Federal Court Ruling On The Pledge Of Allegiance

2 Pages 607 Words

The article I chose to read is The Federal Court Ruling on the Pledge of Allegiance. I

must admit that there are some good points in it but I also disagree with the ruling.

According to the Opinion of Judge Goodwin, it is stated “The pledge, as currently

codified, is an impermissible government endorsement of religion because it sends a

message to unbelievers ‘that they are outsiders, not full members of the political

community, and an accompanying message to adherents that they are insiders, favored

members of the political community’” (Moore-Parker: Critical Thinking, Seventh Edition

Appendix A-5) I completely disagree with this statement. In my personal opinion I

believe the Pledge of Allegiance does not send that message. I think it sends a message

that we are all one nation and that no one should be discriminated against because we are

all equal. Just because God is in the pledge, Atheists think they are being discriminated

against. If the pledge is broken down, it can be interpreted in many different ways, just as

the Bible can be misconstrued to say whatever people want it to say or mean.

I am not a very religious person but I do believe in God. I teach my children to believe

in God. I do not try to push my beliefs on anyone else and I do not believe that saying

“Under God” should be viewed as pushing beliefs. The whole sentence states “one

nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all” Breaking it down, this is

how I interpret it. “One nation, under god” meaning all people alike. “Indivisible”

meaning standing together to be undivided by any means. “With liberty and justice for

all” meaning we are all equal and no one should be treated unfairly or unjustly. God is

just a title. If the pledge stated one nation, under Jehovah then I could see the religious

aspect of the argument. In some peoples eyes...