Chipman 1

Alexandera Chipman
Laurie Oberg
English 11
2 March 2016
One Nation, 'Under God', With Liberty, And Justice For All?
There comes a time where politics and religion play out into the same field of the Bill of
Rights like the Pledge of Allegiance does in this case. Many controversies have speculated on
this, because the government is playing into religion beliefs about 'under God' in the anthem.
There have been a few dozen cases where people wanted to go to Congress to take the word out
because it violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the constitution, (Pew
Forum) because it states that people are free to exercise religion where you can't be infringing
their rights, it goes against what the Muslims, Buddhism, Mormons, Christians, Jewish, and
more follow under these. The phrase under God is provocative in religious groups who have a
different meaning for what 'God' stands for. The pledge may seem patriotic to our nation, but to
the hearts and religion, it goes against all odds, which is why it should be taken out, and chance it
so it wont have a meaning to our groups about being a part of this nation and holy to the
Almighty.
Francis Bellamy, who wrote the first pledge for the support of our republican, published
the original pledge in 1892. I pledge allegiance to my flag and (to*) the Republic for which it
stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all (Baer). Around that time, that
simple pledge had a meaning and a meaning that didn't have controversies to it. In later years of
when this came out, many changes to the wording came, by the Knights of Columbus, which
made the pledge a patriotic, oath, and public prayer for the American citizens. People, who were
by this, didn't mind that 'under God' because they weren't much religious, or they were atheist.
The pledge of allegiance was becoming a big thing in the early 21st century, and still

Chipman 2
today about we have let our children in public or private schools to recite the pledge. In
September 14, 2005 there was a federal court in Sacramento that had ruled it was
unconstitutional to require that public schools to recite the pledge with 'under God' which
received positive views on the people who were religious. Religious people had a big impact of
wanting the infamous phrase about God out, but some people, like Michael Newdow, who are
atheists, tend to want it out; because they really didn't believe in a God, or that they weren't
religious enough to care. On the date March 24, 2004 the Supreme Court would hear an oral
augment against Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, because Newdow's daughter
attends that school, which enforces the students to say the pledge against their will. Newdow was
one of many people who got to case their arguments of to take the word 'under God' out because
that the current version of the Pledge is, at least in part, a religious message, and therefore
recitation of the Pledge is a religious exercise. (Pew Forum) Newdow wanted to protect his
daughter from this, because he was an avowed atheist who wanted nothing to do with religion
with his family, so he supported it to take it out. Unfortunately with the case, Newdow lost
because he did not have legal custody over his daughter, so he couldn't make his point. Things
like this get rejected easily because people often think that the pledge is a patriotic thing instead
of a religion thing.
In 1953 there have been reports of President Eisenhower making it an effort of keeping in
the words 'under God,' because he supported the patriotism about it since hes a republican.
Around this time, people held protests, went for strikes, anything to make Congress acknowledge
that the pledge is interfering in religious bases' that is unconstitutional. The same year President
Eisenhower made a speech that is bias to the public opinion towards the issue of the pledge.
From this day forward, the millions of our schoolchildren will daily proclaim in every city and
town, every village and rural schoolhouse, the dedication of our nation and our people to the
Almighty. (Robinson) This is saying that even though its not saying it towards religion, but

Chipman 3
then Eisenhower throws in to our God that we are one nation, that everyone has the same God, so
its okay when its not. This is stating that it is forcing children into saying it to show our respect
to our leader of the world and t the nation that we live in, when not many Americans have the
same belief on one God.
For the over outcome of the pledge and where it stand with the 'under God' President
Bush has come to a conclusion about where it stands in the public eye. They have had polls of
what the American society thinks and only 8% people think its about religious circumstances
and that it violates the first amendment. By the time President Bush came into office and
addressed things over, the government had come to a conclusion that the 'under God' may
remain in the Pledge of Allegiance as recited in public school classrooms [.] the outcome with
the pledge remains the same [.] Today's ruling ensures that schoolchildren in every corner of
America can start their day by voluntarily reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. (Lane) President
Bush made it easier for it so that it can be separate at your own will verses forcing it and having
a fit against it. Even though it prohibits children to not say it, they still have to stand up and cross
their arms over their hearts to show their respects to their one nation.
Looking back, I found that religion and politics were always involved together even
though it violates the first amendment, but many controversies with arguments prove them
wrong. Still today, Americans or non-Americans that live in the U.S will refuse the right of
showing their respect to the country because their biased ways of their religion. The phrase
'under God' does violate some unconstitutional rights, because if there was an all-girl Catholic
girl school, like Saint. Marys, then they have to say it, because its their religion and what they
are taught to do. The whole controversy behind the phrase was because most religions believe in
one God, and their God isn't the same as others, like Muslims, Mormons, or Buddhism and
Christians, etc. People from religion groups who were against this, thought it was biased,
because they felt like they had to prove themselves worthy to the nation and to the Congress to

Chipman 4
be part of this nation of being one, when everyone is none other than one.

Works Cited
Baer, John W. The Pledge of Allegiance A Short History. Dr. John W. Baer. 2007. Web. 8
February 2016.
Lane, Charles. Justices Keep 'Under God' In Pledge. The Washington Post, The Washington
Post Company. 15 June 2004. Web. 13 October 2011.
One Electorate Under God? A Dialogue on Religion and American Politics. Pew Forum on
Religion & Public Life. Pew Forum. 26 June 2002. Web. 17 November 2006.
One Nation Under God? A Constitutional Question. Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life.
Pew Forum. 19 March 2004. Web. 8 February 2016.