# Reciting Pledge of Allegiance in public schools ruled unconstitutional. Discuss. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 14, 2005, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reciting-pledge-of-allegiance-in-public-schools-ruled-unconstitutional-discuss/321644 "2005-09-14T18:31:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2005, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reciting-pledge-of-allegiance-in-public-schools-ruled-unconstitutional-discuss/321644/81 "2005-09-15T17:15:37Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > So if 1% (and I’m being generous) of those who disagree with you act badly, stupidly or hatefully, it’s okay to condemn the whole group and their opinion. > [@lekatt](#): > > It really don’t deserve an answer, but if you can find anywhere I advocated any violence of any kind show it to me. I have not condemned any group and I have not claimed that **lekatt** has _personally_ advocated violence at any time. The fact that both of you can try to dismiss the actual point I made with different strawmen while hiding from addressing the actual point I _did_ make says a lot about the way in which you are willing to embrace tyranny in the name of majority rule (as long as you are in the majority, of course). The actions that majorities of people will undertake _or will accept when undertaken in their name_ are shaped by the ways in which the public mythology is expressed. If the public mythology is expressed as “we were founded as a Christian nation” (or, in an analogous fashion, if the public mythology holds that people who are not white are less than fully human), then the majority will more easily _tolerate_ the actions of minorities of their members acting in harmful, and even unlawful, ways. I am sure that the overwhelming percent of whites in the nation, or even whites in the South, never participated in a lynching between 1866 and 1930. However, it was the accepted attitude that blacks were inferior (supported by many silly appeals to ethnology or pseudo-philosophical tracts and even misreadings of the Bible) and that it was a legitimate exercise of the majority to take steps to let them know their place that permitted some tiny minority of whites to lynch several thousand blacks during those years. I doubt that anything resembling a majority of people actively tried to burn down Catholic churches or Catholic neighborhoods. However, it was the appeal to our (Protestant) “Christian” foundations of this country that permitted those actions to be perpetrated over many years, with no groundswell of condemnation by the majority to prevent it reappearing over and over. In fact, it was not until enough Catholics had immigrated and they had become a substantial percentage of the population that such attacks finally died down (with the immigration acts and the Palmer raids at the end of WWI being the last futile effort to prevent Catholics from achieving that percentage of the population). All the same laws and Constitutional principles and appeals to the ideals of the Declaration of Independence were in place when tiny groups of haters perpetrated persecution and violence on other people, yet those lofty words did nothing to protect the blacks, Catholics, Jews, Asians, or any other group that has been persecuted because the tiny groups of persecutors always cloaked their actions in appeals to the common understanding that blacks or Asians were inferior or that this nation was founded as a (Protestant) Christian nation. When you advocate enshrining those attitudes in law, you are probably not actively advocating violence. You are simply setting the stage on which some other person can advocate violence by appealing to your (purportedly) neutral “will of the majority.” If I were Jewish or Muslim, I would be greatly concerned to see appeals to our “Christian” heritage as similar appeals have historically preceded religious persecution. The point is not that every person who is Christian is a potential persecutor or that any person has to deny their own heritage. The point is that the Law of the nation and its official declarations must be sufficiently separate from the religious beliefs of the majority so as to not encourage repeats of previous persecutions. And since **lekatt** , himself, describes this situation as > [@](#): > > I am sure the war between the seculars and the religionists has just begun I would hope that he would have the intelligence to step back and see just what he is (implictly) advocating. (Not that I have much hope for actual contemplation from that quarter.) ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2005, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reciting-pledge-of-allegiance-in-public-schools-ruled-unconstitutional-discuss/321644/82 "2005-09-15T17:21:42Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > Correct. And that is why the pledge cannot be made mandatory. Making the Pledge optional is not a solution because you still have a teacher teaching theism as fact. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2005, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reciting-pledge-of-allegiance-in-public-schools-ruled-unconstitutional-discuss/321644/83 "2005-09-15T17:45:52Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > “The United States is in no sense founded upon > Christian Doctrine” -George Washington I think what you are refering to here is a passage from the Treaty of Tripoli, which is often attributed to Washignton. If so, you’re quote is incorrect, and incomplete. It should read, “ **As** the \*\*government of the \*\*United States is in no sense founded on the Christian **religion,** ” and should be follwed by “,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen,-and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.” [Bolding mine] I think you would agree that that changes things considerably: in order to avert a holy war with the states from which the Barbary Pirates hailed and to have US ships continually “pay tribute” to them, Washington, pointed out—accurately—that the “_government_ of the United States” was not founded on the Christian “religion”. That is not the same as the _idea_ of U.S. not being founded upon Christian principles. Your quote from Thomas Paine, contrasted with this one, demonstrates that he understood there to be a philosophical stance (a belief system) that embraced the conept of a God, yet did not necessitate adherence to a religious doctrine. “I believe in one God, and no more; and I hope for happiness beyond this life.” -Thomas Paine, _The Age of Reason_ I will refrain from overwhelming you with quotes from other founders. Jefferson is your best advocate. Although he was a devout follower of the teachings of Jesus (the man), he did eschew formal religion as a matter of personal choice. As far as Adams, it would not bolster your position to depend on him to argue for it. For every quote you can offer there are twenty where he makes the opposite point. By the way, can you tell me where your Adams quote is from? > [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > The founders were not Christians, did not, in any sense, base the Constitution on Christian principles. Theye were mostly Deists, not theists (which means they did not believe that God intervened in human affairs) and they emphatically did not believe that the government had any business endorsing monotheism. Do you have any support for this? Also, which of the founders do you think were Deists and not followers of Christianity? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2005, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reciting-pledge-of-allegiance-in-public-schools-ruled-unconstitutional-discuss/321644/84 "2005-09-15T18:00:20Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > I have not condemned any group and I have not claimed that **lekatt** has _personally_ advocated violence at any time. False statement. “Not that I have much hope for actual contemplation from” you either. > [@](#): > > Originally posted by **tomndebb** \* > it is the “religion” advocates who are more likely to resort to violence against people who do not share their faith, including defamation, vandalism, and actual physical harrassment. \* Here you condemn all those who advocate religion as being prone to violence, and > [@](#): > > Originally posted by **tomndebb** \* > lekatt, seems to have no problem with using violence to impose the will of the majority on others, since he supports the people who have traditionally resorted to violence.\* Here you engage in guilt by association. No doubt you will “simper” something or other that I can dismiss in advance. Let’s see - Newdow is an atheist, atheists killed millions in the Soviet Union and Kampuchea, ergo anyone who wants to remove “under God” from the Pledge supports mass murder. Ridiculous. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2005, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reciting-pledge-of-allegiance-in-public-schools-ruled-unconstitutional-discuss/321644/85 "2005-09-15T18:27:33Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > …says a lot about the way in which you are willing to embrace tyranny in the name of majority rule (as long as you are in the majority, of course). I don’t know what you mean by “…says a lot about…”, but how am I willing to embrace tyranny? It seems that much of your argument is that if a thing has been used for ill in the past, and may be used for ill in the future, that we should get rid of it. And the “it” I’m talkiing about here is not religion, but the state acknowledgement of the role religion played in the formation of the country. According to that logic we should eliminate guns, knives, baseball bats, even words. As far as the foundation of this country, are you really saying that it was not based in large part on Judeo-Christian beliefs and values? Or are you of the opinion that we should “skew” the facts surrounding our founding because the truth may cause is problems? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2005, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reciting-pledge-of-allegiance-in-public-schools-ruled-unconstitutional-discuss/321644/86 "2005-09-15T18:32:49Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Making the Pledge optional is not a solution because you still have a teacher teaching theism as fact. It’s not being taught. It’s an openning ceremony to start off the school day. No child is ever tested on the factual basis of the pledge. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2005, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reciting-pledge-of-allegiance-in-public-schools-ruled-unconstitutional-discuss/321644/87 "2005-09-15T18:41:39Z")
**Shodan** , you don’t score points by lying and deliberately misquoting or quoting out of context posts that are directly above the one you are posting where everyone can see your deliberate misstatements. I have not claimed that **lekatt** personally advocated violence, so your claim is a lie. > [@](#): > > Here you condemn all those who advocate religion as being prone to violence No, I do not. I point out that in the context of the separation of church and state in the U.S., those who have engaged in violence in regard to religion have all been drawn from the ranks of those advocating the mixing of state and religion. I made no assertion regarding believers in general. I do, indeed, link **lekatt** ’s attitudes with those who have resorted to violence to impose particular religious beliefs or actions on those who believe differently. I have also presented historical evidence demonstrating how that happened. If that is guilt by association, then **lekatt** (and everyone else who is willing to tolerate such a mixing) is guilty. I specifically noted in my historical recounting that the majority of people did not resort to violence. They simply adopted an attitude that let the tiny minority who did act violently believe (correctly) that that violence would be tolerated. Now, you can try to twist my statements any way you wish, but if you are simply going to snipe falsehoods from the sidelines, then you are really doing nothing to carry forward this discussion. ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2005, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reciting-pledge-of-allegiance-in-public-schools-ruled-unconstitutional-discuss/321644/88 "2005-09-15T18:44:39Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > As far as the foundation of this country, are you really saying that it was not based in large part on Judeo-Christian beliefs and values? What “Judeo-Christian beliefs and values” was this country founded on? Are the assertions that government derives its power from the consent of the governed and that the people have the right to alter their form of government–by violent revolution if need be–[Judeo-Christian values](http://bible.gospelcom.net/passage/?search=Romans%2013:1-7;&version=31;)? Are the principles that there should be no religious tests for holding office and that the government should not interfere with the free excercise of religion [Judeo](http://bible.gospelcom.net/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2013;&version=31;)-[Christian](http://www.reformed.org/documents/westminster_conf_of_faith.html#chap23) values? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2005, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reciting-pledge-of-allegiance-in-public-schools-ruled-unconstitutional-discuss/321644/89 "2005-09-15T18:58:19Z")
> [@](#): > > It seems that much of your argument is that if a thing has been used for ill in the past, and may be used for ill in the future, that we should get rid of it. And the “it” I’m talkiing about here is not religion, but the state acknowledgement of the role religion played in the formation of the country. According to that logic we should eliminate guns, knives, baseball bats, even words. I am not opposing the role that religion played in the history of the country or the _accurate_ presentation of how that role actually occurred. I oppose generic claims that this was “founded as a (Protestant) Christian country”–rather than the more accurate “most of this country’s founders were Protestant Christians”–along with the official mixing of the government into the promulgation of religion, such as endorsing a pledge of allegiance that makes note of a monotheistic deity (with a clear historical implication that it is the Christian God), the placing of “In God we trust” on our money, the placement of officially led prayers in schools, and other similar actions. Our history should correctly note the role that religion played during the settlement of this country, with churches often being the central building around which towns were formed, the role that many churches played in the growing abolitionist movement, the role that churches played in establishing schools and promoting education, and the religious ideals that informed many of the most prominent leaders of the country. That history, however, had better recognize that religion has been used as a weapon to deny some groups the right to live and work in this country, that particular beliefs were used as weapons to condemn people, (branding Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson atheists, for example), that it was used as an incitement to inflict harm and death on fellow citizens, that it was used as a means to impose disproportionate taxes on unfavored groups. If you simply claim that this country was “founded as a (Protestant) Christian country and look how wonderful it is” while hiding the ways in which religion contributed to the worst as well as the best events in our history, then you really are denying history. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2005, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reciting-pledge-of-allegiance-in-public-schools-ruled-unconstitutional-discuss/321644/90 "2005-09-15T19:12:10Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > -George Washington > > I think what you are refering to here is a passage from the Treaty of Tripoli, which is often attributed to Washignton. If so, you’re quote is incorrect, and incomplete. It should read, > > “ **As** the \*\*government of the \*\*United States is in no sense founded on the Christian **religion,** ” and should be follwed by “,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen,-and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.” [Bolding mine] > > I think you would agree that that changes things considerably: I agre to no such thing. It says that the US is not fopunded upon Christianity and therefore has no enimity to Muslims. How does that change anything? > [@](#): > > in order to avert a holy war with the states from which the Barbary Pirates hailed and to have US ships continually “pay tribute” to them, Washington, pointed out—accurately—that the “_government_ of the United States” was not founded on the Christian “religion”. That is not the same as the _idea_ of U.S. not being founded upon Christian principles. Yes it is. It’s EXACTLY the same thing. There isn’t a single “Judeo-Christian” principle or idea or thought anywhere in the US Constitution. > [@](#): > > Your quote from Thomas Paine, contrasted with this one, demonstrates that he understood there to be a philosophical stance (a belief system) that embraced the conept of a God, yet did not necessitate adherence to a religious doctrine. > > “I believe in one God, and no more; and I hope for happiness beyond this life.” > -Thomas Paine, _The Age of Reason_ I didn’t say the founders were atheists, I said they were Deists. Deists believe in God as a creator but do not believe he intervenes in human events. > [@](#): > > Here it is that the religion of Deism is superior to the Christian Religion. It is free from all those invented and torturing articles that shock our reason or injure our humanity, and with which the Christian religion abounds. Its creed is pure, and sublimely simple. It believes in God, and there it rests. > > It honors reason as the choicest gift of God to man, and the faculty by which he is enabled to contemplate the power, wisdom and goodness of the Creator displayed in the creation; and reposing itself on His protection, both here and hereafter, it avoids all presumptuous beliefs, and rejects, as the fabulous inventions of men, all books pretending to revelation. > [-Thomas Paine](http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/paine-deism.html) > [@](#): > > I will refrain from overwhelming you with quotes from other founders. Jefferson is your best advocate. Although he was a devout follower of the teachings of Jesus (the man), He did not believe in the divinity of Jesus or in miracles or that God interevned in human events. > [@](#): > > he did eschew formal religion as a matter of personal choice. And as a matter of personal belief. > [@](#): > > As far as Adams, it would not bolster your position to depend on him to argue for it. For every quote you can offer there are twenty where he makes the opposite point. By the way, can you tell me where your Adams quote is from? I got it from [wikiquote](http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Adams). Here’s another one from Adams that’s right on point for this discussion. > [@](#): > > “The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. … **It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service [forming the U.S. government] had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven**, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; **it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses. …Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery… are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind”** > -John Adams from _A Defense of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America_, 1787 > [@](#): > > Do you have any support for this? The Deism of the founders is well documented. [Here’s](http://www.deism.org/foundingfathers.htm) a little page to get you started. [Here’s another](http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/farrell_till/myth.html) > [@](#): > > Also, which of the founders do you think were Deists and not followers of Christianity? Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Franklin and Paine, to name a few. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2005, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reciting-pledge-of-allegiance-in-public-schools-ruled-unconstitutional-discuss/321644/91 "2005-09-15T19:54:14Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Making the Pledge optional is not a solution because you still have a teacher teaching theism as fact. Teachers do not teach theism when they salute the flag. There are some religions that for religious reasons don’t eat pork. Should we remove all the pork from the supermarkets so they won’t be offended. No, they have a choice of buying or not. A student has a choice of saying the pledge or not. That is enough. Quit trying to make a federal case out of it. \ ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2005, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reciting-pledge-of-allegiance-in-public-schools-ruled-unconstitutional-discuss/321644/92 "2005-09-15T19:58:39Z")
Does anyone in this thread believe that if the Ninth Circuit rules as they did before, the Supreme Court will vote to uphold them? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2005, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reciting-pledge-of-allegiance-in-public-schools-ruled-unconstitutional-discuss/321644/93 "2005-09-15T20:02:34Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Does anyone in this thread believe that if the Ninth Circuit rules as they did before, the Supreme Court will vote to uphold them? I don’t. And that applies to the existing court and the one that will emerge once Bush has filled the two vacancies. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2005, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reciting-pledge-of-allegiance-in-public-schools-ruled-unconstitutional-discuss/321644/94 "2005-09-15T20:03:51Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Does anyone in this thread believe that if the Ninth Circuit rules as they did before, the Supreme Court will vote to uphold them? Not me. I’ve already said I think they’ll hide behind Ceremonial Deism. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2005, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reciting-pledge-of-allegiance-in-public-schools-ruled-unconstitutional-discuss/321644/95 "2005-09-15T20:05:26Z")
> [@lekatt](#): > > Teachers do not teach theism when they salute the flag. No, they teach it when they say we’re one nation “under god.” ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2005, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reciting-pledge-of-allegiance-in-public-schools-ruled-unconstitutional-discuss/321644/96 "2005-09-15T20:06:10Z")
> [@MEBuckner](#): > > What “Judeo-Christian beliefs and values” was this country founded on? Are the assertions that government derives its power from the consent of the governed and that the people have the right to alter their form of government–by violent revolution if need be–[Judeo-Christian values](http://bible.gospelcom.net/passage/?search=Romans%2013:1-7;&version=31;)? > > Are the principles that there should be no religious tests for holding office and that the government should not interfere with the free excercise of religion [Judeo](http://bible.gospelcom.net/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2013;&version=31;)-[Christian](http://www.reformed.org/documents/westminster_conf_of_faith.html#chap23) values? I can’t see any connection between your links and the founding father’s beliefs. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2005, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reciting-pledge-of-allegiance-in-public-schools-ruled-unconstitutional-discuss/321644/97 "2005-09-15T20:12:06Z")
That’s the point. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2005, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reciting-pledge-of-allegiance-in-public-schools-ruled-unconstitutional-discuss/321644/98 "2005-09-15T20:19:49Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > No, they teach it when they say we’re one nation “under god.” So, if a teachers says: > [@Random Teacher](#): > > Class, we are now going to recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Reciting the pledge is entirely optional, and anyone who wishes not to do so may remain silent. then they are “teaching” deism? How on earth do you come to that conclusion. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2005, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reciting-pledge-of-allegiance-in-public-schools-ruled-unconstitutional-discuss/321644/99 "2005-09-15T20:27:10Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > I have not claimed that **lekatt** personally advocated violence, so your claim is a lie. > > No, I do not. I point out that in the context of the separation of church and state in the U.S., those who have engaged in violence in regard to religion have all been drawn from the ranks of those advocating the mixing of state and religion. I made no assertion regarding believers in general. > > I do, indeed, link **lekatt** ’s attitudes with those who have resorted to violence to impose particular religious beliefs or actions on those who believe differently. I have also presented historical evidence demonstrating how that happened. If that is guilt by association, then **lekatt** (and everyone else who is willing to tolerate such a mixing) is guilty. I think you need to quit trying to associate me with violence. Why do you and other moderators keep attacking me personally? I intend to make my beliefs heard with my vote. This is a country of the people, by the people, and for the people. Below is how they voted in a poll in 2003. The first number is approved, second, disapprove, and third no comment. The inscription “In God we Trust” on U.S. Coins. 90% 8% 2% Non-denominational prayer at public school ceremonies. 78 21 1 Monument of the Ten Commandments in a public area. 70 29 1 Monument of the Qur’an in a public area 33 64 3 Federal funds for social programs run by Christian organizations 64 34 2 Federal funds for social programs run by Islamic organizations 41 56 3 [http://www.religioustolerance.org/sep\_c\_st5.htm](http://www.religioustolerance.org/sep_c_st5.htm) The people have spoken. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2005, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reciting-pledge-of-allegiance-in-public-schools-ruled-unconstitutional-discuss/321644/100 "2005-09-15T20:28:25Z")
Because the teacher is stating as fact that we are “under god.” Just because a kid doesn’'t have to chant along doesn’t mean it’s not still an endorsement of theism by the government. All you have to do is turn it around. Would a teacher have a right to start every class by saying that God does not exist? How is it possible to hear the phrase “under god” as anything but a statement that God factually exists? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reciting-pledge-of-allegiance-in-public-schools-ruled-unconstitutional-discuss/321644.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reciting-pledge-of-allegiance-in-public-schools-ruled-unconstitutional-discuss/321644.md?page=6)