The debate "Should the words Under God be in the pledge of allegiance of the United States" was started by
June 2, 2015, 11:34 pm.
By the way, thatjonathanguy is disagreeing with this statement.
74 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 81 people are on the disagree side.
That might be enough to see the common perception.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
toughgamerjerry posted 2 arguments, Weakley posted 1 argument, DerpedLocke posted 4 arguments, theQueenofdebate posted 1 argument to the agreers part.
soullesschicken posted 1 argument, PsychDave posted 10 arguments, sloanstar1000 posted 4 arguments, desght posted 2 arguments, thatdebatingchick posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
Damn3d, DavidStuff777, Bodaciouslady16, toughgamerjerry, gotitgod, Weakley, barca_paaras11, Bxat9, sabrina, R3dD0g, denno27, DerpedLocke, sloanstar1000, daisy, Jlav0820, ayofi, nicalow, theQueenofdebate, bamasam777, ototoxic, ajeng, dixie18, Tristanzee, Musstta, jbailee, tmfp, nwenn24, steady_current and 46 visitors agree.
thatjonathanguy, TheRealMe, I_Voyager, DanielleR123, soullesschicken, eka_zulaikha, PsychDave, KimUri, thatmathewguy, project_mayhem, historybuff, dylan420blazin, omfgcandy, Rafiki122, fgarcia505, PlatypusParty, Upbeatethan, ylmzemrah, Skeetc15, AstroSpace, graples, dgw23, desght, benrpollak, thatdebatingchick, wayneSPEC, aceofhearts, ELIJAHJ, dylan21502, ari_pooya, flam3zxx3, atheist20, Yuki_Amayane, PandaKidd, kittrapper, nickc123, countrybumpkin, xbulletwithbutterflywingsx, pajrc1234, Gman119, zoeclare7 and 40 visitors disagree.
Along with what sloanstar1000 said, there are many more alignments than just Muslim, Jewish, Protestant, and Atheist. And a lot of these believe in more than just one god and are in no way related to the Bible. And saying Atheists should just believe in God or some other force is just ignorant. Why don't you pray to Buddha or Zeus or even don't pray at all.
Queen, why should Christians, Jews, or Muslims receive special treatment in this country? we have freedom of religion which means freedom from religion. My hypothetical children shouldn't be forced to pledge to a god if we don't believe exists. Nor should anyone need the government to validate their personal beliefs.
We are under God, so obviously it should be in the pledge of allegiance. If you happen to be Muslim or protestant or Jewish or baptist, your religions are based off one God. For the atheists, try believing in God or at least some force of nature.
It had not actually occurred to me to look I to the origins of the phrase. I simply accepted that it was written by the founding fathers as I didn't even know that I did not know about the history. Thank you for pointing that out.
it really depends on what god they are talking about because the god that is referred to by Christians would not stand for anything that America has done lately therefore they have disregarded god and he should not be apart of their pledge of allegiance the only thing America should pledge its allegiance to is America because they obviously don't care what god has to say.
The biggest issue I see (that the great majority of you are ignoring) is that the founding fathers had NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. And I checked multiple sources just to be sure. The words "under god" weren't even added until the 1950s, and it was only because America was scared of communism. Therefore, it doesn't matter whether they believed in sexism, slavery, or god. Adding these 2 words was CONTROVERSIAL IN THE 50S. We are much more religiously tolerant and there are many more atheists as well as people of other religions now than there were back then. So yes, it's true, the pledge shouldn't have those words. We're not worried about Communism anymore, there isn't some longstanding 200 year old tradition many of you are implying, and we are not nearly as religious as we used to be. Many citizens call themselves Christians but I want you guys to think. How many people do you know that claim to be Christian, and how many of those people actually go to church every Sunday, or actually pray to God on a regular basis, or have actually read more than a couple verses in the Bible?
The problem is, that is the implication of your line of thought. The inclusion of the Christian God in the Pledge of Allegiance means that everyone must pray to the Christian God or they are unpatriotic. No one in this debate is trying to discourage you from your religion, the dissenting voices simply do not want you forcing them to pray to a God they do not worship.
to be fair, your arguments weren't that clear, I addressed the points I thought understood. Dealing with multiple topics in one go isn't a very efficient way to debate, it just muddles the topic.
If a clear, concise argument can be made, that would help.
You are misinterpreting my ENTIRE argument, and ignoring half of it. I will take no more time in restating my points.
No, not all opinions and beliefs deserve to be respected, and not respecting a belief is not fascism. If Fascism wasn't respected in 1930s Germany, the Third Reich wouldn't have come to power. So that makes NO sense.
The belief that the Christian religion should be respected over all other religions in this country is a belief that should not be respected, The Constitution defends the minority from mob rule. It's divisive and unnecessary.
First of all, "Allah" is simply the Arabic word for "God". But this is irrelevant, of course.
First of all, you are implying through the train of conversation that you disagree with a lot of the Founding Fathers' ideals. However, they DID believe in democracy, some concept of God, for the most part, and a lot of things that makes America "great" to a lot of people. If they failed at something, the Bill of Rights is a great start at remedying that.
The problem I could see as the other side is as you have said yourselves: "This is discriminating against my personal beliefs. Therefore, I see no good reason to keep this clause in there."
Okay, so this is about respecting someone else's beliefs. I can understand that.
However, this is not about bowing to contradictory ideals. More than 60% of Americans claim to be Christian; more than 70% religious. That's a lot. Of course, there is a good percentage of Atheists/others out there as well. Here is what is happening: less than half the population wants the two words "Under God" to be taken out of the Pledge of Allegiance. Okay. I respect their opinions just as much I respect some Vegetarians' opinions on the morality of eating meat. (I would like to point out that we have not enacted anti-meat laws as of yet in this country, as these people are still able to pursue their ideals.) But... Less than half... I hate to imply that Democracy is a majority vote, but is it just to simply ignore the beliefs of the majority in favor of the minority?
Yes, perhaps I would disagree with the clause, "One nation, under Shiva the Destroyer"... but I wouldn't cry about it. I might simply not say those three words that conflict with my beliefs.
The problem with this topic is that ALL opinions deserve to be recognized and respected. That keeps us from falling into Fascism. But changing something that people have simply uttered without sincerity or simply not uttered at all (without fear of retribution, I might add) is arguably ILLOGICAL, in of itself. I resent this topic because it relies too heavily upon beliefs that people are already bringing to the debate table. Some people say that we should have a Secular nation. Some disagree. That's fine. We cannot please everybody. Whatever happens, somebody will accuse somebody that x action is unfair or whatnot.
I respect your opinions and beliefs. Please respect mine as I know you will.
Of course not. I'm not sure why you would use the founding father's views on this subject either. The writers of the Constitution made sure that the only mention of religion was that no law shall respect the establishment of religion.
The founders were right about not allowing religion in government so true religious freedom and equality could exist, though they were wrong about a good many other things... like slavery.
Christians don't have special rights in this country, would Christians like it if "Under Allah" was there instead? of course not, so don't be a hypocrite about it. The words shouldn't be there in the first place.
By using the founding fathers' views and beliefs to justify keeping "under god" in the pledge, it is reasonable to look at how well their views reflect our current society. Racism, sexism and slavery were all common and accepted, and no longer are. As such their views are out of step with society and with the nation today. To rely on their beliefs to justify your argument here you would need to justify why this belief is relevant today while many of their other beliefs are not. What differentiates their discrimination against those of other faiths from their discrimination against women or those of other races that allows it to be acceptable?
If it has little to no impact, there would be little to no impact to removing it. You brought up the views of the founding fathers as a reason to keep the phrase in use. That makes the other views of the founding fathers relevant to the discussion.
This has nothing to do with SLAVERY. This is a two-word clause that has little to no significant impact to those that choose to see it as such.
They also believed in slavery and women not having the vote. Society has changed, and it is not unreasonable to expect the Pledge of Allegiance to reflect the tolerance and inclusiveness that modern society strives for.
Regardless of your personal beliefs, a lot of the Founding Fathers were Christians (or at least close). If people believe this to be irrelevant to America today, so be it. But it hardly makes a difference (except maybe to people like Ted Cruz ;P).
I agree there are bigger things we should worry about, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't talk about this. Freedom of speech means we can talk about both big things and little things, even if some people don't like the discussion.
Freedom of religion definitely permits you to say bless you to someone who sneezes but it does not permit you to require someone to say it to you. That is essentially what you are asking people who do not believe in the Christian God to do when they swear the pledge of allegiance. They have to say that the Christian God is the deity that watches over the United States. Would you find it acceptable if you had to say "One nation under Allah..." or people would think you were not patriotic?
First of freedom of religion gives everyone the right to say that if someone sneezes I will say God bless you I have the legal right to say that Under God has always been in the Pledge of Allegiance nobody ever complained about it till now and I honestly think this is a waste of a debate cause there are bigger things in this world to debate over instead of debating of two words
Having done some more research, I have to correct myself. It is no longer necessary to swear on the bible when testifying in court. Out of respect for those who are not Christian, this tradition is no longer mandatory and witnesses can "affirm" that they are telling the truth rather than swearing an oath on the bible. Disregard any parts of my arguments related to that practice as they are not valid.
It does show that lawmakers are sensitive to the issue and have replaced one tradition of forcing people to acknowledge the Christian God as supreme. By extension, it is not unreasonable to consider the next step altering the pledge of allegiance to remove the religious component.
Do you care about the war in the middle east? I don't have to live somewhere to have and express an opinion. I don't try to hide where my perspective comes from.
As to the history of the pledge, history must be looked at carefully, as not all historic beliefs are positive. We have discussed previously the fact that the founding fathers supported and defended slavery and sexism. Their views on religious tolerance are also very suspect. Otherwise the Salem witch trials would never have happened.
The vast majority of Christians, just like any other religion, are good people. But saying that because it is the dominant religion, or because the laws were originally based on Christian values it should continue to be religiously based is not a strong argument. If something has been discriminatory for 5 years, or 10 years, or 100 years, it does not make it better. If a tradition is detrimental to society, it should be looked at, it's value weighed, and if the benefits do not outweigh the costs, it should be changed or abandoned.
First off, if you're in Canada then why do you care if the words "under God" are in the pledge of allegiance or we swear on the Bible?
Not every congressman was Christian when the pledge of allegiance was put in place. But they all believed that it was healthy to bring everyone to one religion and not be completely independent on their own beliefs. Or else America would not be as good of a nation. The words "under God" bring everyone together in America.
But Christianity has always been seen as America's top religion and that America's laws were based on Christian morals. So it's only logical that we show that we really are a Christian nation. Sadly, I don't think America will be for much longer but until that happens the words "under God" should stay in the pledge of allegiance.
We swear on the Bible and pledge to God because that is the highest power. If someone is not Christian, you are demanding that they acknowledge that your God is supreme. While not everyone objects, some will and they have reasonable grounds to do so. It is not a gesture that is intended to be insulting, and the vast majority of people would understand that, but it is insensitive to the fact that different people have different beliefs.
The pledge of allegiance was put in place by the founding fathers. Those founding fathers were Christian and put that in place to respect their religion and they believed that America became a country because of God's will. Although there is a law inside the first amendment that says that congress cannot make a law that restricts any religion. But saying under God in the pledge of allegiance or swearing with your hand on the bible is not offensive against any religion. Because our founding fathers based the laws off of biblical morals. Nobody can deny that. Every congressman, even the ones who were not Christian accepted that to be put in place because they thought it would be healthy. The United States has always been considered a Christian nation, and supports Christian morals. And for that reason it should stay in the pledge of allegiance.
It's the same as swearing on a bible to testify in court. I'd you don't believe in the Christian God it is a meaningless, and potentially insulting gesture.
No, freedom from religion right?