New Hampshire's Virtual Town Hall
With their hand placed over their hearts, the children were assembled in the school yard and reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. In their recitation of the Pledge, they did not utter two words, “under God.”
The aforementioned was a scene in The Bells of St. Mary’s, a 1945 film about an ailing inner-city Catholic school.
When the movie was made, the Pledge of Allegiance did not include the words “under God.” Those words were added in by law in 1954, after a push by the Knights of Columbus, a Catholic fraternal organization. Back then, proponents of using the words argued that the use of those two words would set the United States apart from other countries.
Now, some are trying to remove the words “under God,” pursuing the matter as far as the courts. In 2005, a California district court ruled that requiring the pledge in public schools constitutes an endorsement of monotheism after the Supreme Court a similar case just one year before that went through the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, finding it was brought by a non-custodial parent of a student. Florida’s highest court, in 2006, found a 1942 state law requiring students to stand and recite the pledge was unconstitutional.
Recent challenges, however, have met with different results. The same Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in early 2010 ruled that the words “under God” were patriotic, and not meant to endorse a religion. In November, a Boston appellate court upheld a New Hampshire court’s ruling that requiring students to recite the Pledge of Allegiance does not violate students’ rights.
Those who favor retaining the words “under God,” meanwhile, challenge the claim that the words promote an officially sanctioned religion, instead maintaining that the First Amendment was meant merely to prevent Congress from adopting an official state religion. They also see the removal of the words as a further encroachment of secularism upon American culture.
However, modern opponents of compelling students from saying the pledge argue that doing so constitutes a government endorsement of religion, which they say contradicts the section of the First Amendment prohibiting Congress from establishing a state religion.
The effort to prohibit public schools from requiring the pledge, and therefore the words “under God” is indicative of a fear that it mandating the pledge would promote specific religious philosophies. While that effort is not waged by traditionalists who savor the old ways, removing “under God” would represent a return to the pledge as it was prior to 1954 — like what the little actors and actresses recited in the scene from The Bells of St. Mary’s.
Comment
Comment by Robert M. Collinsworth on May 18, 2011 at 6:09pm Common sense tells me that we should not require children to say the words "Under God" as part of the Pledge of Allegiance"; however, it also tells me that if some children should choose to say "Under God" as part of the Pledge of Allegiance, that should be OK too. While I do not feel that the beliefs of many should be forcibly imposed on the few, I also do not feel that the beliefs of the few should be forced upon the many.
Our state motto is “Live Free or Die”. Those of us who embrace the meaning of our motto feel that it should stand for something . . . represent something . . . mean something. It should stand for our belief in the individual freedoms granted by our constitution to the individual . . . it should represent us as a people who believe that each individual should have the right to either include the words “Under God” or to not include the words “Under God” as his or her heart and mind dictates . . . and lastly, it should mean that we believe that life without individual freedom and liberty is no life at all, because we become little more than chattel to those who dictate what we must believe in or must not believe in!
Comment by Chuck McKenney on November 23, 2010 at 10:26pm © 2012 Created by LFDA Editor.
You need to be a member of Live Free or Die Alliance to add comments!
Join Live Free or Die Alliance