The Pledge of Allegiance

In June 2002, a federal appeals court ruled that reciting the Pledge of Allegiance was unconstitutional because of the words "under God" within the pledge. The court upheld the ruling early last month, giving a March 10, 2003 deadline to remove the pledge as a part of school curriculums in nine states on the west coast. However, the Supreme Court got out of hearing the case in the not too distant past due to a technicality: the plaintiff was not the legal guardian of the child whose school was in question.

This case accentuates a burning debate in the United States over the separation of church and state. One of the contributing factors to the establishment of this country was a freedom from the tyranny of government and religion.

Thousands came from Europe in order to escape the oppressiveness of a monotheistic government. This establishing characteristic is now in jeopardy of being forsaken because of a blind loyalty to two unnecessary words. The inclusion of the words "under God" came about by legislation in 1954. Its intention was to distinguish the United States from the atheistic, Communist nations. We are no longer fighting Communist nations in a war of ideology.

The United States remains the lone superpower with many of the former Soviet satellites in debt to the United States for economic support. We also managed to attach a defining statement about conservative views into a popular anthem of allegiance. I'm sure Joseph McCarthy would be pleased to see how far we have come.

In addition to being a relic of the Cold War, the words "under God" serve to alienate a great number of religious believers who don't believe in the Christian God. Judge Alfred T. Goodwin in a majority opinion for the appeals court last summer, stated that, "a profession that we are a nation 'under God' is identical . . . to a profession that we are a nation 'under Jesus," a nation 'under Vishnu,' a nation 'under Zeus,' or a nation 'under no god,' because none of these professions can be neutral with respect to religion."

Many religions do not believe in a single god or a god similar to that of Christianity, yet we have tipped our hats to the fact that the United States is a nation of Christians and everyone else. Removing "under God" is not only a preference of everyone else but is also a necessity to ensuring the freedom to practice religion in the United States. The fact that politicians of both parties and the public have created such an outcry for these two little words says something about America.

The United States is in a period of identity crisis, with threats of war and the anxiety of new technologies and ideas creating a need to look inward. From this, the Christian element emerges as a viable solution to these problems. If everyone were to follow the words of the Bible and live according to Christian morality, the world would be better, right?

No. In fact, we would lose all that is American about us. Our rights to express ourselves and believe in something that may seem outlandish to others would be subverted by the indoctrination of religious belief. God is not the answer to all of these issues.

The government and the public must look to common institutions, such as political and social discourse, in order to reach the greatest number of people and disabuse the anxieties of the public. By allowing "under God" to remain in the Pledge of Allegiance, the judicial system would be conceding that the real power lies within the Christian community of the United States. Our government is defending an inherently un-American concept to be allowed into public schools and public discourse for many years ahead of us.

There is no need for God in praising our allegiance to the United States. There is also not a need to remove the Pledge of Allegiance all together. The solution is obvious- remove "under God" but allow students in public schools to pledge their allegiance to the United States. After all, is that what the pledge is for in the first place?