In 1954, the phrase, under God, was added to our country’s Pledge of Allegiance.  President Eisenhower said, From this day forward, the millions of our school children will daily proclaim in every city and town, every village and rural schoolhouse, the dedication of our nation and our people to the Almighty.  Every since that day, the Pledge of Allegiance has implied that we, as Americans, believe in one male God.  Until recent years, no one fought that assumption, but as our country grows more and more diverse, we are hearing complaints from minority groups such as Muslims, Buddhists, and atheists.  In fact, one atheist, Michael Newdow, took the case to federal court, arguing that the pledge unconstitutional.  This debate is still ongoing in our country, both in the court systems and in individual lives.  Each side has a fair and logical argument.

      There are those who want to keep the phrase, under God, in the pledge, stating that this country was founded on a belief in God, and that taking it out would lead to chaos because a country without God is a lawless country.  They say that those who don’t believe in God should simply leave the phrase out when they recite our nation’s Pledge of Allegiance.  And, as 76% of Americans believe in one male God, according to religioustolerance.org, it seems perfectly reasonable to leave the pledge the way it is now written.

      On the other hand, some people want the phrase, under God, taken out of our pledge, saying it violates their beliefs in a higher power.  They argue that this country was built on religious freedom, and that forcing people to proclaim a belief in a God is unconstitutional.  Simply leaving the phrase out isn’t enough; it still makes them uncomfortable, even angry, to be associated with it, the same way a Christian would be offended if it said, without God rather than, under God.

      So, when both sides have a highly credible argument to support their opinions, how do we decide which is right and which is wrong?  Who makes that decision for an entire nation?  I would like to propose a third option for our court system to consider:  leaving the line blank and letting each denomination, each individual, fill it in however they choose.  Christians could say, under God, Muslims could say, under Allah, and atheists could say, under law, perhaps.  Each belief, though different, would be protected and defended.  Since the constitution guarantees us the freedom of speech, nothing stands in the way of each individual expressing his own beliefs.

A  Flag Timeline can be viewed at timeline
http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagpics.html