http://www.cnn.com/2002/LAW/06/26/pledgeofallegiance.ap/index.html

How do you feel about this? To me it is just one more way of showing how far this country has come since the founding father's signed the Declaration of Independance.

By Sunny on Wednesday, June 26, 2002 - 05:24 pm:

I don't agree with it, but then again I was brought up saying the phrase "under God" and thought nothing of it. It can certainly be left out when reciting the Pledge, so I don't see why we need to have it declared unconstitutional. Until this decision, I had never thought of it as a prayer (still don't), but more a verbal declaration of my loyalty to the United States and everything it stands for.

I'm waiting now for a call to remove "In God we Trust" from all U.S. currency. While I doubt it would be economically feasible to replace all the money currently in circulation, I'm not surprised by too much anymore.

By Joan on Wednesday, June 26, 2002 - 05:41 pm:

I don't agree with it. I'm also not surprised by it though. That is all I'm saying for now.

By Annie2 on Wednesday, June 26, 2002 - 05:45 pm:

I think some of these people have WAY TOO much time on their hands and need to focus on something which will generate loyalty and patriotism within our country.

By Pamt on Wednesday, June 26, 2002 - 06:44 pm:

Well, as a Christian I totally disagree. However, as a big believer in religious freedom, I see the guy's point. (I didn't actually read this link, but am familiar with the atheist father who was upset that his dtr was being exposed to the pledge). I would strongly be opposed to me or my children pledging to "one nation under Allah" or "under Buddha." Overall, I think this whole court thing is what Annie2 said...someone with way too much time on their hands. Non-Christian children can just refuse to participate in the pledge like Jehovah's Witnesses have done for decades. We are after all a country founded largely on Christian principles. I also agree with Sunny that if we edit the pledge, then patriotic songs like "God Bless America" and our currency system will be next. Oh my!

By Ginnyk on Wednesday, June 26, 2002 - 07:23 pm:

The Pledge has, in fact, been altered at least twice - see this link, published by a U. S. Embassy. It was, as I understand it, written post Civil War. The phrase "under God" was added in 1954.
To say non-Christian children can just refuse to participate in the pledge ignores the kind of treatment given to children who refuse to participate in any class activity. Which is why the Supreme Court has ruled so consistently as it has about not having the teaching of religion (which is different from teaching about religion) in public schools.

Sunny, there have been several unsuccessful calls to remove the phrase "In God We Trust" from currency, as well as unsuccessful efforts to stop funding a chaplaincy for Congress with tax dollars.

I would point out that one of the blessings of this nation is that people can peacefully protest, in courts and in the streets, anything they disagree with. It's the American way. To deny anyone their Constitutional right to protest would, imo, be unAmerican.

Which is why I, in the face of my very strong pro-Choice beliefs, continue to support the right of anti-abortion protestors, for example, to protest in the courts and in the streets.

It may make us uncomfortable, but experiencing a little discomfort is worth it when what we are protecting is one of the strengths of this nation.

By Pamt on Wednesday, June 26, 2002 - 09:26 pm:

"To say non-Christian children can just refuse to participate in the pledge ignores the kind of treatment given to children who refuse to participate in any class activity." Ginny, just curious, what kind of treatment is given to children who refuse to participate? I've been in many classrooms either as a parent or in a professional capacity through my job and I have never seen (nor would most schools tolerate) a child being treated differently in the classroom because of not participating in an activity. Jehovah's Witnesses don't pledge, celebrate birthdays or other holidays (i.e., refuse to cut out Valentines, don't participate in the classroom Thanksgiving feast, etc.)and they are not ostracized in the classroom. Nor are Jewish children maligned because of not celebrating Christmas or handicapped children treated cruelly because they can't run the 50-yd dash is PE. Maybe some bullying does occur on the playground, but kids can be cruel and tease someone for being clumsy or smart just as easily. My youngest son has a milk allergy and couldn't eat pizza, cookies, nacho cheese chips, cupcakes, or punch (sherbet/sprite kind) at his pre-k graduation reception nor could he eat at the end-of-the-year Chuck E. Cheese party or his "taste of Louisiana" food day. I had to bring him different foods to all these events and others. This is a child who LOVES pizza and would give his right arm for chips and cheese dip, but he can't have them. Should I demand no milk protein of any kind in the school simply because my child can't have them? Should I take him out of school because the other kids ask him all of the time why he can't eat what they eat? I know that allergies vs religion are somewhat diverse in nature, but the underlying point is the same. Just playing devil's advocate....*eg*

P.S., Just so you know where I'm coming from I believe strongly in separation of church and state. However, I think the pledge issue is a bit on the ridiculous side. I have no problem with the "no prayer in school" (in opposition to most of my fellow S. Baptists), because I can actually prayer anywhere at anytime. Abd spontaneous heartfelt prayer is much better than a corporate "religious" prayer anytime, IMHO. If we have organized Christian prayer in school, then it follows that we could have organized Muslim, Buddhist, new age, etc. prayer...and that I am simply not comfortable with.

By Feona on Wednesday, June 26, 2002 - 09:31 pm:

I was listening to the radio talk about this.

They made some interesting points.

Now they might try to get AA and Na out of the treatment facilities because they mentions a higher power. I don't think this is a good idea.

In new york city one school didn't do anything for mother's day because a few kids parents were lesbiand or gay. They didn't want to offend anyone. Well I guess we should get rid of all the holidays. They all offend somebody.

In regard to the constituion the second ammendment they ignore.(Guns?) They don't care about. Actually I don't like guns in anyone's house especially here in densely populated New York.

By Jackie on Thursday, June 27, 2002 - 06:06 am:

Ok I really hate stepping in on religious posts, but this will be short.
PamT, why would all "Non Christians" not want to say the Pledge? We are Jewish(so we fall into the Non Christian group)But we BELIEVE in GOD,you know the GOD who created the Heavens and Earth, so why wouldnt I want my son to say the pledge.I said it as a kid, and my son has said it. He will be in 3rd grade next yr and we are on the east coast. From what I heard its not effecting every state yet. Please do not group all the Non Christians into one group, we are all dift.
Jackie

By Pamt on Thursday, June 27, 2002 - 08:27 am:

Oh Jackie, so sorry for my choice of words. I really meant all world religions who have a different "god" or supreme being. Yes, we do believe in the same God and I have to tell you that I am very fascinated by Judaism. We have a mezzuzah hanging on our front door post and my husband (a youth minister) has done a Seder meal with our youth group several times, being taught how by a Jewish friend. I guess I meant religions that were not Judeo-Christian or couldn't wrap their brains around the concept of God. Thanks for pointing out my error and sorry to offend.

By Ginnyk on Thursday, June 27, 2002 - 08:53 am:

As I was riding the train to work this morning, a thought occurred to me: Why do we pledge allegiance to the flag. Why are we not simply pledging allegiance to the United States of America?

By Jackie on Thursday, June 27, 2002 - 09:24 am:

Pam-Im not offended. As I go through life I realize some people dont really understand the concept of Judasim, as simple as it really is.

By Melanie on Thursday, June 27, 2002 - 09:33 am:

I find it so sad that this decision was made. I find it completely ridiculous.

Ginny-we are pledging allegiance to the flag and for what it stands for.

Feona, don't get me started on the whole holiday thing. Our community preschool hired a new director this past year and she refused to celebrate all holidays because someone *might* be offended. Thanksgiving is offensive to Native Americans and Vegetarians (I am not joking-that's what she said), Valentines Day is bad because we should tell people everyday that we love them, not just one day a year, Mother's Day and Father's Day might upset someone. Let's just say I am happy to be done with that school!