State courts around the country have made it very clear over the years that the phrase “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance does not violate the First Amendment. Last week, The American Humanist Association in Massachusetts claimed it discriminates against atheist students, but since students aren’t required to participate, the case isn’t likely to pass muster. The courts are only allowed to interpret the law, so perhaps opponents of the phrase should be looking to Congress instead.
Pledge requirements do not violate the Constitution. However, that does not mean it’s good policy. Whether intentional or not, leading children in the pledge is a loophole around the First Amendment, using social pressures to promote certain religions over others.
The bottom line is that the phrase makes some people uncomfortable, otherwise it wouldn’t be as controversial. The Becket Fund alone brought the case to court four times in a 13-year period. Not all students in American schools are religious and not all religious students are monotheistic.
Reciting the pledge may be optional, but in school it has the potential to open doors for questions and judgments toward students who do not feel comfortable reciting the pledge.
It doesn’t hurt supporters of the pledge to take the phrase out. The pledge itself might be a historic tradition in our country, but removing those two words would not threaten that culture. “Under God” wasn’t added to the pledge until the 1950s, during a time when godlessness was linked with communism. If the fear is of altering history, then the words never would have been added in the first place.
The pledge itself is even unnecessary. While some may find it important that students learn the symbolism of the flag and what it means to be a part of this country, group chanting over a crossed heart hardly belongs in an academic setting. Reaffirming your allegiance daily does not change the social contract, laws, taxes and benefits that a person agrees to simply by choosing to live here.
Also, mindlessly swearing fealty to the republic for which it stands directly contradicts the popular Lockean idea that if the government takes a turn for the worse, the citizens have a right and obligation to replace it. These are the ideas students need to be learning, in as unbiased a manner as possible.
Flags are taken seriously in today’s society, but it is up to the individual to decide how much they want to feed into that symbolism. How society is best embodied changes from person to person, and the pledge directs kids toward one way of thinking.
A country that earns loyalty through fair laws and respecting freedoms doesn’t need indoctrination. Congress should require students to be taught about the pledge and be told what is expected of them as citizens. Only after a child fully knows what he or she is saying should they make the choice to one of the many flags around the school and pledge using words he or she truly believes in.