Pledge of Allegiance vs. Constitution?

[conus00]

Okay gents,
I have been studying for my US citizenship test and me and my g/f had an interesting conversation. This horse has been probably beaten do death many times already but I would like to know your opinion on this question:

Is the Pledge of Allegiance in direct contradiction with U.S. Constitution?

Can somebody explain this to me:

The Pledge of Allegiance
I 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.

and accordig to the Bill of Rights (The First ammendment):

You can practice any religion, or not practice a religion at all.


I understand that there were 4 changes to The Pledge of Allegiance (the last one made President Eisenhower in 1954 adding the words "under God").
Doesn't this make The Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional?

Are the atheists/agnostics, still, bound by it?

I do not want this thread to turn into another "religious" war on subsim, but this just does not make any sense to me.
Your opinions?

[Dowly]

Funny, I just watched these two videos on youtube last night:

This one's about the pledge of allegiance:


And this about the inauguration thingamaling (I think), anywho, the same atheist is in it:


Quite entertaining to watch tbh.

[Sailor Steve]

Is the Pledge considered official government doctrine?

Personally I consider the pledge to be unconstitutional even in its original form, on the grounds that any loyalty oath goes against the personal liberty America is supposed to stand for.

[frau kaleun]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Is the Pledge considered official government doctrine?

Personally I consider the pledge to be unconstitutional even in its original form, on the grounds that any loyalty oath goes against the personal liberty America is supposed to stand for.

[UnderseaLcpl]

For all practical purposes, the Pledge of Allegiance is not in contradiction with the United States Constitution for two main reasons.

1) It is not a criminal act to refuse to recite the pledge, nor is the pledge mandated anywhere outside some very specific state laws.

2) It requires only that one pledge allegiance to the ensign of the US and the Republic it represents. The remaining terms are descriptors, none of which indicates that by pledging allegiance to the US you are pledging allegiance to God; only that you are pledging allegiance to a nation that is under God. A nation governed by a constitution which allows no abridgement of your rightful freedom to start or choose or not choose a religion. Those are very different things.

Most of the opposition to the pledge comes from people who don't want any mention of God made anywhere, or who are of the (quite justified) assumption that the term refers to a Judeo-Christian God. In these cases, people aren't so much against the pledge itself as they are against supporting what they see as a meme to propagate beliefs they oppose. I suppose I can understand that. I've never been a big fan of the pledge myself, albeit for different reasons.

In any case, the pledge is not unconstitutional.

edit- "uh-oh, Frau's here"
Um... I'm on a horse!

[SteamWake]

The origins of the pledge.

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur10.htm

[conus00]

I can see where you are coming from in case of The Pledge of Allegiance. From your standpoint and in layman's terms: you are not forced to take it and you or not punished if you do or do not.

But why are the words "under God" included?

Can it be amended so these words are "optional". Like in the Oath of Allegiance (I will have to take to become U.S. citizen)?
"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."

According to wikipedia:
8 C.F.R. 337.1 provides that the phrase "so help me God" is optional and that the words ‘on oath’ can be substituted with ‘and solemnly affirm’.

Why can't the Pledge of Alliance be modified in same fashion?

@SteamWake interesting article. I didn't know all that.

[frau kaleun]

Originally Posted by UnderseaLcpl

edit- "uh-oh, Frau's here"
Um... I'm on a horse!

Actually I kind of agree with you that, unless someone is being required to recite the pledge as "proof of loyalty" for some reason, it's prolly not unconstitutional for it to exist. Technically. I still dislike the idea of loyalty pledges in general, and the added "under God" doesn't help since it at least implies that there is some deity who is "over" the nation or its founding or it guiding principles.

Honestly they were still having us stand up to recite the pledge every morning in high school and I never recited it, simply because I did not like being told or expected to do so on demand. Nobody seemed to notice. Granted I still stood up, because I will do that much out of respect for certain things. I've always wondered though how much of a stink it might've caused had I just sat there and quietly gone about my business.

Furthermore, I think that Carthage should be destroyed.

Interesting question. That it is asked by a current non-citizen, studying to become one, makes it all the more relevant.

It is this look from the outside which allows us to constantly have a re-look at ourselves. The best reason for immigration I can think of.

I don't know the answer because I'm too close to myself as a citizen.

Thank you for asking the question.

[conus00]

Originally Posted by frau kaleun

Actually I kind of agree with you that, unless someone is being required to recite the pledge as "proof of loyalty" for some reason, it's prolly not unconstitutional for it to exist. Technically. I still dislike the idea of loyalty pledges in general, and the added "under God" doesn't help since it at least implies that there is some deity who is "over" the nation or its founding or it guiding principles.

Honestly they were still having us stand up to recite the pledge every morning in high school and I never recited it, simply because I did not like being told or expected to do so on demand. Nobody seemed to notice. Granted I still stood up, because I will do that much out of respect for certain things. I've always wondered though how much of a stink it might've caused had I just sat there and quietly gone about my business.

Furthermore, I think that Carthage should be destroyed.

My g/f was just curious what (rougly) year it was because she stopped saying pledge of allegiance while being still in elementary school and was not required to recite in high school? She went to high school in mid 80s.

[frau kaleun]

I was in high school from 1978-1982. I can remember them still doing it there but whether it was every year, I don't know. My senior year I was off-campus most of the day and I'm not sure I even went to "homeroom" which was when they did all the announcements and pledge over the PA system.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Originally Posted by frau kaleun

Actually I kind of agree with you that, unless someone is being required to recite the pledge as "proof of loyalty" for some reason, it's prolly not unconstitutional for it to exist. Technically. I still dislike the idea of loyalty pledges in general, and the added "under God" doesn't help since it at least implies that there is some deity who is "over" the nation or its founding or it guiding principles.

We're agreed upon that. I only got on my horse to impress you

I was never a fan of the pledge in school, either. I used to make up funny words for it, or grumble my way through it, much the same way you did, and for the same reasons. Ironically, I had a completely opposite political ideology at the time from what I do now.

These days, I'm not sure how I feel about it. I've proudly stated the pledge many times in uniform, but the only oath that really stuck with me was to "uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic". Strange how those different sentiments could come from the same person.

Furthermore, I think that Carthage should be destroyed.

By men on horses, preferably.

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by UnderseaLcpl

Most of the opposition to the pledge comes from people who don't want any mention of God made anywhere, or who are of the (quite justified) assumption that the term refers to a Judeo-Christian God.

First of all, I didn't read the two points you made, so if what I say next contradicts what you have stated in them, just everyone ignore my post. (I'm a "tad" drunk, so my attention span is pretty much zero)

But the quoted text was a flashing, big neon sign to me. What are you trying to say? Atheists aren't against the Judeo-Christian god, but against an higher power or deity. Which includes ALL gods.

You americans like to use the word "freedom", does it not apply also to the religion? The line in the PoA clearly contradicts (yeh, I've learned a new word, me>awesomeness) the freedom of believing whatever deity, object, slump of piss you want.

And I don't even get why it has to be there, I mean, let's get real, America isn't exactly the model student in the school of God. Yes, there are those who believe and then there's those who "believe" and change the rules that gets one to heaven when there's need to, wtf is that about? Is that not God's law? One can't just change it when it contradicts (Woot, that's a strike!) to something he/she want's to do but God says NO.

Of course, this happens all over the world, not just america, so don't take this as a attack on america or something like that (or I call you an douchenozzle [giggity giggity for those who remember that ]).

Right... I think that's all.. I go back to what I was doing.

PS. Damn, I think that's my all time longest post.

PPS. this has been bothering me, is it PPS or PSS. My brother uses PSS, but is it not PPS, as in post-post-scriptum or someting?

PPPS. If someone knows the girl in my sig, PM me, she is HOT!

[conus00]

Originally Posted by The Third Man

Interesting question. That it is asked by a current non-citizen, studying to become one, makes it all the more relevant.

It is this look from the outside which allows us to constantly have a re-look at ourselves. The best reason for immigration I can think of.

I don't know the answer because I'm too close to myself as a citizen.

Thank you for asking the question.

You are welcome. One of the ways how we improve ourselves is being questioned by others. On different (but related subject) you should take a look at this: http://usgovinfo.about.com/blinstst.htm

It is the list of questions required for U.S. citizenship test. It might be little bit outdated but it will give you an idea. I believe that majority of U.S. citizens would flunk the test. My g/f (smart and born and raised American) didn't know the answers to approx 1/3 of the questions.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Originally Posted by Dowly

First of all, I didn't read the two points you made, so if what I say next contradicts what you have stated in them, just everyone ignore my post. (I'm a "tad" drunk, so my attention span is pretty much zero)

Now I'm reading it for sure.

But the quoted text was a flashing, big neon sign to me. What are you trying to say? Atheists aren't against the Judeo-Christian god, but against an higher power or deity. Which includes ALL gods.

Yep, you missed a bit. NP, though.

You americans like to use the word "freedom", does it not apply also to the religion? The line in the PoA clearly contradicts (yeh, I've learned a new word, me>awesomeness) the freedom of believing whatever deity, object, slump of piss you want.

I have to disagree with one point. Americans don't like the word freedom, they love it. Much of our cultural identity is based upon it.
Other than that, I completely agree that you>awesomeness.

As far as the rest of your post goes, many of us agree to some extent.

Of course, this happens all over the world, not just america, so don't take this as a attack on america or something like that (or I call you an douchenozzle [giggity giggity for those who remember that ]).

America invented giggity-giggity.

PPS. this has been bothering me, is it PPS or PSS. My brother uses PSS, but is it not PPS, as in post-post-scriptum or someting?

It depends on the context. PS is Post-scriptum and PSS is post sub-scriptum. I'll explain it later.