The language “under God” was added to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954 during the Cold War,
an era when the country was particularly alarmed by atheistic communism. Michael Newdow is
an avowed atheist with a daughter in the elementary school of Elk Grove Unified School District
in California. He objected to the school district’s requirement that his daughter say the Pledge
including “under God,” as he considered that government establishment of religion, in violation
of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. His challenge reached the U.S. Supreme
Court, which dismissed his claim on a technicality that did not reach this central issue. (The
technicality was that Newdow did not have the legal “standing” to raise this issue in the courts.)
The issue remains an important one to many people. Some of the justices of the Court indicated
that they would not have found this language “under God” a First Amendment violation if they
had reached that question. One justice said that the words “under God” do not constitute “a
prayer, nor an endorsement of any religion,” but rather “a declaration of belief in allegiance and
loyalty to the United States flag and the Republic that it represents.” Another said that this
language is an “idiom for essentially secular purposes,” and that it is acceptable to
“commemorate the role of religion in our history.” One justice observed that language such as
“In God we trust” on our currency is just a reflection of “ceremonial deism” that does not
establish any particular religion.
What will be an ideal response?
1. Do you agree with this reasoning? Does the language about God force atheists and
agnostics to adopt a view of religion they do not accept? Is Deism an example of a type
of religion being established in the Pledge and on our currency?
2. Does this language interfere with the freedom of religion for those who do not accept
Deism, such as Buddhism? Use philosophical reasoning to defend your position.
3. What other examples can you think of in government-funded public life that invoke God?
Are these justifiable on the same grounds used by the Supreme Court?
You might also like to view...
Jean-Paul Sartre argues that we are condemned to be free
Indicate whether the statement is true or false.A scholar of Hindu law is called a __________
a. pandit b. swami c. guru d. smrti
The rule of "last on, first off" with respect to firing policies protects which of the following?
A. The rights of junior members of a firm to job security B. The job security of middle management. C. Seniority rights to job security D. The pension rights of new employees.
"There is no god but God, and Muhammad is the Messenger of God.". This sentence is known as the
a. Quraysh b. Sunna c. Hadith d. Shahadah.