Pledge Allegiance to What (final paper)

Final Research Paper
English 1010
Hailey Stokes, professor
8/5/2010
Andrew Reed Brough


Pledge Allegiance to What?


“Supporting the legality of marijuana or abortion does not mean you smoke dope and kill babies; similarly, allowing people to pledge to the U.S. flag without pledging to a specific Creator does not mean you disregard that Creator.” says James McOmber, a Salt Lake City student and active church-goer. He was referring to removing the mention of God from the Pledge of Allegiance.
In a community where believing in God is commonplace, this is a hot topic among parents, clergy, and students alike. The religious enthusiasts want to keep God in our schools and homes, while the people who aren't so religious seem to be growing more and more disgusted by the practice. Along with those non-religious folks are an ever increasing group of people with mixed beliefs who just don't agree with the belief that “...One Nation, Under God...” (Pledge of Allegiance) needs to be recited in our schools in order to keep their children close to their God. Let's not forget, however, the non-religious people who think that it should stay due to a misunderstanding of terminology and Pledge history.
Many people will argue that keeping the Pledge Of Allegiance in our schools and keeping the
“...One Nation, Under God...” line in it is a way of being true to our roots as Americans. Our forefathers came to this land in search of religious freedom. They fought for our right to worship God, when, where, and how we choose. There are, however, some problems with these arguments. One such issue is that if we are free to worship when, where, and how we choose, shouldn't that mean that we're also free to not worship? Furthermore, according to The Pledge of Allegiance and the Meanings and Limits of Civil Religion By: Grace Kao, the pledge didn't include the words “Under God” until 1954. So technically, the arguments mentioned earlier in this paragraph aren't even legitimate arguments.
The fifties seemed to be a time when our nation was struggling to instill standards and beliefs in it's children, and now looking at the sixties, we see it was for good reason, yet not very effective. Even still, “Under God” seemed to be the stability our nation needed at the time. It was translated as a statement of our nation being watched over. I remember when I was in elementary school I was frequently told that the fathers of our nation put those words in the Pledge of Allegiance as a way to pay respect to God often. What we weren't told, maybe because we were too young to understand, is that “Under God” was a term frequently used in the eighteen hundreds to mean “second only to God”. It was a way to give God credit while still claiming that the subject at hand was important. Various dictionaries also state, "under God: as a secondary cause or mediate object of gratitude." It wasn't necessarily a statement that meant to what the Pledge is commonly understood to mean. Given this information, I personally changed my opinion on this subject. I initially thought that since this nation was founded on religious freedom and beliefs, that we should stay faithful by allowing ourselves and our future generations to be true to what our forefathers have said. While I am religious, my primary intent on this subject is to stay faithful to my country. We, as citizens, are nothing without our government, and vice versa (that can be argued, of course, but this seems to make the most sense to me).
Mike Glick, a University of Utah student, active LDS church-goer, and extremely patriotic U.S. citizen, says, “I do believe that this country was built around God and a creator and the words should stay. Whether people say them or not is up to them. Removing the pledge or changing it does offend me. To me it is unpatriotic.... If you are that distraught by the country you live in and what it was built and formed off of, move. Go to another country. Because I will fight till the day I die to keep this country and what it stands for.” Obviously Mike has very strong opinions on this matter, as do a lot of other people in our nation. But he does make a good point that it is up to each individual as to whether or not they want to recite the Pledge. I remember as a child learning that I wasn't required to stand with my fellow students and say the words, but rather I had a choice. I was asked to have respect for the practice and at least stand while the other children recited it, but I didn't have to join in. I found great joy in looking like a rebel to my fellow students, but over time my joyful attitude changed from rebellious to thankful. I am now thankful to my teachers for teaching me that I had that choice. I don't necessarily think that the Pledge is a bad thing or that reciting it, with the God terminology intact, is a horrible or ignorant practice, I just feel that each person has a right to choose what they'll do. All that being said, another person I interviewed, Laura Gilchrist, stated “...[The Pledge] isn't necessary, it doesn't have the roots a bunch of supporters claim it does and it wastes time better spent on learning math or something.” This may be a slightly different view from the one stated just previous to it, but it still gives a great point. We could very well be wasting time that could be spent helping strengthen our kids' brains. Our nation will only be as strong and intelligent as our future leaders will be, which won't be much if we don't educate them now. But is teaching our kids patriotism and tradition really wasting our time, or is it helping our nation become stronger by uniting our generations?
We are a nation of many faces. America has been called “The Melting Pot” or “The Mixing Bowl” for a reason. There are so many different people in our country. We have every race, color, creed, religion, and lifestyle. We have Americans who were born and raised here that share the beliefs and ideals of religious and political groups that are based in other countries, and conversely we have foreign born people who immigrated to this country because they share the belief that this country's founders had. As a missionary and service worker for my church in Georgia I met and learned from many different people. I sat for an hour in the house of a Muslim from the middle east eating his food and learning about his religion. When he was finished, he politely sat and listened to me teach of my religion. Our normal missionary teaching habits include an invitation to join our congregation, but that day was different. That day we ate, spoke, shook hands, and left with a smile. There was no awkward tension due to strange requests to come experience something either of us weren't ready for. As Americans, whether we're lifelong citizens or new to the country, we have learned that The Pledge of Allegiance is a part of our customary beliefs. For most people it's not an awkward thing. The majority of Americans can recite it word for word, even though the majority of us haven't said it since high school. But if we were to ask my Muslim friend to join us in the Pledge of Allegiance, he probably would decline. Not because of ignorance to our culture and customs, but because he is more true to his country, customs, and culture. He's respectful to our religions and public customs and, I'm sure, demands the same respect from us. Even as children we learn to treat our peers the way we would want them to treat us, and our Muslim friend is a great example of this logic. Why we can't all be this way is a sad problem, but also very unfortunately understandable.
The “problem” that we find now lies in the ability that all human beings have to make choices, have opinions, and stand by their opinions. This is a blessing from whichever Creator one decides to believe in, but also a curse to our existence. We have a biological right and privilege to make our own lives. The problem with this is that it is virtually impossible for large amounts of human beings to form a perfect union or undivided group. We will forever disagree with our peers. And this is what we see happening daily in the world as we know it. People are forming ideals and opinions about countless subjects, standards, and beliefs, and will not easily back down from their decisions. What's right and wrong has become controversial in the world and “politically correct” is now what we base our public image on. We hold our private beliefs sacred and secret, yet, in public, we conform to the least offensive practices we can. We don't mention a person's race, religion, or health problems, for fear of causing offense which can often lead to legal action. It's almost sad that we are basing our actions off of the fear of offending others. We can't just be honest to ourselves and others and expect the same. Along with not wanting to offend others with our private beliefs, we are constantly changing our preferences to fit in with our friends and what is perceived as “cool” or acceptable. A large amount of supporters of virtually any issue could very well be supporting the issue blindly. It's extremely hard in these modern times to get a true and real count of how many people actually support an issue, due to so many blind followers.
Another solution to the issue of separating God and country would be to completely remove The Pledge of Allegiance from our customs and practices. This, in my opinion, will backfire horribly. Yes, it solves the problem of whether or not our children have God in their daily routine, but as it's been said previously, our future lies in the rising generations. Without unity, they will fail to lead our country in future events. I firmly believe that our current leadership is doing (arguably) as good of a job as they've been doing because of the unified, conservative time frame they were raised in.
I feel that if we are basing our decision to keep the Pledge of Allegiance in schools or to keep “Under God” in the Pledge off of our fear of offending others that we are turning ourselves into cowardly, sad people. I think that no matter what our decision, it needs to be a decision based on changing for the unity and bettering of our nation, and not one based on not offending others. I would be more than happy to revert back to the original pledge of allegiance as a way to come closer to our roots. To me, it seems to be the same as modern golfers wearing authentic vintage clothing that dates to the original days and uniforms of the sport. The same thing happens in baseball, and now even basketball teams are reverting to their vintage logos and jersey colors. This is all a way to pay homage to those who came before. Changing the words, now and in the past, of something that holds so much importance to our nation may arguably be more of a hindrance to our nation and it's future generations than our leaders may have expected. We obviously do not know what would be different today if the words “Under God” had not been added in 1954, but who's to say that the decision was a good one?
As citizens and visitors of these United States of America, we must decide for ourselves what we feel is offensive, beneficial, and redundant for our future leaders. Whether we remove the mention of God from our nation's Pledge or not, it is up to us to decide how much we support or reject. My argument is that, while I don't agree that we have anything to worry about by keeping God in the Pledge, our decision should be based on what will prepare us for a better future rather than what will or won't offend our more sensitive fellow human beings.