Why do people want to remove "Under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance?
112353
It's the "seperation of Church and State" thing. However, I do not agree with them. That has been with us since the beginning and I don't think it hurts anyone to say it. People have a choice whether to recite the words and if they don't like it, they don't have to save. Some of these folks don't want God anywhere in their lives and that's their choice but I think they go too far sometimes. It's bad enough that so many have lost God in this country but it is their constitutional right to object. God bless. =)
38658
It depends, do you want to exclude the people who don't believe in God from being able to pledge allegiance with their full conviction?  If not, then the pledge should revert back to it original form with it's reference to religion omitted.\n\nIn order to pledge allegiance to your country you shoud not have to agree that your country is subservient to any supernatural beings.  It's one nation under the people.  \n\nIf people must pledge loyalty to God in order to pledge loyalty to their country, then we are not truly indivisible, and it's not liberty and justice for all, just those who believe in God.\n\nAnd to the genius who said to rewrite the constitution, IT DOESN'T CONTAIN THE WORD GOD.  Also to the history impaired, the founding fathers didn't put UNDER GOD in there.  It was added by Catholic groups during the McCarthy era to separate us from the godless Commies.  A proud era in our history.
672106
Make it optional, no need to pledge allegiance to the flag every morning at all, and make the "God" part optional when saying it.  I think it's more important for kids to understand the Constitutional principles for which this country is founded and is the LAW than some abstract references to what the "proper religion" was at the time of its creation.  I can't find a single reference to a "state religion" in that or any document, including all the articles of confederation.  All I see is that Congress shall make NO LAW regarding the establishment of religion or the free excercise thereof.\n\nMeaning to me that people are freely allowed to excercise their right or abstain from referring to God or Gods in a public forum.  On another note, I don't want any reference to religion in school, that's what the home, church, and parental responsibility are for.  If a religious group wants to meet after school, go for it, but don't make it compulsory or degrading.
751753
If you don't want to pledge allegiance to the United States of America,\n\n\nLEAVE,,,,, it is that simple, see how much freedom you get in other countries.\n\nPeace!
1048322
Because not everyone believes in god, you include it in politics and it offends people that do not believe. Its offensive to me for you to want that more of it.
537183
I am against it: it isn't fair to make people who, 1. don't believe in god 2. believe in different gods, pray just because a bunch of christians believe this country belongs to them and only them.
818
"God" is not mentioned in the Constitution. And the Constitution forbids the making of any laws for OR against religion, which is pretty much the same thing as saying "all persons have freedom to worship as they please, and it's our job to make sure they keep that as a right." \n\nClosest thing to mention God is the Declaration of Independence, which says "...endowed by their Creator..."
1145243
No it's not.  First of all, it is the only proper way to destroy a flag as taught in the military, the boy scouts, etc.  Secondly, the first amendment protects our speech, so any amendment to ban it is obviously unconstitutional.\n\nObviously, this is an emotional issue, but people have to re-learn to respect freedom in this country.  I may not agree with what the KKK says, but their right to say it is protected by law.  A constitutional amendment to ban it is simply fascist in nature.
790332
I KNOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! PEOPLE ARE SO PICKY!!!!!!!! And I'm not yelling...I just like doing capitals. It's something that people do....u know like the whole "Take the 'god" out of the pledge" or other things like that.....
952395
Liberals do not like the "under God" line in it.  After all.... they think they are gods and do not want to be reminded that here is one and they are not him.  Then, they might have to humle themselves before Him.\n\nSue
72333
in God we trust is printed on the money we use not in the pledge of allegiance\n\nthey want to take UNDER GOD out of the pledge.  this is because of the seperation of church and state in 1963 people think that there should be NO religon in the Gov't \n\nThis Is BS.  the US was FOUNDED on RELIGON\n\nAll men are CREATED equal.  we are endowed BY OUR CREATOR with...\n\nits the freedom OF religon not the freedom FROM religon\n\nit was writen in the constitution that people should be able to WORSHIP GOD AS THEY PLEASE.  it was to prevent the Gov't from telling people you must practice THIS (specific) religon.  It wasn't written to take away the FOUNDING PRINCIPLES of this country.\n\nthe people who are trying to take UNDER GOD out of the pledge are behaving stupidly.  If we all had a little more of GOD's Qualities (love, joy,peace,meekness,kindness,wisdom,and longsuffering)\nthe world would be a much BETTER place \n\nstop trying to take God OUT! and start trying to put him BACK IN!\n\nTHE GOD OF ISREAL FOR PRESIDENT!  AMEN!
978285
You infer correctly, and bravo for pointing this out.  People insist on it because that is what they want to believe, whether it is true or not.  They will insist that this is a "Christian" country, simply because Christianity is the main religion of the people.  In reality that doesn't mean squat to our Constitutional principles or freedoms.  If the founders wished to create a Christian nation they had the perfect opportunity to do so.  They chose instead to create a democratic republic in which religion has no say.  This fact gets conveniently ignored by fanatical Christians who think they automatically have the right to run everyone's lives.  They'll quote scripture as though it is civil law, but have little clue what the meaning of separation of church and state is at all.  Better education in our schools could help dissolve their ridiculous notion.\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\nAce?  For every quotation from a founder supporting the role of religion in government, I can produce two from the same founder speaking against it.  This debate went on for quite some time and the founders wrote and spoke about both sides of it extensively.  The proof in the pudding is that they had a chance to install a theocracy and chose not to do so.  They chose to keep that distance between church and state in the end.  How can you even argue with that when they didn't take the opportunity to create a theocracy?
534285
The first answer was "There is only one God." However, the Christian God is different from the Jewish God and the Muslim God, and even within Christianity, the different denominations seem to have their own concept of God, so Paganism notwithstanding, It still makes more sense to say "Under Gods"\n\nBut then when you throw in all the other deities of this great melting pot, and the fact that most of the people we think of as founding fathers were not Christian, it really makes sense to say, "under Gods."\n\nI think you've really hit upon something here
1080317
One with "under God":\nI pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to The Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.\n\nOne without "under God":\nI pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to The Republic for which it stands, one Nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
963929
This is a very good point, and i have actually researched it before.  In the Freedom of Religion amendment, there are two clauses: the establishment clause, and the free excercise clause.  The establishment clause is the separation of church and state, or in other words, the government cannot establish or promote any one relgion.  In the free excercise clause, the government cannot ban any one religion.  Oddly enough, atheism is only considered a religion in the free excercise clause, and not in the establishment clause.  This is a sort of loophole that allows the religion to establish atheism in schools, without going against our rights to freedom of religion.  Pretty messed up, huh?
231232
Why does the God you describe have the same "with us or against us" attitude that Bush does? It's this simple. You can practice any given religion, without interference. That is your right. However, your rights stop where the rights of others begin. As everyone else has the same right, to practice any or no religion, you have no right to force your religion on them. God was inserted into our culture at a time when 99% of the people in it were christian. That is simply no longer the case, and equal rights must be upheld. By "erasing" God from our culture, we are not denying his existence, we are simply not affirming it. THAT is the middle ground. We're not saying that we know God doesn't exist, we're saying that we don't know that he does. As a nation. That is, some of us believe, and some of us don't, and some of us aren't sure. You have every right to believe in God, and worship him in any way you choose, within reason. But you do not have the right to demand that our government and our culture support your views over anyone else's. This is equality. The only way you could perceive it as an attack on your beliefs is if you want those beliefs forced on others, or the nation as a whole.
1082626
The line in question, "one nation under God" was ADDED to the pledge in the Cold War days as an anti-communist stance.  Maybe we should simply change the pledge back to its original wording.\n\n"In 1954, Congress after a campaign by the Knights of Columbus, added the words, 'under God,' to the Pledge. The Pledge was now both a patriotic oath and a public prayer."