The pledge of allegiance is by definition a solemn swear of allegiance to the United States. But recently, it has been under attack by some for its use of the phrase “one nation under God.” This case was brought up by an atheist from Sacramento who didn’t want his second-grade daughter to have to hear the pledge of allegiance. He took it federal court. After a self fought case to the Ninth Appellate Court, the court ruled that the phrase “under God” is an “endorsement to monotheism,” thereby in conflict of state and church separation. This ruling came at a tough time in America when everyone was still trying to find an answer to September 11. But, I do believe this to be the right decision.
The state-sponsored use of “one nation under God” is a subtle, but intentional endorsement of religion. In so doing, the government is in breach of the First Amendment to the Constitution. The people who are fighting against the Court’s decision to ban the phrase seem entirely to forget about the Constitution. A senior judge who disagreed with the ruling said “there was only a ‘miniscule’ risk that the use of the phrase ‘under God’ would ‘bring about a theocracy or suppress someone’s belief.”” Does something in there sound wrong to you? The judge implies the phrase could and would suppress small portions of Americans. That’s unacceptable.
A Harvard professor predicted that the Supreme Court would overturn the decision. Our House of Representatives and the Senate were disgusted by the court’s decision. The senate passed a resolution 99-0 showing support for the pledge of allegiance. The lawmakers of the United States are simply playing politics to appease the majority of Americans. We put our trust in these people's hands to represent us and defend the Constitution, not to appease constituents who support state-sponsored religious endorsement.