The Pledge Should Be Allowed In The United States

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.

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

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.

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

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

It is often thought that people should be forced to say the Pledge of Allegiance. However, what people fail to realize is it is not an american practice to force something on someone. For example, people for the most part

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 years have passed by, I’ve seen a dramatic change in schools, ranging from elementary to high school, suddenly stop saying or ignoring the Pledge of Allegiance. I cannot count the amount of times I have gotten angry at peers because they failed to show our country respect. Whether or not schools shouldn’t require the Pledge of Allegiance for both public and private schools should not even be considered. Discussions over the course of history have become heated, religious values have been crossed, and furthermore my heart is broken for those who fail to give two minutes of their time to say the pledge.

The Pledge of Allegiance has gone through several changes since it was written over one hundred years ago, but none of these changes have had as much controversy attached to them as the addition of “under God.” Written in 1892 by a minister named Francis Bellamy, the pledge was written for a national patriotic school program, in which children throughout the country would recite his words while facing the American flag. Words have been added, phrases have been altered for clarity, and even the correct way to salute the flag has been changed. While the vast majority of these changes were important, for example the salute being changed from a Nazi-esque extended right arm to the child’s hand over their heart, “under God” does not add anything of meaning to the Pledge. This phrase is not a necessary or beneficial part of the Pledge of Allegiance and should be removed by the President.

After the Civil War ravaged our country, the sixteenth President of the United States, Abraham Lincoln, delivered the “Gettysburg Address” to unite our country. In the speech, he spoke of the core values of human equality and ended the speech with “…that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.” Here the listener or reader can see that even in harsh times, the United States was a nation under God, and see that God gave the American people hope for a resolution to the conflict. In 1942, Congress adopted the Pledge of Allegiance. In my school, we recite the 1954 to present version every day, and always end it with “One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.” As a proud American, I recite this with meaning every day, and I could not be happier to say

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).