"Under God" should remain in the pledge, for the sake of tradition

Labarum suggests the phrase "Under God" should be left in the pledge of allegiance, for the sake of tradition.

I will argue con.

First round is for acceptance only, please.

Truly, I do not see any benefit in removing it. But if you would like to debate sure.

Introduction:

First and foremost, thank you to my opponent for accepting this debate. I look forward to hearing their positions and arguments.

Pro has asserted the term "Under God" should remain in the US Pledge of Allegiance for the sake of tradition.

First we must establish a definition for tradition -

tra"di"tion noun \trə-G2;di-shən: a way of thinking, behaving, or doing something that has been used by the people in a particular group, family, society, etc., for a long time

I argue that less than a century is not nearly enough time to declare something a "tradition"

1. The Roots of the "tradition":

The pledge was authored in 1859 by an ordained minister, Francis Julius Bellamy. The original text in question read:

"I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

The traditional pledge never contained the term "Under God", therefore the phrase cannot be considered traditional.

Francis Julius Bellamy was a noted socialist thinker, a proponent of secular public education, and a tremendous theologian who understood that a government endorsement is not needed for those who are secure in their faith.

'Francis Bellamy protested even the addition of "the United States of America" on Flag Day in 1924, believing the pledge as he wrote it did not need changing. "If he didn't want 'the United States of America' in the pledge, he wouldn't have wanted 'under God,"' his grandson Scott Bellamy told The Commercial Appeal of Memphis.'

SOURCE: http://www.sullivan-county.com...

SOURCE on Bellamy's socialist leanings: http://www.oldtimeislands.org...

2. The motivation behind the addition of "Under God" was entirely based on fear, not faith.

In 1942 - The pledge is recognized by the U.S. government as it was originally written (save for a change from Republic to The United States of America, a change the Bellamy estate resisted).

The red scare is the only reason "Under God" exists in the pledge. Communism was falsely perceived to be a secular threat, which caused Eisenhower to encourage the addition of "Under God" to the pledge in 1954. In part due to pressures from radical social groups such as the Daughters of the American Revolution and the Catholic group Knights of Columbus.

Rev. George Docherty (1911 - 2008) preached a sermon that was attended by President Eisenhower and the national press corps on 1954-FEB-7. His sermon said in part:

"Apart from the mention of the phrase 'the United States of America,' it could be the pledge of any republic. In fact, I could hear little Muscovites repeat a similar pledge to their hammer-and-sickle flag in Moscow."

This sermon had the desired effect of imparting fear upon Eisenhower. Three days later, Senator Homer Ferguson, (R-MI), sponsored a bill to add God to the Pledge. It was approved as a joint resolution 1954-JUN-8. It was signed into law on Flag Day, JUN-14.

President Eisenhower said at the time:

"From this day forward, the millions of our schoolchildren will daily proclaim in every city and town, every village and rural schoolhouse, the dedication of our nation and our people to the Almighty."

A clear violation of the Separation clause.

The true tradition would be to say the pledge without the phrase or the additions added after it's adoption.

SOURCE: http://www.ushistory.org...
SOURCE: http://www.smithsonianmag.com...
SOURCE: http://www.religioustolerance.org...

3. The Separation Clause:

The pledge is a clear violation of the separation clause. The phrase "Under God" has been the ongoing subject of much controversy and legal bickering, however a constitutional purist must acknowledge it is in violation.

"As for purpose, the government conceded what the 1954 act's legislative history makes plain: Congress added the words "under God," at the height of the Cold War and McCarthyism, to reaffirm the core difference between American society and "atheistic communism." As President Eisenhower explained during the act's signing ceremony, daily recitation of the Pledge was intended to proclaim "the dedication of our Nation and our people to the Almighty."

The government nevertheless argued in Newdow that the Pledge as a whole had a secular purpose because it was primarily a patriotic observance, not a religious one. The 9th Circuit's rejection of this argument is strongly supported by the Supreme Court's reasoning in Wallace v. Jaffree (1985). Wallace involved an Alabama statute that originally mandated a daily minute of silence in schools for "meditation." The Alabama legislature then amended the law to read, for "meditation or voluntary prayer." The Supreme Court found that the amended statute violated the Establishment Clause, emphasizing that the legislature's sole motive in changing the statute was to add a reference to prayer. Similarly the 9th Circuit stressed that, although the Pledge was not unconstitutional across the board, inclusion of the words "under God" had been added to advance religion and thus made it unconstitutional."

SOURCE: http://www.berkeley.edu...
SOURCE: http://undergod.procon.org...

Since my opponent has forfeited the round, I feel there is nothing more for me to add.

Please vote Con!

Pro has again forfeited their round.

With no counter argument provided, please vote Con!