Pledge of Allegiance

Quote:Seperation of Church and State? Umm...there's no such thing in the U.S....just so you know. Thomas Jefferson strongly believed that there should be a seperation, but the other framers of the Constitution believed that religion put boundaries in place that were helpful to government. Heck, George Washington himself added "So help me God," to the Presidential Oath of Office. So, that argument is out.

Eh, at the same time, our nation has progressed, am i right? Further, more defined, separations between church and state have occured since Washington and Jefferson. If there was no such thing we wouldn't have made the "separation between church and state" i'm pretty sure a lot of people wouldn't come/have come to america. Government nowadays takes into account various religious preferences and tries to ensure that religion doesn't become involved in the state.

While the government does try to take all religions into considerance, there still isn't really anything seperating the two. Besides, I'm not really talking about how we deal with it today. The fact is, our nation's history is founded on religion, and that shouldn't be removed from the Pledge of Allegiance.

this land was created by the people and for the people... under the consitution which our founding fathers held up to be the highest law in the land pressed for seperation of church and state, to protect people like the 49ers, Quakers, ect., from religious persecution. Being thus it is unreasonable for the American population to go believing that the words "under God" is ment to represent all gods. If it was written that way then it would have also said "Buddah" and even "Allah" therefore the words "under God" should be taken out of the Pledge in order to uphold the constitution.

People are becoming way to sensitive about political correctness. I mean, Does anyone who is against the "one nation under god part" really loose sleep at night over their deep concern of how emotionally troubling that line is to those who are atheist or polytheistic? If you don't like the pledge of alliegence, don't say it (especially in the case of non-citizens). No one should be forced to pledge, however, part of being a citizen involves having alliegence towards your country. If you don't, get out. Citizenship is a priveledge not a right, those who truely lack a sense of alliegence to their country should emigrate to a country that better suits their needs.

(Originally I was just going to put "cry." However myopichappiness and What are on my side.)

Oh, and hurleybob9118 the pledge doesn't say "under our Christian God." Buddha is the Buddhist equivalent of God (for those Buddhists who believe he is God, not those who believe they are meant to follow his teachings without recognizing him as a supreme being) and for Muslims, Allah is God (If i'm not mistaken, 'Allah' is actually Arabic for the word 'God.' In that case it would have to be "One nation under God, Jesus, Buddha, Allah, Dios, Dieu, Gott, Dio, or the Sky (atheists)." Which of course would be extremely complicated BUT, luckily, *politically correct.)

*Ethnically satisfying?

The constitution was created long before the existence of public school systems. Therefore, public schools aren't, technically, considered the "state."

But, anyways the three main points are:

a) No one is severely (I doubt even moderately) affected by the line "One nation under god." People are overly concerned over the possibility of offending someone.

b) You can't take every word of the constitution literally, otherwise you could argue that we don't live under true freedom because of the existence laws and police to enforce them... Although I guess that's an anarchist's best argument.

c) Most importantly, there are much more pressing issues at hand than making sure no ones feelings are hurt.