Perhaps "history" has changed in meaning since I was young, but I believe it is more accurate to say that the United States was founded upon the belief of religious freedom -- not Christianity. Remember the King and the Anglican Church (Church of England)? It just happens that most of the founding fathers were of one Christian denomination or another. The words are "under God," not "under Christ." How you define God or any other Supreme Being is up to youl

Also, I'm not sure why we should consider any man unChristian because of some of his actions. Christianity is built upon the premise that nobody is perfect. That everyone sins, and that those misdeeds can be forgiven. It doesn't matter whether you or I personally believe that -- it is the church's doctrine, at least as I understand it. So, if someone has an illegitimate child, or swears, or drinks, or robs a bank, it doesn't mean that he doesn't consider himself a Christian and cannot be an accepted member of the church.

In terms of the quotes, they're interesting, but I'm not sure what they prove. First of all, we don't know in what context they were given -- if they were given at all. By the way, I feel the same about many quotes in the Bible. They are records kept by other human beings, and can be recorded correctly, incorrectly or with any kind of "spin" (to use the current in vogue word) that the historian/writer chooses to give them.

Finally, (I think) it doesn't really matter who lobbied for the inclusion of the words "under God," since it was the Congress who passed the law. That the Kights of Columbus argued for the passage is not relavent in the long run -- only that a majority of the elected leaders at the time passed it, and the President signed it. The times have changed, but the basic tenants of the Constitution have not -- and at least to this point, the words remain an official part of the pledge.

Whether those two words are recited aloud matters little to what I choose to believe or not believe. Whether your or I choose to say them also doesn't really mean much. It's a choice.

Saying the Pledge Of Allegiance toward the Flag is Pledgeing to Our Country! Plain and Simple! The under god was added later, a given! Never understood why it was added! Yes, the So Called Founding Fatehrs were of a religious affilliation but it did not seem to bother them what religion they were! They were the New America!

The National Antheam was a poem written by Francis Scott Keys during a battle! Later placed to music! Hell no one can sing it like is suppose to be sung! Thanksgiving Day was placed under I think honest Abe!

America the Beautiful would be a better song of the Country!

Now My children, I am going to bed!

Thank you for your time!

TTFN!!!!!!:D

Not all were christians. Franklin was a noted Deist, for example. It's not a matter of making people happy, though, smiley - it's a matter of doing the right thing according to the principles of our nation.

You mean like those truths we hold to be self-evident? Like John Locke's "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Property" (that we perverted to "Happiness" to keep slavery viable)?

Look, the dollar bill issue is moot, it's different than putting people in a situation where they are made uncomfortable making a declarative statement about God. As far as 'man-made' principles . . . Well, I think I addressed it, but if not I'll go further into how the principles of our founding had nothing to do with divine providence.


The 'justice' exists in the responsibility of the majority to protect the interests of the minority. That's the bottom line.

Oh, I definitely agree with you that the quotes are not the ultimate proof that this country was never supposed to have to do anything with religion or that they have anything to do with the Pledge of Allegiance issue at all (I was addressing the person who brought up the "fact" that all of America's founding fathers were Christian), or even that all of them were necessarily said. I just think that a lot of people have misconceptions about the way religion has influenced the way this country developed . . . I think it's important to note that many, many of the most influential Americans, including quite a few of the founding fathers, were not Christian and that some weren't even religious.

I agree. However not all churches are alike. The ones that I went to doesnt even care what you been doing or who you are. They want to know what you are going to do with your life in the future. No one is perfect. As far as I am concern (and most of the church) no is outside forgivness. I say most of the church cause i actually went to a school where they believe that some things people did were unforgivable. Not true!!!!! Drinking, smoking,......doesnt make you NOT a christian. It is sad how some religious people dont get that.


Like I said, take 'under God' out. Quite frankly it is up to each citizen. If it does get taken out, people can still put it in. If it stays in, people can take it out. It is just a matter of being official. Still what difference would it make. Do what you want!

I'm actually surprised at the amount of people that said the pledge in high school--I don't remember saying it after elementary school.

I think a problem that some people have with just taking out the "under God" part is that a large part of the country (half of the baby boomers, Gen X, etc.) grew up with the "under God" version. I really only found out that it was added post-1954 this past year. You "can't" take it out because then it just wouldn't be the Pledge of Allegiance. I personally would rather people just not say it if they don't feel compelled to than take "under God" out.

First, no the KoC are not "disrespecting" anyone. The reason they exist is because even in recent times, some ignorant Catholic-bashing bigots think that it is impossible to be a good Catholic and a good American at the same time. Hence the patriotic displays of the 4th degree.

Second, your accusation that they are imposing "their God" is equally innacurate. If they were going to impose "their God" they would have made a specific mention of the Trinity or Jesus, etc. They didn't.

Third, the "knee-jerk, anti-Commie" concerns were not as trivial as posts on this thread are making them out to be. Another nation, about as powerful, militarily, as the US of A wanted to destroy our way of life. That isn't minor. There was a very real possiblity of world war, possibly nuclear, that would have ended the freedom to choose to be religious or not. Read the Communist Manifesto some time--one of the main goals was to eliminate religion. Now, who's imposing on others' rights??? The two words: "Under God" was a reaffirmation that the choice to believe in God, as a fundamental underpinning of our nation, would not be diminished.

Fourth--while you're at it, make sure to get the US currency to eliminate "In God We Trust" from the design. Anything less would be inconsistent.

Adrienne (proud Lady of a Sir Knight, greater Houston assembly)

But isn't mentioning "God" at all in the pledge imposing *A* God on people?

No, not necessarily. Again, if you look at the intentions behind *why* and *when* "under god" (to continue this example) were added, there is no imposition at all: it's a matter of American pride that people CAN choose whether to worship or not. People in the Soviet Union didn't have that option unless they wanted to disappear in the middle of the night. Same is true in some Middle Eastern countries today.

In order for the pledge to impose "a god" it would (1) have to name him/her/it with a specific name or (2) have to be interpreted very literally, without the historical context.

Note: the above is MHO only and made with the greatest respect and friendship for my GC buddies.

Adrienne (PNAM-2003)

We said the Pledge of Allegiance right up until senior year. It's what happens when you grow up in a military community.

I stopped saying the pledge, however, somewhere during my last years in elementary school. I consider myself fairly patriotic, but I felt like pledging allegiance to the flag was like bowing down and worshipping it--and I will not worship a symbol. I am patriotic in my own way. Besides, does saying the pledge make one a patriot for life? (Remember, Timothy McVeigh said the Pledge of Allegiance!)

I did stand, however, because of basic fear of ostracism (hey, I was 9). I think that the Pledge, like one's choice of religion, is a personal choice which should not be forced upon anyone by a school...especially a public school. Maybe I'll move to one of those West Coast states...

Well said! (from another Sir Knight, but this one's a Masonic Knights Templar.)

I disagree. As one who does not believe in ANY god, I feel that having god mentioned in a PUBLIC institution *is* imposing some type of god upon students there -- a god, any god -- to me it doesn't matter which one. Even taking the history into account, I think that the mention of god in this context is inappropriate.

The "god" mentioned in the pledge could, of course, be any number of gods associated with any number of religions, but I for one believe in none of them. Maybe that makes me more sensitive to the issue -- I'm sure it does.

I have no problem with religion, god, and the people who choose to believe in it. However, I just don't think that a PUBLIC institution is the place for it. By having teachers and school officials lead the pledge (including the word "god") I feel that the state is sanctioning a certain type of religion (i.e., one that involves a belief in god, whatever that god may be). Yes, of course, part of what makes America great is that we have the FREEDOM to worship or not. That, however, is a choice to be made by individuals and should NOT be part of a public classroom.

I love you adduncan (you know I do), but I disagree with a bit of your logic. By saying that the US is a Nation "under God", it implies that everything the nation does, from the laws we make and enact, to how we treat our compatriots is done under God's name. It suggests that God is a part of the national identity, and that everyone within the country holds to that notion.

I'm deeply conflicted over religion, although I do believe in God -- but I've always felt uncomfortable about the "under God" portion of the Pledge of Allegiance because it seems to exclude a great many wonderful people who simply do not believe.

Not a problem, Sister. Disagreements are just that, not declarations of war. <G>

I still stand by the historical context that it was created in, and the intent that the phrase implies the freedom to worship or not. The KoC, who jonsagara rightly pointed out first recommended the phrase's inclusion, is very clear about that.

Regarding the point about God as part of national identity: I would say that is actually the case. I would submit that starting with the Declaration of Independence, the USA has acknowledged a "supreme being" from its founding. "...endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights......" They didn't name who or what this Creator was--it may or may not have been the Judeo-Christian God. (sugar and spice pointed out, also rightly, that many of our founding fathers had some serious issues w/ religion as well). To follow the line of logic regarding removing all references to God in any form, is to eliminate the ideals and documents the USA was founded on. Hence, why I am very hesitant to see them removed at all, if they are taking a "generic" form and have a purpose to supporting the freedoms we cherish, again, in historical context.

{{{Sistermadly}}}
Adrienne (PNAM-2003)
:D

[nitpick] The goals of 'real' communism, as put forth by Engels et al, was never 'elimination' of religion - that would just be a byproduct of worldwide communal culture . . . the terror-tactic elimination of religion wouldn't have flown with those who developed communism.
[/nitpick]

Anyway, I see where you're going, but you bastardize the logic a little to make your point, to my mind. Either way, it doesn't apply today, as the "evil empire" has been reduced to bread lines and splintered territories. It doesn't really work for me as a universal affirmation of your right to believe whatever you want - it's an affirmation of a "god" watching over our indivisible nation.

Personally, if I'm say Zen Buddhist, I couldn't care less about some imaginary 'god' you have, so why force me to affirm my religion through a word I don't even use?