Should Under God Be Taken Out of the Pledge?

Taking under God out of the pledge has always been a subject in many debates. The following are some of the views and opinions expressed by both sides.

Why the Phrase Should be Removed

Those who want it removed say it is very presumptuous. By including God, it assumes that every American believes in one. This isn’t the case at all. It’s true that a majority believe in the existence of a deity. But not everyone does. By including that phrase, it either implies all Americans believe in the deity, or should.

The pledge, it is argued, should be for all Americans. By taking under God out of the pledge, it ensures the partiality and secular nature of the pledge. America has already secularized Christmas, Halloween and other holidays. Why not do the same with the Pledge of Allegiance?

Why the Phrase Must Stay

Those in favor of the phrase remaining have their own reasons.
The first point is that the phrase doesn’t support any religious beliefs. The fact that God was used and not Jesus, Allah or any other specific deity proves this point.

Second, in no way does it allow for church intervention in politics. The separation of church and state was already made clear by the Founding Fathers through Thomas Jefferson’s writing.

It should also be stressed that the pledge isn’t a prayer. You are not swearing allegiance to a religious faith. Taking under God out of the pledge is unnecessary.

When it was affixed, President Eisenhower said it transcends religious belief itself. It goes beyond any and all religions. It becomes a spiritual arsenal that all Americans regardless of faith can use.

Other Supporting Arguments

If the word God is to be removed, it will start a chain reaction. Does it mean “God Bless America” shall be banned? What about all the bills with the phrase “In God we Trust”? Will they be phased out?

What about ordinary phrases like “Oh my God” and “Lord help us”? Will they be outlawed too? According to some, the use of God in these statements and in the pledge just needs to be accepted.

Some even argue that there’s no point discussing it. Instead of saying that taking under God out of the pledge is needed, why not just refuse to take the pledge? It’s voluntary, so you don’t have to submit yourself to it.

But those against it counter that its inclusion is indicative of bias. When the pledge was originally made, God was never mentioned in it. The fact that it was included at all indicates a religious orientation. It may not be biased for any religion. But it is biased in favor of the religious.

This can’t be allowed. While practicing any religion is allowed, so is the right not to adhere to any religious belief. And what about religions or ways of living that don’t believe in the existence of a deity?

There is no indication that taking under God out of the pledge will take place anytime soon. At the same time, the fact that the debate is still on shows the issue is very much alive.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.