Summary Of The Pledge Of Allegiance

I Pledge Allegiance, by Chris Lynch, is a book about the troubles a young teen named Morris goes through when he and his three life long best friends from Boston, Rudi, Ivan, and Beck find out that Rudi is being drafted into the military to go and fight in Vietnam. Once the Morris, Ivan, Beck, and Rudi find out that one of them is being drafted they all make a pledge to join the military and do whatever it takes to protect each other and keep each other safe.

Recently the mentioning of “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance has been considered very controversial. One of the prime foundations of what America is built on is the separation of church and state in all public institutions. The two words clearly violate this law. There has been much talk about just taking out the words “Under God”. I believe that if you are going to edit parts of it why not rewrite the whole thing. Since I believe the pledge is out-dated, we should create a modern variation of this verse, to honor our democracy. Better yet we can recite it only on special occasions but with the understanding that it is optional to say it.

Wilde states by adding “under God” to the Pledge it separates a nation that is said to be indivisible. By doing so it makes Americans who have never been devout but always patriotic feel un-American for not wanting to utter the words “under God”. The point is, reciting the Pledge is a patriotic service in which religion should not be attached to.

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.

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

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

When I was in Mrs. E’s kindergarten class, everyday we would stand up in that small, but comfortable room, face the flag and say the Pledge of Allegiance. As a little kid you really don’t understand what exactly the Pledge is saying, it was just a bunch of words we would have to say everyday as a class. It wasn’t until I got older that I realized the Pledge was a very important part of everybody's day.

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 the essay “Why the Pledge of Allegiance should be Revised,” Gwen Wilde argues that the Pledge of Allegiance should be altered to better fit the image of Americans.Wilde states that the phrase “under God” should be removed due to the fact that only 70 to 80 percent of Americans “say they are affiliated with some form of Christianity,” and that the other 20 to 30 percent are unable to say the phrase “in good faith.” Wilde wrote her essay for a composition course at Tufts University. The following is a summary of her essay.

“The words "under God" were added to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954 to show the world the stark contrast between the United States of America and the Communist regime.” The words show the relationship between our country and our social system. This also shows that more than half of the country approved adding in the words “under god.” “The men who created our government were men of strong faith.” The men who created the government understood the rights that we inherit from God. Although our freedom does not come from government but, being a Christian in the government must of helped America get its freedom. In 1954, 80% of the country supported having “Under God” in the pledge, so it should

“I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, for liberty and justice for all”. Notice that it leaves out “Under God.” Saying the Pledge of Allegiance

On March 24, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Elle Grove Unified School District vs. Newdow over the decision that the words, “Under God”, in the Pledge of Allegiance. Michael Newdow, being an atheist, did not want his daughter to learn of a “false” or “fake” God. He did everything in his power to try and get the phrase removed from the pledge and from society all together. Newdow states, “And every morning my child is asked to stand up, face that flag, put her hand over her heart and say that her father is wrong”. Although the 9th Circuit Court originally agreed with Mr.Newdow’s contention, the court stayed the ruling after a national uproar ensued. People did not want someone who has a biased thought process to decide whether or not a simple phrase in the pledge, should be removed. Newdow states, “For 62 years, this pledge did serve the purpose of unification, and it did do it perfectly”. Newdow does not want anything to do with any God in this world just because he has a biased thought

The phrase “Under God” is a big reason behind why a lot of individuals choose not to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. Religion should be separate from patriotism due to a significant amount of United States citizens belonging to different religions or having no religion at all. It is inconsiderate to people of different religions to make them recite a Pledge with another god’s name in it, just as it is inconsiderate to include a phrase involved with a singular religion in a pledge that children in a whole country are expected to stand for and

I think that the pledge of allegiance was changed multiple times because the world changes, people change. I am pretty sure that at some point in the future it will continue to be changed. People have to learn to adapt to new ideas, new policies, new laws because not everything is going to be the same. I also want to point out something else that Chief Justice Rehnquist said. I disagree with him when he says "willingly participated;" many students neglected to say the pledge of allegiance when I was in elementary school, and some would even get suspended. A lot of students didn't willingly say the pledge of allegiance, they had no other choice or they would get in trouble.