Should the words "Under God" be used in the US Pledge of Allegiance?

The Pledge of Allegiance is not required for everyone to say at any point in time.
I suppose with this point, I should be speaking from personal experiences. Throughout school, we recite the PoA every day to show our "loyalty to America." However, America is a diverse land, and where I live in particular, there are many people from Mexico. Not once in my school career have I seen someone reject reciting the pledge and be reprimanded for doing so. You may wonder how this has to do with the religious aspects of the debate, but I am just showing that it is not required for people to announce. Simply put, if someone feels uncomfortable with the religious aspects of the PoA, they do not have to recite it. This does not mean that the PoA should be altered in any way.

Majority of Americans identify themselves as Christians. [1]
The link above states that 83% of Americans identify themselves as Christians, whereas only 13% identify as having no religion. In a country where we praise the idea of favoring majority, why would we not favor this majority? Remember that there is only a rule about banning religions and creating religious establishment given to the federal government, so using the saying "under God" in no way goes against the Constitution. With the overwhelming 83% of Americans identifying as Christian, I see no problem with the simple two words. Like I said earlier, it is not required that one pledges their allegiance.

The Pledge of Allegiance is a part of American history. [2]
The link above shows that the PoA was written in 1892 by a minister. Over a century later, Americans are still reciting the pledge without a problem. The PoA, regardless of anyone's opinion toward it, is a staple piece of history in America. The pledge was written by a minister, so yes there of course was a mention of God as that is what he believed in, and according to [1], what 83% of Americans believe in.

You see, we can't change something because 13% of Americans identify as unreligious. America is the place where majority rules, and Christians have the majority.

[1] http://abcnews.go.com...;
[2] http://www.ushistory.org...;

I apologize, my links have appeared to have broken. Hopfully it works this time:
[1] http://abcnews.go.com...
[2] http://www.ushistory.org...

"A) The Pledge of Allegiance is required, and to not recite it will induce negativity."
This is only personal experience. This is not conrete evidence of the reaction not reciting the pledge will cause. Like I said, where I am, majority of the people do not say the pledge and are not looked down upon by those who do say the pledge.

"B) "Under God" was not part of the original pledge."
I don't honestly see this as a strong point against having a phrase in the pledge. This argument states that the phrase is unecessary because it was not in the original pledge, but with this argument, you must apply this to all situations to se if the general statement is valid. I prove that the "it was not in the original pledge" argument is false because a vast majority of our current amendments to the Constitution were not originally in the Constitution. Just because they were not in the original document does not make the unecessary or invalid, which shows that just because the phrase wasn't in the original pledge, the phrase is not automatically unecessary and invalid.

"C) Christianity does not rule America."
This is true as America is not a theocracy, but this is true in the majority of the population. As proved in my earlier argument, a vast majority of Americans identify themselves as Christians. You have disproven my percentage, which, I admit I did not look at the date oops. However, any person who has passed the first grade will know that anything over 50% qualifies as the majority.

To get to the point of my rebuttals, and to negate the remainder of your argument, there is no valid reason why the phrase "Under God" should be taken out of the PoA. As for the making the other 30% comfortable, there are elections and polls in which a huge majority takes the lead, but the minority has to deal with the results. America is diverse, yes, but with a majority identifying under a certain label, there is no reason why the PoA should be altered to appease the 30% minority. If it is that necessary, the individual can skip the "under God" and continue with the pledge.

This concludes the debate.