Return of the Pledge debate

o7What are your thoughts on a federal court judge’s ruling last week

that the “under God” reference in the Pledge of Allegiance” is

unconstitutional?

f7

“In God We Trust” is our national motto. It is on our currency, in

our National Anthem, and is expressed in our Declaration Of

Independence as the rationale for our existence as a nation of

equality.

“In God We Trust” is part of our DNA as Americans.

It demands no particular denominational allegiance, nor does it

command particular individuals to rightly bow before its divine

referent.

“In God We Trust” affirms a premise upon which our nation is

founded: that God exists. Other governments of history, i.e.,

communist, began with the premise that no god exists. In State We

Trust serves as their unpublished pledge, affirming no transcendent

rights, no morality, and guaranteeing no individual human freedoms.

“In God We Trust” denies that we are an atheist people. Let’s

acknowledge our heavenly Providence, granting the unbelieving

minority their freedom to live in error.

“In God We Trust,” and so God shed His grace on thee. Let’s not be

America the Beautiful in mere facade, but more so within our soul. We

are the home of the brave and the land of the free only so long as we

bravely champion truth. Jesus said, the truth will set you free (John

8:32), the opposite of which I shudder to consider. Let’s call our

courts to account and admonish them to safeguard our cherished motto,

the premise upon which we are blessed and made great.

THE REV. BRYAN GRIEM

Senior Pastor

Light on the Corner

Montrose

At the conclusion of my last year in Junior High School we

students were given a chance to have lunch at a local pizza parlor

during school hours. Those students who liked pizza went. Those who

didn’t, didn’t. And I don’t think any of us was offended.

How unreasonable it would have been to cancel the party because

one student (or one student’s father) had a moral objection to pizza!

No child is legally required to recite the Pledge of Allegiance.

Yet for decades American children of faith have been forced to

acknowledge the theory of evolution even though it contradicts their

deeply held religious beliefs.

We parents of faith have had to teach our children to stand firm

in their beliefs as schools have become increasingly unfriendly to

faith and morality.

Perhaps parents who object to “under God” in the pledge should

practice “tolerance” and learn to do the same.

From what to do in Iraq to how to respond to Katrina, it is

obvious that calling on the name of God, not erasing it, is the one

thing our nation needs most. And God welcomes us all: “Call to Me,

and I will answer you, and I will tell you great and mighty things,

which you do not know.” (Jeremiah 33:3).

PASTOR JON BARTA

Valley Baptist Church

Burbank

It would seem to me that since the words “under God” have been a

part of the pledge for about 50 years now that the phrase would be

safely grandfathered in as constitutional.

Nothing is sacred nowadays, however, with activist judges.

I wish that the phrase had not been inserted into the pledge of

allegiance in the 1950s. It was unnecessary and served only to turn a

patriotic pledge into a religious patriotic pledge.

Since it has been in the pledge for so long now, I doubt that the

Supreme Court will reject it.

I don’t even think a vote will be close, if it comes to a vote.

The words “under God” do not constitute, in my opinion, an

establishment of religion.

If the Court rules the words must go, I do not see how we can

continue to have “In God We Trust” on our coins and other such

religious terms carved on federal buildings and elsewhere visible to

the public.

I suspect this controversial issue will be revisited many times

again in the future no matter what the Supreme Court’s decision may

be.

I think most people would like to see the whole thing go away. Our

nation is based on religious principles. Naysayers should get over

their pique concerning that fact.

THE REV. THOMAS E.

WITHERSPOON

Unity Church of the Valley

La Crescenta

Once again, a few radicals are misrepresenting constitutional law

and are trying to force their extreme ideas upon the entire nation.

The Constitution’s first amendment states that “Congress shall

make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting

the free exercise thereof.”

Our founding fathers were, by and large, a religious group of

people who included prayer and references to God in various functions

of government. It is clear that their intent was not to separate our

country from religion, but rather to prohibit the government from

forcing a particular religion or belief upon the populace.

The pledge of allegiance does not, by anyone’s stretch of the

imagination, force a particular religion upon our public school

students.

Furthermore, the pledge is optional. If a student so wishes, he or

she can remain silent during its recitation.

A benign, optional, reference to God can hardly be misconstrued as

forcing a religion down someone’s throat.

The fact remains that the overwhelming majority of students in

this great country do believe in God.

It is wrong to deny the majority a perfectly constitutional

reference to God because of the wishes of an extreme minority.

I believe that we should leave the Pledge of Allegiance alone.

The pledge is an honorable part of our national awareness, which

strengthens our resolve as one nation under God, indivisible, with

liberty and justice for all.

RABBI SIMCHA BACKMAN

Chabad Jewish Center

Glendale

Part of me wants to say, “Are we really having this debate?”

Personally, there are so many more issues that are worth “going to

the mat” for than this one.

I am old enough to remember when the phrase “under God” was added

to the Pledge of Allegiance. That’s right: added.

The phrase was not in the original Pledge as written, I believe,

by a Baptist minister in the late 1800s or the early 1900s. The year

was 1954 when “under God” was put into the original Pledge. (Those

were Cold War days. We couldn’t let those atheistic communists think

that we didn’t believe in God!)

Strictly speaking, I think the federal court judge was right when

he said the “under God” reference in the Pledge of Allegiance was

unconstitutional.

However, I also don’t believe the debate is worth the time and

money of going all the way to the Supreme Court to make a point.

Besides, the way the Court is leaning, I’m guessing the protest

against having “under God” in the Pledge will lose.

Here’s my suggestion, and I hope I don’t sound like a right-winger

because I am not: if saying “under God” offends anybody, simply don’t

say “under God” while the Pledge is being said.

Then the super-patriotic, super-religious will be satisfied (for

the time being!) and those who are offended by the phrase can simply

not say anything while the rest are saying “under God.”

Again, are we really having this debate?

THE REV. SKIP LINDEMAN

Congregational Church

of the Lighted Window

United Church of Christ

La Canada Flintridge