Nation under God Essay

The demarcation regarding the intention of the boy deity in the compact of Allegiance is non a new whizz. In fact, this argument stems from the long standing principle of separation between the church and the disk operating system which is embodied in the First Amendment of the United States constitution. Under this principle, the politics and the church be to be kept separate from each otherwise. The disposal is require from encouraging or advancing any of the interests of a single religion. This nub that the g overnment can non promote a single religion or call upon its concourse which religion to follow (Clark 1965).It is a blanket prohibition that prevents the government from intervening in the spectral beliefs of people. The second aspect of this principle recognizes that the government testament invariably have to deal with religious institutions one manner or the other (Clark 1965). The doctrine on the separation of church and land therefore also regulates the dealings between the church and express such(prenominal) that there should only be a minimal and incidental flutter from the government. This is also known as the rule on excessive network between the church and the state.The problem with the engross of the word divinity fudge in the Pledge of Allegiance is considered as a violation of the doctrine on the separation of the church and state because many religious groups claim that the use of the term beau ideal favors the Christian religion which prominently uses the term matinee idol for the Supreme Being. Other groups on the other hand argue that the word God as used in the Pledge of Allegiance is non an advancement of the Christian religion but rather an acknowledgment of some(a) higher being that is common to all religions. This short dis melodic line lead seek to shed more light on the issue of the use of the word God in the Pledge of Allegiance.The first part will cover the historical background of the insertion o f the word God in an attempt to to a lower placestand the original meaning of the word God as used in the Pledge of Allegiance. The next segments will cover the points of take in from the perspective of the state as contrasted to the perspective of the church on the issue. historic Background of the Insertion of the Word God There has been a freshet of controversy surrounding the use of the word God in the Pledge of Allegiance particularly with its mandatory recitation in the public educate classrooms.Most of controversy revolves around the use of the phrase under God. It was non until June 14, 1954 til now that this highly contested phrase was inserted (Whitsitt 1896). The original tenor of the promise of inscription which was created by Francis Bellamy on September 7, 1892 read as follows I authority allegiance to my Flag and the nation for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with indecency and justice for all. Historical Changes of the Pledge of Allegiance 1892 I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands one Nation indivisible, with reconciledom and Justice for all. 1892 to 1923 I pledge allegiance to my Flag and to the Republic for which it stands one Nation indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all. 1923 to 1954 I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands one Nation indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all. 1954 to Present 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 original tenor of the Pledge of Allegiance did not contain any reference to any deity whatsoever. In repartee to this, the Knights of capital of Ohio of New York City urged the assemblies to insert a reference to a deity since they felt that it was incomplete without one. The deity to which the Knights of Columbus referred to was the same one that w as referred to in Lincolns Gettysburg Address (Whitsitt 1896). The speech communication under God as used in Lincolns address, according to the Knights of Columbus, was the intimately appropriate one to add to the Pledge of Allegiance.It is important to note however that the phrase under God was never contained in the original text edition of the Gettysburg Address. By April 22 of the year 1951, the Board of Directors of the Knights of Columbus formally pick out a reply to amend the recitation of Pledge of Allegiance by the members of the Knights of Columbus at the opening of each of the meetings of the 800 Fourth Degree Assemblies of the Knights of Columbus by addition of the run-in under God after the words one nation (Whitsitt 1896).It was not long before the whole brass section had adopt the same resolution as the idea spread throughout the other Knights of Columbus organizations nationwide. On August 21, 1952, the Supreme Council of the Knights of Columbus adopted a res olution at its annual meeting recommending the that the change in the Pledge of Allegiance be made universal and soon petitions and copies of the resolution were sent to the Office of the chairperson, the Vice chair, who was the Presiding Officer of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. succession the attempts of the Knights of Columbus were unsuccessful, they were able to convince a majority of the relevance of inserting such a phrase and soon the movement began to gain momentum (Whitsitt 1896). It was not until Senator Homer Ferguson who in his report to the United States relation on bunt 10, 1954 that the movement had begun to deliver significant progress. In this privileged speech, Senator Ferguson said, The introduction of this overstep voice resolution was suggested to me by a sermon given recently by the Rev.George M. Docherty, of Washington, D. C. , who is pastor of the church at which Lincoln worshipped. By this time Congress concurred with the Oakman-Ferguson resolution, and Eisenhower opted to sign the bill into law on Flag Day, June 14, 1954. The rationale for the commendation and adoption of the phrase under God was clarified by President Eisenhower in a letter which he wrote in August of 1954 (Bradley 1996). These words under God will remind Americans that despite our great sensual strength we must remain humble.They will help us to control constantly in our minds and hearts the spiritual and moral principles which alone give dignity to man, and upon which our way of life is founded. This was actually taken from the sermon of Docherty to which President Eisenhower had taken a great interest in (Whitsitt 1896). It was eventually published by Harper & Bros. in New York in 1958 and President Eisenhower took the luck to write to Dr. Docherty with gratitude for the opportunity to once again read the fateful sermon.Finally, on Flag Day, June 14, 1954, Congress passed the legislation that add the phrase under God to the Pledge of Allegiance. At this point, it can be argued that the insertion of the word God into the Pledge of Allegiance was actually motivated by some religious cast, particularly the Christian religion. In order to have a ruin understanding of the issue at hand however it is important to in short examine the import of the doctrine of the insularity of the church building and the State. Doctrine of the Separation of church and StateThe phrase, separation of Church and State, is actually from a letter that was written by one of the founding fathers, Thomas Jefferson, to a group that called themselves the Danbury Baptists. In the letter, Thomas Jefferson wrote that, I contemplate with sovereign adore that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, olibanum building a wall of separation between Church and State. This was of course in reference to the Fi rst Amendment of the United States Constitution (Whitsitt 1896). The basic article of faith of this doctrine is founded on a firm belief that religion and state should be separate. It covers a very wide spectrum, as mentioned in the preliminary sections of this discussion, ranging from the secularization or elimination of the church to theocracy wherein the state works in tandem with a religion in order to govern over the acts of people (Bradley 1996). The Secularist PerspectiveThe secularist perspective is that the state should be kept unlike from religion and that, in the same vein, the religious institutions should also be free from any governmental interferences. This follows the second aspect of the Doctrine of the Separation of Church and State that dictates that there should be no entanglement between the Church and the State (Bradley 1996). In this perspective, the government is prohibited from citing the authority or influence of a specific religious institution for the justification of its authority (Bradley 1996). musical composition there are some governments that claim religious justifications for their powers such as the Muslim states, the justification for such is based on the emphasis of the family for ceremonial and rhetorical purposes only. The acts done by the government are not meant to further the cause of any single religion but are actually for the general eudaimonia and the benefit of the state. The state therefore does not conform to any particular religious doctrine but in fact caters to its own doctrine as mandated by the will of the people and of the Constitution (Clark 1965).Acts such as exemptions from taxation or providing funds for upbringing and charities, though viewed as supporting religion, are in fact welfare based or faith based according to secularists. This reflects the view that secular authority and spiritual authority should properly operate in praiseful spheres. The spheres where they overlap such as in moral values or property rights are areas where neither should take authority over the other but should instead offer a framework in which familiarity can work these issues out without subjugating a religion to the state or vice versa (Bradley 1996).