century. Now that America is so influenced with different races and religions people believe the Pledge has crossed the line in the first Amendment of the Constitution of

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,

Since the Pledge of Allegiance was something that was recited every single school morning, it did not have much importance to me and just became a school routine, you stand up, place your hand on your heart, repeat the words, and sit down. Even at one point it became annoying to me. If you were to not fully participate you would be slightly scolded by the teacher or given a look. Now that I am older I have learned more about what it means and understand that it has an emotional meaning to some Americans. The Pledge of Allegiance is a patriotic vow to the United States to remain loyal and obedient to the country that offers freedom and

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.

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

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

Question 13: Certain readers who may not agree with Wilde’s argument are those who do believe in God, not all of them, but a portion of them may be close-minded and see nothing wrong with the newly revised Pledge. For example, the type of people who believe in a divine power and are not open to listening to others spiritual beliefs or lack thereof. Readers who do not agree with Wilde’s argument are entitled to their own opinions, however, not everyone shares their same values and the addition of the words “under God” creates a division of people who believe the statement and those who do not. One might persuade the opposers of Wilde’s argument by saying there is a division in the nation because of it, or that there is no purpose for. The purpose of the Pledge of Allegiance is to show loyalty to one’s country, not to show one’s religious beliefs, since not everyone in the United States share the same religious beliefs.

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

As of late, our country has had numerous discussions and debates about whether or not if it is your right to stand or sit when the pledge of allegiance is being played. Since the 11th grade in high school, I decided to not stand for the pledge. I often questioned, how can you pledge for a country that does not treat or protect you or your other fellow African Americans the right way? The reason why this is such a major concern is due to the fact that a majority of African Americans, including myself, believe that the pledge of allegiance does not stand for what it says. I did research and I contend that it is important to reveal what the pledge of allegiance stands for.

Seventy three years ago Congress got the United States out of what had turned into an unexpectedly embarrassing situation. It concerned the Pledge of Allegiance -- specifically, something called the Bellamy Salute Most people today have likely never heard of it, but the Bellamy Salute was once a constant part of the country's life. Until 1892, there was no such thing as a Pledge of Allegiance(Greene) The Pledge of Allegiance of the United States is an expression of allegiance to the Flag of the United States and the republic of theUnited States of America, originally composed by Francis Bellamy in 1892 and formally adopted by Congress as the pledge in 1942.[1] The official name of The Pledge of Allegiance was adopted in 1945. The last change in language came on Flag Day 1954 when the words "under God" were added. But since that day, lots of controversies happened regarding adding the word “Under God”. This event made some Americans upset. Pledging our allegiance to a flag that flies over a nation “under God” has become a point of contention for some. Gwen Wilde, a student at Tufts University, explains in her essay, “Why the Pledge of Allegiance Should Be Revised” that “the addition of the words “under God” is inappropriate, and they are needlessly divisive—an odd addition indeed to a Nation that is said to be

The argument of the words ?under god? remaining in the pledge is an ongoing fight?one with many court cases, all of which have ruled the same. The ruling is that under god is still appropriate and need not be removed from the pledge. The argument is clear, saying that there are many people who are not ?under God? and do not believe in ?Him.? Some people believe this statement shows that our nation?s religious beliefs are all the same, when in fact they are not. In a recent case in California, a few chief justices spoke on their opinion about the pledge. Justice Rehnquist says ?Reciting the pledge, or listening to others recite it, is a patriotic exercise, not a religious one? Participants promise fidelity to our flag and our nation, not to any particular God, Faith or Church.? (Hendrie, 2004, paragraph 25). Judge O?Connor says that ?nearly any government action could be overturned as a violation of the establishment clause if a ?heckler?s veto? sufficed to show that its message was one of endorsement.? (Hendrie, 2004, paragraph 27).