Pledge Of Allegiance example essay topic

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America", words spoken by thousands of students across America every single day. These are words that in some way or another have sewn their way into the hearts of every American student as either a ritual, a way to show patriotism, or a yet another way to waste fifteen more seconds at the beginning of the day. Whatever the case may be, the Pledge of Allegiance has become one of the more prominent staples in America today. No matter what part of the country you may have grown up in, as soon as that bell rang, the morning announcements commenced with the recitation of the pledge of allegiance. This was a common axiom shared among millions of Americans.

A bond used to unite others in the face of oppression and despair. While some individuals stood and said it with enthusiasm and spirit, others climbed to their feet for the daily torture of saying the pledge. Whatever the case may be, this is a universal tool used by American students today. But what happens when our daily staple is threatened? As a nation, how do we react to a dilemma that has arisen from the depths of the people all the way to the Supreme Court to stare the Pledge of Allegiance down in the face?

As a collective mind, how do we decide what is needed, necessary, or offensive to some. Where do we draw the line as a country known for its liberty and nobility? Is there even a line to draw? What do we do when religion blesses most but oppresses others? Do we appease the suffering few or the comfortable masses? Some of us may ask what sparked this feud that has caused so much conflict.

It all began with Michael A. Newdow, who lived in Broward County, Florida. He filed a report in 1998 when he was concerned about his, then four year old, daughter who would be starting school. The little girl had been raised, like her father, as an atheist. An atheist is a person who does not believe in God or any such higher power. Newdow was concerned for his daughter's having to say the pledge of allegiance in school with the phrase "under God" in it. Newdow was up in such arms about the matter that he even took is predicament to court.

He told the court that he felt it unfair for his daughter to feel left out while all the other children stood and said the pledge with hearts that had chosen God, when his daughter had not. The courts decided to dismiss the case on the grounds that the girl was only four years old and therefore not old enough to attend school. They furthered their point by arguing the idea of religious tolerance. They were trying to teach the girl the principle on which this nation was founded. Many immigrants moved to America searching for religious freedom and tolerance.

The court tried to show the father and the little girl that although she did not have to say the pledge or did not have to say under God, she did have to be tolerant of the views of children who said under God with that intent in their mouths and hearts. Saddened and discouraged the Newdow decided to move to California. Though the thought of California was fresh in his mind, he was mistaken to find that there his plea would hold little to no bearing. He approached Elk Grove Unified School District with vigor only to be denied when he presented his case.

The state law required the pledge of allegiance to be spoken at the beginning of each school day. "Each elementary school class [shall] recite the pledge of allegiance to the flag each once a day" ~California Statuette. This left Newdow no room for bargain due to the fact that he lacked standing to challenge the SCUSD's rule. When Newdow's daughter began school Newdow did not attest to his daughter being forced by her teachers to say the pledge of allegiance.

Rather that she was injured when she was compelled to watch her teacher lead her class in the pledge of allegiance. According to West Virginia State Board of Education V. Barnett e (1943) any state issued teacher would be found unconstitutional if compelling the students to partake in the pledge of allegiance each morning. It was considered breaking first amendment rights by demanding the students to say the pledge, or parts of the pledge, that they did not necessarily believe in. Newdow asks the President of the United States to change, alter, or modify the pledge of allegiance so that "under God" would not be found and to enact Congress right away to act to remove "under God" from the pledge.

While each idea is prevalent in the issue, they are completely different in aspects. The idea for "under God" exists as a more early patriotic fashion blended with a sense of religion. During the early years of our country, and even during the years in which those words were written in the pledge, religion was the key fundamental provoking national feelings. Patriotism bloomed with a sense of religion in it and it was not uncommon to find the word God presented in any government documents.

The nation was founded on such ideas as manifest destiny and religious freedom granting all who came to America the choice to partake in any religious experiences or to deny them at one's own will. Only until the nation grew into what it has become did the word or idea of God become offensive to some. The use of "under God" should not necessarily be viewed as offensive. It should be viewed upon as historical, therefore calling some sort of respect from any patriotic view. This is obviously not taken into consideration through Newdow's actions. The little girl was not forced to say the pledge of allegiance and there for should not have felt such grievance.

She should have been taught the ideas that all Americans were taught when they first moved here. The idea of religious tolerance and that while she may not have believed in what was being spoken during the pledge, she should have been tolerant of other's exercise to use "under God" in the pledge. The opposite idea holds just as much mental significance for many. While people acknowledge the fact that our nation was found by many well known religious figures it was still founded under religious tolerance and while this idea can be used for, it can also be used against. With the notion of religious freedom fresh on everyone's mind it was easy to be lost in the general public.

Since the majority of the public was religious it was easy for the freedom to be shifted in a religious manner. However the people of religion must also be tolerant of those without religion. While it is easy to say, "be tolerant of my religion" it seems to be harder now to say, "Be tolerant of my lack of religion". These people, though not in with the general masses, still hold bearing on the way this country should be run and governed. When something that is a serious subject to them and not necessarily to someone of a religious back round is brought up it is easy for the general masses to extinguish its flame since they all agree the same way, however this does not mean that the argument is any less important then anyone else's. Today the little guy or underdog is known to be kicked around or swept under the rug with an idea or problem that is then turned away.

This happens so many times that the problem eventually grows and develops into something much larger then its original intent. By now the people of a religious background are confused and outraged that the non-religious one be so upset about their problem, that could have quite possible been solved much earlier but was not due to the fact that it was ignored, moved, or turned into something it wasn't. This inevitably leads to a giant pimple that defaces America's outstanding face. It is a problem that seems insignificant to religious holders but far larger to those who do not hold a religion of their own. Though opinions may vary from just about every person who lives in America, the answer is obvious to me.

Having growing up in a religious household I was raised on the beliefs that God holds a prevalent facet on all of our lives whether we choose to acknowledge His presence or not. The fact that many Americans choose not to belief in God or wish to acknowledge his existence does not bother me. It is when they try to take away my rights as an American to freely to except God; I am not fond of this. My opinion therefore stands that the pledge of allegiance is fine as it is and although some may be hesitant to recite it, it is their option to say it or not. If they do not believe in saying "under God" they may either exclude that portion from the pledge while they say it, or simply stand in silence with the respect this nation deserves. The California court case with Michael Newdow was dismissed.

It was said that his case had no real argument. The fact that he was arguing for the rights and safety of his daughter was taken into consideration, but there was not any prosecution brought against his daughter, just some awkwardness. The fact that we have the Christians and the Religious Americans fighting to keep the rights of their beliefs in the American way of life is an attest to the patriotic religion that is an underlying principal in American standards as it is seen in this day and age. However the Atheists feel that they are being pressured into a belief system that they are not yet ready for, or ever will be ready for.

In this day in age it is hard to accommodate everyone and their standards and beliefs. I feel that if we keep it based upon the historical beliefs that we were founded on our country will be lead in the best possible direction that can truly be hoped for. Patriotism is a fundamental that must be rooted deep within the American system, with God, if it hopes to achieve an advanced tomorrow.