"Under God"... should be removed from the "Pledge"

If it didn't affect me directly, and wasn't legitimately detrimental to anyone, I wouldn't care honestly...

But, then again, like I've said, I'm able to just tune things out...

It's so easy, and much more efficient than frivolous lawsuits...

Still don't see what's so offensive...

 

You NAILED IT!! That is exactly the problem. I despise forced/fake patriotism.

We need a "Pledge" that all Americans can recite and mean wholeheartedly (especially kids who have to hear/endure its recitation on a daily basis, in a STATE-CONTROLLED setting); otherwise, what message does that communicate to those children? That they should duck-away (in their hearts) from making a real commitment, when this nation asks them to step up and be counted?

I mean, we already know that PUSHING religion does to many people in this world; the results are typically negative. Yet we can't see where promoting "...under God..." in a daily ritual, would not add to such negativity when it is imposed upon individuals (however subtle such indoctrination may seem).

What is wrong with this?

Absolutely NOTHING is wrong with THAT (1923) "Pledge"; it is time to reinstate it.

I've reenlisted many times in my lifetime as an American soldier... and even that "OATH" offers a soldier the proper options of "allegiance"; that is, you DO NOT have to recite "So help me God", if it is not your choice to do so. And that is the way it should be. So, there are no "atheists" in foxholes (and other places of danger)? Many people need to rethink that.

 

Wouldn't it be more grown up to remove the pledge from the pledge? What's it for? Why is it performed? Do those parroting it by rote understand the meaning and implications?

 

You are making a good point. Sadly, there are those who think/believe indoctrination (of various sorts) is necessary, so they advocate it. I'm one who believes that a person who naturally grows to appreciate, honor and love their nation... has patriotism that blows the doors of the guy programed to be a patriot. They are affected by a LOYALTY born of true freedom and liberty... not compulsion.

That's the kind of person who would die for this nation, and likely wouldn't have the exact words to explain why.

 

I agree that is why when and if I am ever somewhere where the pledge is being said I do not rise to do not say the pledge.

 

And true American will know where you stand.

 

Right! Just as when I stand and take the Oath of Enlistment as a soldier... it is the PERSON standing behind those "words" that makes the REAL difference... not so much the words themselves. That is, do "I" as a person/American MEAN WHAT I SAY? (Yes, I always have meant it.) And in case ANYONE would wonder... that is why I also FIGHT HARD and while usually respectful here, I am very adamant in communicating my views about America (a nation I love and sense that I am certainly an integral part of).

The words in oaths and pledges are mostly a 'formality'; but what matters most is the person standing behind those words. So... if I as an American soldier have an "Oath" which is worded (or allowed to) fit my religious (or non-religious) CONVICTIONS... WHY SHOULDN'T children in public schools (or others) have something equally as INCLUSIVE as that?

I'm not saying that atheism should WIN (as some people perceive the conflict), but that those who do believe in whatever "God" is to them realize and accept that those who DO NOT believe in the same... MUST also be included. As it is, many are suggesting those NOT believing be EXCLUDED or set aside (if voluntarily).

All we need to do to resolve this reasonably and equitably... is to return to the 1923 version of the "Pledge". Anything else propels this issue FORWARD to another time; but I think it is time we RESOLVE it; once and for ALL.

 

If you want to resolve it "reasonably and equitably" then remove the pledge from public schools altogether. Anything else is missing the forest for the trees.

 

Looked at your poll results and its comforting to know that there are still more God fearing people around than those Satan worshiping secular atheists.

 

Helps to know what words mean before you use them...

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/secular

A Satan worshipping atheist is not possible...lol

 

That is no scientific poll. And considering the preponderance of activistic "Conservatives" within this forum, I'd say this conversation might actually favor my overall view, out in the general public.

Even so, when an issue of basic rights is presented... it is surely not only about popular consensus. Is it (ultimately) Constitutional to affect people in the manner which they are in many school, daily?

I'm happy this is in COURT, right now.

BTW... you can fear God and cringe at Satan in your own way(s); as for the kids/families who cannot or do not relate to "God" in the way you might... let them be INCLUDED in a manner commensurate with the same.

You come out here trying to use "fear", to COMPEL others to your view or "faith"; and you are wrong to want Government PUSHING the same.

 

So folks... why SHOULDN'T restore the "Pledge" more to its original state?

Why does the word "God" HAVE to remain in it?

 

Better yet, why does it matter???

 

You ought to know that is does, by now. (Even so, it is in court for good reason.)

 

Maybe replace "under God" with "seeking justice" with as much liberty and freedom for all, as is pragmatically possible.

Or: One nation, under ( insert numbered option here), indeterminate, with freedom and justice for all.

Options
1. God
2. Allah
3. Yahweh
4. Elohim
5. All Gods
6. No God
7. The Universe
8. Socrates
9. Plato
10. Aristotle
11. Budda
12. Einstein
13. No living being
14. Nothing because all existence is an illusion
15. Write in your own option, and place fingerprint

 

Why does the "Pledge" have to remain at all? Why can't it be scrapped in its entirety? Is this nation as a whole so insecure that we have to brainwash our children at a very young age to devote unquestioning loyalty to the state?

If a "pledge of allegiance" is to mean anything wouldn't it require that the people reciting it A) Understood the concepts involved, and B) Recited it voluntarily?

 

That is a different thread; mine is about keeping it rather than throwing it out.

I can assure you, that many people do not want it done away with completely.

Yes, many within this nation ARE that "insecure"; they want to indoctrinate their children and the children of others.

I'm not against reciting the "Pledge"; I merely want it to apply to all that wish to recite it.

 

I thought this thread was about the pledge of allegiance and how it was wrong to use it to indoctrinate children?

And I can assure you that many people do not want to remove "under God" from the pledge, either. Does that somehow make it right? Is this a popularity contest?

I agree.

So do you think children should be made to recite the pledge (with or without mention of God)? Don't you find it ridiculous to have young children pledge loyalty to concepts that they don't understand yet? Things like nation-states, republics, etc..Hell, most 6 year old don't even understand the symbolism of pledging one's "allegiance to the flag", yet they are still made to stand and recite it daily.

I see that you want to limit this discussion's scope to the one small bit of indoctrination that you most disagree with but if we are going to have this conversation about indoctrinating children, and more importantly, other people's children then shouldn't we look at the issue from its core? I'm trying to examine the issue using basic principle whereas it seems that you are just trying to satiate your pet-peeve.

 

Okay, it is about that and more. MY emphasis is upon restoring the wording to be as 'inclusive' (as it once was).

(see the above)

Indoctrination isn't good.

No, but DO so word the thing... so that many more could/would say it and MEAN it.

No necessarily. I do believe that certain values are worth instilling. Even so, I think that is another topic overall.

That's another topic, IMO.

Of course I do. The WORDING of the "Pledge" is primarily what I'm focused upon in this thread. I would welcome threads covering more of what you wish to discuss.

Make a thread, addressing that "core" issue then. I'm not against you starting it.

You can call it what you wish; but since you are brilliant (as you seem to be)... I'm sure you can create the very topic you would find more appropriate or broader than this one.

Know what I mean?

 

I don't think it really matters...

And I think it's in court because there is a group of people without something to better occupy their free time...

 

And lest the overly sensitive, and hysterically offended become to hyper-ventilated, we should remove the phrase god from all federal buildings and treasury currency.....

to "protect" against govt instituted religion...........

its difficult not to mock atheist statists imaginary fears

 

You would ultimately be incorrect.

Your thinking is dismissive; that is your choice.

 

The operative word in my post was think, indicating an opinion...

By definition, an opinion cannot be wrong...

Sorry...

There's that whole opinion thing again...

 

Yet, people pursue the substance behind their opinions. So be it.

(see the above)

Don't be sorry; just pay attention to what various courts rule on the matter. You don't care much, but the making and defining of laws which affect ALL... aren't contingent upon your individual interest or concern.

Remember, there is usually something behind an opinion, and not all of them are equal.

 

I don't think it matters...

The fact that I don't think it matters cannot be incorrect...

People can have a differing opinion on the matter, but, that doesn't invalidate my opinion, nor does mine invalidate theirs...

That said, I don't think this really affects anyone at all...