The Instigator
Intellisio
Pro (for)
Tied
5 Points
The Contender
GodIsMyRock374
Con (against)
Tied
5 Points

Should the words "under god" be in the pledge of allegiance?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/20/2017 Category: Politics
Updated: 11 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 558 times Debate No: 105183
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (2)

 

Intellisio

Pro

The words "under God" should be in the Pledge of Allegiance.
The first round is only for acceptance. Please do not forfeit as that is what happened with my last two opponents on this topic.
GodIsMyRock374

Con

I accept the debate. Resolved, that the words "under God" should not be in the Pledge of Allegiance. Good luck, and thanks for posting this debate. It should be excellent.
Debate Round No. 1
Intellisio

Pro

I'd like to thank my opponent for accepting my debate. I want to start off by repeating that "under god" should be in the Pledge of Allegiance.
The Pledge is not trying to insult someone or their religion. We have been saying this Pledge for many years and many people have fought against it. Yet, people are not fighting against the statement "In God We Trust" that is imprinted on each and every coin in the United States.
There is no need to change the Pledge of Allegiance because it is a way of respecting our country and saluting our flag. The views of a few people should not influence the greater good of the Pledge of Allegiance. In my opinion, we as a nation have been saying this Pledge for many years. There is no point in changing it now.
The most controversies about our pledge come from students. "The main reason that the pledge of allegiance is said in schools is to instill a sense of patriotism amongst students. Some believe that it shouldn't be controversial at all because it the process is just what it is described as: a pledge. Because of how the pledge has been prominent in American society for as many as 100 years, it could be said that it could be too big a change and un-traditionalistic if the pledge was to be abandoned now following on from the years of prominence that it has had in the educational arena." This was stated by an Teachnology article.
The Pledge of Allegiance was written in August 1892 by Francis Bellamy. He wrote in hoping that the pledge would be used in any country.
The original version is:
"I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
Our altered version is:
"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
This was changed because of President Eisenhower who encouraged Congress to add the words "under God."

Sources: http://www.teach-nology.com.........
http://www.ushistory.org.........
https://www.bartleby.com.........
GodIsMyRock374

Con

I want to thank my opponent again for posting this debate. Resolved, that the words "under God" should not be in the Pledge of Allegiance.

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." The addition of the phrase, "one nation under God", is an indicator of identity. According to my opponent, Francis Bellamy meant for the pledge "to be used in any country." The fact that we, as Americans, added "under God" is indicative that it was meant to set us apart from other countries. Now national identity is very important, as it dictates such things as nationalism, patriotism, and loyalty. In fact, that is what the allegiance is all about. Not only confirming loyalty to one's country, but also reaffirming identity in the country. Yet, how can you pledge allegiance to something you do not feel loyalty to, nor believe in, such as God?

The allegiance was formed over 150 years ago. That was back in a time where the majority of Americans were very religious and fully believed in God. Look at what has happened since then though. Darwinism and a rise in Secularism have apparently taken America by storm. In the 60's and the 80's, both the drug and sex revolutions changed yet another demographic into anything but religious. Within the Universities, academia has all but sworn off the existence of God. The newest generation, the millennial, has become extremely ambivalent, and many have sworn off the Church. According to Dr. Alex McFarland, a Fox News contributor, "College-aged millennials today are far more likely than the general population to be religiously unaffiliated" (Fox). God and religion have become increasingly unpopular in American culture, especially with the rise of such philosophers as Nietzsche, Foucault, Bacon, and Freud, the idea of God within culture itself has become very fragile. And as Nietzsche himself said, "'Whither is God?' he cried; 'I will tell you. We have killed him -- you and I'" (Nietzsche). Because God is becoming more and more irrelevant in American culture, it is no longer necessary to make "him" a part of American culture's identity. Taking the "under God" section out of the allegiance would not be making changes for offended people, but rather making the allegiance relevant to the culture whom must say it, and further more, repeat it with fervent belief and genuine patriotism.

God was part of our heritage, that much is true. To take any mention of God out of the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence would be ridiculous because those are dead documents, and God is a part of our history. But the allegiance, give the historically set place of its conception is not a part of that history or heritage, but rather a part of a constantly evolving American culture. Changing the allegiance would only serve to align itself with he reality of what this country is today.

resources:
http://www.foxnews.com...

http://www.historyguide.org...
Debate Round No. 2
Intellisio

Pro

My opponent stated that our Pledge should be altered to fit our society today. If that was done, we would have chaos. First, I would like to point out that saying the Pledge of Allegiance is not mandatory. There are plenty of students who sit out during the Pledge.
The Pledge is based on our country's foundations. In the 1700s, an estimated 75-80% of the population attended churches, which were being built at a headlong pace. This shows how important this is to our country. We have many people with different religions, different beliefs, and cultures. This doesn't come to prove that we should change our Pledge because of that.
I respect that America is diverse, but that doesn't mean changing our history to fit the needs of others.
In fact, "Thomas Jefferson and our other Founding Fathers understood that the government does not give us our freedom. Our freedom comes from God, and the government was established to protect that God-given freedom. That was their justification for the American Revolution as stated in the Declaration of Independence." This shows that Thomas Jefferson even understood the importance of those words.
Many people will argue that "Under God" was not stated in the original Pledge. The only reason was because they took many years to get it right! Many of our nation's leaders have spoken about the importance of God in the Pledge of Allegiance and in our country.
The Pledge of Allegiance isn't a prayer that swears people to a belief. It is something that is stated to respect our country. We are not pledging allegiance to God in the Pledge of Allegiance. We are pledging allegiance to the republic.
The Pledge is part of the basis of our country. Change it and there will be shouts of protest. It is senseless to even imagine changing it.
My opponent stated that the Constitution and Declaration of Independence are "dead documents." They are alive in our society today. Students study about the Declaration, Constitution, and the purpose they served. These documents are anything but dead. We should enforce them in our daily lives.
Our founding fathers were part of the making of these principles. We should try our best to abide in them. We may talk about how our country has dramatically changed.
Why should we say the Pledge? Why are we so concerned about the Pledge when there are more important things going on? The reason is because America wouldn't be as strong as it is today without the history that acme before. By saying the Pledge of Allegiance, we are bringing history alive everyday. Just think, you're saying the same pledge Martin Luther King Jr. said years ago!
Thank you for taking this time to debate with me. I fully respect your views, but my opinion stands strong and has not wavered.

Sources: https://www.gtbe.org...
GodIsMyRock374

Con

In his rebuttal, my opponent touched on my use of the word "dead document". However, he does not understand the definition of this term. In the legal and political worlds, a dead document is one that cannot be changed or altered, such as the Declaration of Independence. They still apply to the present, but cannot be revised.

My opponent stated that "The views of people should not influence the greater good of the Pledge of Allegiance". This is the premise for his argument that "we as a nation have been saying this Pledge for many years. There is no point in changing it now". The current longevity of the pledge does not secure its status as something Americans say. Suppose the pledge said "under Satan" or "under the President", or something else that was not in line with the beliefs of Americans. They would change it. If the pledge is supporting something that is not supported by the people, its defense should not be that it has been recited for a long time, and that's why it should stick around. Sometimes we say bad things for a long time, but it doesn't mean that they shouldn't be changed. And yes, the views of the people should influence the greater good of the pledge. This is a democratic republic, where the people have the most say.

Also, my opponent stated that changing the pledge would undermine the respect it shows to our country and the flag. But "we are not pledging allegiance to God in the Pledge of Allegiance", says my opponent, so in that case, how would it hurt the respect shown to the flag and the country. It wouldn't because those too are independent of God.

My opponent stated that "[if the Pledge of Allegiance was changed], we would have chaos." Yet, he was unable to prove how exactly chaos would ensue as a direct result of the change.

In conclusion, the Pledge of Allegiance is a beautiful sentence that we say to reinstall patriotism in our hearts, and a firm resolve of loyalty in our minds. Yet, the Pledge must remain something that the American populace can say without a certain doubt. Not only does removing "under God" put an end to any religious conflicts in relation to this subject, but it reaffirms America's identity now, in the present. It reaffirms our commitment to separation of Church and State, so that whenever the pledge is enforced, it cannot be a violation. God is irrelevant to modern day American society, so why keep him in a "living" (meaning open to change) pledge that confirms our alliance to a new America? It's time to change. It's time to solidify our identity.

Thanks for the debate. I really enjoyed it. Hopefully you post more debates in the future. Might be fun to have more rounds though.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by whiteflame 10 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Skywalker900// Mod action: NOT Removed<

5 points to Con (Arguments, Sources). Reasons for voting decision:

[*Reason for non-removal*] There is no RFD required on this debate. As such, votes made on this debate are not moderated.
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 10 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: dsjpk5// Mod action: NOT Removed<

5 points to Pro (Arguments, Sources). Reasons for voting decision:

[*Reason for non-removal*] There is no RFD required on this debate. As such, votes made on this debate are not moderated.
************************************************************************
Posted by bodog 11 months ago
bodog
no, it should not be in it because it not only is not traditional but it is not a separation of church and state.
Posted by John_C_1812 11 months ago
John_C_1812
Yes, not because the many believe in only a religious GOD. It is due to the fact at least one person can still show there is a none religious GOD.
Posted by lIlIlIllIIIIllIlI 11 months ago
lIlIlIllIIIIllIlI
Just curious, are you for it being or against?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 11 months ago
dsjpk5
IntellisioGodIsMyRock374Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Vote Placed by Skywalker900 11 months ago
Skywalker900
IntellisioGodIsMyRock374Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05