Toto

You may be interested in <a href="http://www.randomfilm.com/pledge/" target="_blank">the Pledge site.</a>

callina

the Anti-Christmas
Please, help me find an atheist school. I have found one and they take something like 1 out of every ten applicants.

ex-idaho

I got into a ona air argument with one of our local right wing talk show host recently about this very topic.

He asserted that all children in public school should have to recite the pleadge daily.

I asserted that if you force a person to pledge alligence to anyone or thing it is rendered mute. A pledge is only valid if the person saying it actually means it. You are far less likely to mean your pledge if it is cohersed.

As for the assertion that non-theist should just skip the "under god" part, that is just as stupid. If you skip any portion of a pledge it looses its meaning and purpose. A pledge is a committment to sacrifice. You do it a great disservice by choosing to only ackowledge a portion of its meaning.

I believe that the "under god" should be removed from the pledge. It is increasingly devisive and serves no purpose. It is being used as a tool of intimidation to those that would seek office in this country just as the oath of office is. I am running for the state leg in my state and dread having to recite the oath if elected. I will however not compromise myself and utter "so help me god".

Dr Theo

What exactly does it mean, anyway, to pledge allegiance to a flag? Does a flag speak or make commands? Now in the age of Intenet they will probably come out with a talking flag and we can all pledge allegiance to it. Maybe it will say something like, "You need to give me more money for bombs to drop in Afghanistan, plus a missle defense system, now DO AS I SAY!"

Well, that's my two cents, and now, if I could invite everybody to a very current issue on church-state separation, see the debate on "Jehovah and the War on Terrorism" in these same debate pages -- under "Misc. Religious Discussions" or use the link:

<a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=45&t=000278" target="_blank">http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=45&t=000278</a>

Sincerely,
John Norman

JB01

I don't think having a single "official" pledge is such a great idea in the first place. It's a lot more meaningful for people to pledge allegiance if they do it in their own words. With that said, I think the standard version could use considerable revision.

My pledge would go something like, "I pledge allegiance to the liberal, secular democratic principles of the United States of America, and to that republic insofar as it respects and upholds those principles." Period.

I would say that allegiance to a "flag" is mostly meaningless rhetoric; at best it has an unpleasant my-country-right-or-wrong feel to it. Obviously, as an atheist, I have no use for the "under God" part. I'm almost willing to commit to "indivisible"; during the Civil war I like to think I would have; but I can imagine situations where I wouldn't oppose some sort of division.

As for "liberty and justice for all", I think you can really only choose one of these two, unless you believe that imprisonment is unjust for all Americans in all circumstances. Justice for all is a worthy ideal in itself, but most people's concepts of justice entail sometimes depriving criminals of liberty.

Admittedly, this is not all that well thought out.

Oresta

JB01
As for "liberty and justice for all", I think you can really only choose one of these two, unless you believe that imprisonment is unjust for all Americans in all circumstances. Justice for all is a worthy ideal in itself, but most people's concepts of justice entail sometimes depriving criminals of liberty.

I'm not into mindless ritual. Kids reciting the pledge -with or without the "under God" phrase - are not likly to have a clue as to it's meaning.
However, the pre- under God version does make sense, and adding the God phrase seriously distorts the original intent of meaning.

The phrase "one nation indivisible" would have resonated with pledgers at the time the pledge was written in the late 19th century. Many folks were still alive then who had lost husbands and sons in a bloody Civil War, and many southerners had not yet accepted the outcome. The phrase "with liberty and justice for all" refers to the Bill of Rights which guarantees basic freedom of the press, religion, and the rights to assembly and homes secure from military quartering (liberty), and equal protection under the law and due process (justice for all).

The problem with adding "under God" after "one nation" is that it dramatically alters the meaning of what follows to connote that the union of our nation state and the rights and freedoms it extends to all are derived from God. This, of course, is not the case. All of these derive from the the Constitution, a totally secular document.

Alonzo Fyfe

I actually remember my first day in the first grade reciting the pledge. I remember the teacher providing instructions on how to stand, with one's hand over one's heart. And I knew the basic idea behind it.

At that time, I thought that the part that said 'under God' was a holdover from the past that people just had not gotten around to removing yet. (Like cleaning my room, it was something that could be taken care of 'later').

I would not consider such a pledge on the part of a kid as a binding contract. But it was not meaningless either.

yelyos

Here in Canada, the anthem contains the line "God keep our land glorious and free". The Charter of Rights and Freedoms begins: "Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law...".

It would probably be difficult to call Canada a "secular state".

In spite of all this, there seems to be much less of a problem with religiosity than the U.S. There are no disputes over evolution in schools, very few Jehovah's Witnesses(only one came to our door in the past few years), and nobody (at the schools I've been to) has complained about my omission of the word "God" from the anthem.

This has led me to believe that the whole idea of a secular state is difficult to implement in reality. I think that the pledge reflects how many people consider the U.S not to be a secular state, but a Christian one.

Oresta

This has led me to believe that the whole idea of a secular state is difficult to implement in reality. I think that the pledge reflects how many people consider the U.S not to be a secular state, but a Christian one.

Perhaps American History courses should point out that there is no evidence that the founding fathers were visited by any Pentecostal flames. They conceived the revolutionary idea of a republic all by themselves.