Yet another decision regarding the ruling of keeping the term “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance and also the motto “In God We Trust” on U.S. coins is discussed in Terence Chea’s article “Fed. Appeals court upholds ‘under God’ in pledge.” Beginning back in 2002, Michael Newdow, an asserted atheist, claimed that the term “under God” violated the First Amendment prohibition against government endorsement of religion. The appeals court in 2002 ruled in favor of Newdow, yet the Supreme Court in 2004 denied the claim on the grounds that he did not have full custody of his daughter. Newdow filed a similar claim in 2005 which was approved by a federal judge to be reviewed, yet again, by the appeals court. Nevertheless, the appeals court upheld their previous decision claiming that Newdow’s argument did not violate the constitutional separation of church and state.

Let’s take a closer look at the First Amendment. The First Amendment states that, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” Prohibiting and abridging mean to limit, or basically interfere, with an individual’s freedom of speech. Students that attend public schools are not required to recite the Pledge of Allegiance. With regards to “respecting an establishment of religion”, Greg Katsas, U.S. government representative regarding the currency case, has this to say: “I think these two phrases encapsulate the philosophy on which the nation was founded. There is a religious aspect to saying ‘One nation under God,’ but it isn't like a prayer. When someone says the pledge, they're not praying to God, they're pledging allegiance to the country, the flag and the ideals of the country.”

Newdow claims that the reason for his petition is that “the government [is] not treating people equally on the basis of their lawful religious views.” Article 19 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” The battle is about whether or not I, as an American citizen, have the ability to remain free, including my speech. By removing “under God” or “In God We Trust”, no one’s freedom is being honored. But keeping these phrases allows individuals to decide whether or not they want to acknowledge and say them (in the case of saying the Pledge of Allegiance). The freedom remains to say “one nation under God”, but the freedom also exists not to say it, as long as the phrase remains in the Pledge of Allegiance. Remove the phrase, the freedom is essentially removed as well.

~Kimberly

0 comments