 |
|||
|
Sections |
Pledge of allegiance under religious fire |
|
|
|
Parents and students protest the pledge of allegiance due to a conflict with religious beliefs and begin a battle with those who hold the pledge as sacred.
By
STEVE MAYER |
 |
||
|
MIDDLETOWN, Pa - Few topics in America can become as controversial as people's religious beliefs. Those that do not subscribe to any particular religion or have no belief in the idea of God, often come under harsh criticism from adherents of religious doctrines, particularly Christianity. Michael Newdow has become the new lightning rod for religious controversy. A three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals voted 2-1 that the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance is an unconstitutional endorsement of religion by the government. The "under God" phrase is in violation of the Establishment Clause of the Constitution according to opponents of the phrase. The case, Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, is now before the Supreme Court. The court heard Newdow's arguments in late March. Supporters of the pledge, in its current recitation, say that the phrase "under God" is merely a reflection of the country's tradition of incorporating religious elements into everyday public life. "America's presidents have routinely issued prayer proclamations that express the nation's dependency on Almighty God. Like it or not, our nation's religious heritage served as the groundwork for this land of the free," Jerry Falwell said in a recent article on his website. Falwell commands Jerry Falwell Ministries, an evangelical Christian organization. "President Bush called the ruling 'out of step with the traditions and history of America,'" David Hetterick said in an article that dealt with the pledge controversy and appeared in the Minneapolis Star Tribune. Hetterick pointed out that Bush's father, when he was president, once said, "nonbelievers can't be considered citizens or patriots. This is one nation under God." Many people often erroneously equate religious belief with patriotism, according to Hetterick. "In no way was the pledge itself rejected," Hetterick said regarding the Ninth Circuit's ruling. The decision was only challenging the "under God" portion of the pledge. "Religious belief or the lack of it is not and should not be a litmus test for American patriotism or citizenship," Dave Silverman, Communications Director, said in a February press release for American Atheists. American Atheists is an organization that works to maintain a separation between church and state as well as defending the rights of atheists nationwide. According to American Atheists, "the intent of the 1954 Act of Congress was to 'Denigrate and Disparage' Atheists as part of a political strategy to identify Atheism with 'Godless Communism.'" Those opposed to the "under God" portion of the pledge point out that the original pledge made no reference to God. Francis Bellamy, a socialist and clergyman, originally wrote the pledge in 1892. It appeared in the periodical "The Youth's Companion." The Pledge of Allegiance, as Bellamy wrote it, did not contain the phrase "under God," causing many opponents of the phrase to call for its removal. On June 14, 1954, "under God" officially became part of the pledge. Although the wording had been changed slightly for reasons of clarity beforehand, the incorporation of the "under God" phrase would be its final change. "The Los Angeles Times" reports that in 1953, the bill was introduced by Rep. Louis Rabaut and by Sen. Homer Ferguson, with support by President Dwight D. Eisenhower. The "under God" phrase was lobbied by religious leaders from the fraternal Catholic organization—the Knights of Columbus. Many opponents of the "under God" phrase point out the social climate of 1950s America as reasons for the inclusion of the phrase. The Cold War was steadily gaining momentum, so the "under God" phrase is viewed as a way for the country to differentiate itself from the "godless communism" of the Stalinist Soviet Union. According to a recent press release by the Eagle Forum, a conservative activist group, the "under God" version of the pledge "is an act of patriotism, not of prayer." "Indeed, judicial invalidation of the Pledge would foster—perhaps require—the invalidation of the Constitution and National Anthem, as well as numerous other documents and civic statements acknowledging God in our national life," the group said. According to the Eagle Forum, 87 percent of Americans support the phrase "under God," which Hetterick refers to as "another victory for the tyranny of the majority theocracy." While the Constitution makes no reference to any divine being, many supporters of the "under God" phrase site historical documents as well as the Declaration of Independence and its phrase, "...all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..." "The Supreme Court in 1962 banned prayers from public schools, and now schools are awash in drugs, sex, and violent acts, " Phyllis Schlafly said in her April column "God is Not so Easily Defeated." Schlafly is the president and founder of the Eagle Forum. "Before going insane, Friedrich Nietzsche declared that 'God is dead,' and now atheists want the Supreme Court to make it official." Many opponents of the "under God" reference do not want the government to endorse atheism, but rather want the government to remain neutral on issues involving religion in the public sphere. Groups such as American Atheists are calling for a return to the original version of the pledge, which they say excludes no one. When declaring that "God is dead," Nietzsche did not mean in the literal sense of the phrase. He meant it to be understood that the cultural concept of "God" was outdated. Supporters of the "under God" phrase point out the National Motto, "In God We Trust," which appears on U.S. currency as examples of how God's influence has permeated the American culture. Lance Jencks, a financial professional and community activist, wrote in the April/May issue of "free inquiry" magazine that the original national motto was E Pluribus Unum. The phrase is Latin for "Out of Many, One." The motto was suggested by Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, and John Adams in 1776. In 1954, the same year as the pledge change, the motto was changed to "In God We Trust." "Rather than giving emphasis to power derived 'Out of Man, One'—from the people upwards—this new formulation reverses the situation to 'In God We Trust'—from the top down....We no longer trust the people; now we put our trust in God," Jencks said in the article. "Our Constitution was intended to protect us against those of any religion who presume that religious belief is prerequisite to patriotism," William E. Phipps said in the same issue of "free inquiry." Phipps is a professor emeritus of Religion and Philosophy at Davis and Elkins College. According to Phipps, during the country's formation, immigrants were aware that appeals to God had caused divisions in their native lands. "All American atheists and polytheists that I, a Christian minister, have known are devoted to our democratic government and deserve having a Pledge to the Flag that also represents them," Phipps said in the article. "The original version of the Pledge, which was in use longer than the one most Americans now living have learned, passes the constitutional muster and should be revived." "We are, and have continued to be, a religious people since our founding," said Pat Robertson in a recent article that appeared on the official website of the 700 Club, an evangelical Christian organization. Robertson points out that every constitution of the fifty states contains a reference to God. "Now, a tiny minority is using the federal court system to attempt to dismantle our entire public affirmation of faith in God." A ruling in the Newdow case is expected to take place some time in June of this year. All stories in this magazine are the intellectual property of the individual authors. You may email comments about this story to: slm379@psu.edu
|
|||