Student Says Allah Instead of God in Pledge of Allegiance

Author: Reece101

Posts

Total: 108
Topic's author
#1
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,916
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2

I just learnt about this the other day. 
Thoughts?
This is such a checkmate move against online reactionary conservatives.

Arguments in no particular order:

  • Allah means God in Arabic. Christians that speak Arabic say Allah. 
  • Islam, Judaism, and Christianity all have the same God. 
  • Freedom of speech.
  • Freedom of religion.
  • The student is probably getting death threats.
  • Under God was added to the pledge in the mid 1950’s. 

#2
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@Reece101
Better idea, completely remove religious language from the pledge and you fix it. 
#3
SkepticalOne
SkepticalOne's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 1,720
3
3
7
SkepticalOne's avatar
SkepticalOne
3
3
7
-->
@Reece101
The pearl clutching from Conservatives here is delicious. XD
#4
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Reece101
Pledging allegiance to a flag makes no sense anyway.  Flags and  Gods and what they represent change over time but our allegiance to our Republic should never.  I think we should rewrite our pledge a little to highlight our mission and emphasize that the pledge is a promise that we make to one another to stick together in support of a shared principle.

How about this:

"I pledge my allegiance to the citizens and nation of  the democratic Republic of the United States of America as founded upon the Constitution in order to establish justice and secure the blessings of liberty, peace and prosperity for ourselves and our posterity.  I honor this inheritance and devote myself to our cause and common purpose: that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from this earth."
#5
Conway
Conway's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 278
1
2
5
Conway's avatar
Conway
1
2
5
-->
@Theweakeredge
Better idea, completely remove religious language from the pledge and you fix it. 

The phrase "under God" is certainly reverent, but not connotating any religion. 

Throughout the Pledge of Allegiance there doesn't appear to be any language which could be removed for such purposes.

#6
Conway
Conway's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 278
1
2
5
Conway's avatar
Conway
1
2
5
-->
@Reece101
I don't understand the point of saying "Allah", assuming someone is already speaking in English.  Do you? 

I think it would seem to be some sort of reference to the Qur'an, which is properly rendered in Arabic.
#7
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
Saying a pledge more than once makes it irrelevant anyway. Basically telling kids to say the pledge every day says their word can't be taken as their word they have to renew their pledge absolutely hate it.
#8
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@Conway
Yes it is - capital "G" god, specifically refers to the gods of the abrahamic religions, don't try to pull that semantic stuff. 
#9
MarkWebberFan
MarkWebberFan's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 291
1
2
6
MarkWebberFan's avatar
MarkWebberFan
1
2
6
Imho, I don't understand why people have this vague identity of being a muslim. I think it's kind of pointless to have it. I don't understand how saying the arabic word of God can be a controversy either. She's wrong to have this vague muslim identity and the panel is wrong to have this trivial discussion.
#10
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Conway
The phrase "under God" is certainly reverent, but not connotating any religion. 

Not connoting any religion but specifically excluding a bunch of people who don't believe humans live "under God"-  polytheists, atheists, Buddhists, Jainists, Shintos, some sects of Hindus, Quakers, Satanists, etc., etc.

Any law making people recite an affirmation of a single, present deity is a clear violation of the First Amendment.  Better to toss that silly pledge written by a newspaper out the window and if any pledge seems necessary, write one that adheres more closely to the spirit of our Constitution.
#11
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Conway
@Reece101
I don't understand the point of saying "Allah", assuming someone is already speaking in English.  Do you? 

I think it would seem to be some sort of reference to the Qur'an, which is properly rendered in Arabic.
Allah is the Arabic pronunciation of the Aramaic word Elah- which is the name Jesus would have used for God when preaching.  Islam incorporates Judaism and Christianity into its belief system and uses one the old names for God that goes back to Levantine polytheism, preceding even our oldest languages and religious beliefs still in practice.
#12
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 3,205
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@Reece101
American Pledge of Allegiance in school, waters down the concept of true loyalty.
Besides, why do any Americans 'need to pledge any allegiance to the country they're 'born into.
Oaths to integrity of one's profession, means enough when one 'enters that profession, as a soldier, doctor, lawyer, politician, so on.
Let more private religious schools be formed, if parents want their kids focused on religion in their upbringing.
#13
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@Theweakeredge
"...the liberties of a nation cannot be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God." - Thomas Jefferson

"...our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people and was wholly inadequate for the government of any other."' - John Adams

#14
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 3,205
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@fauxlaw
America,
It's 'still not a theocracy though, and as multiculturalism has been insisted upon, as well as a separation of church and state.
Seems reasonable 'not to expect it to be 'required in schools, but 'still allow students religious freedom.
#15
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@Conway
You mean like the Holy Bible should only be properly rendered in Hebrew and Greek? Translation is fine as long as it is done correctly, by people who understand both the from and to languages, but more especially when they understand the relative cultures, which produce language in the first place. Translation merely by dictionary comparison usually fails because dictionaries are poor teachers of culture.
#16
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@Lemming
as well as a separation of church and state.
Show me those words in the 1A. They are not there. Jefferson is chiefly responsible for the phrase becoming popular, but at the time when Madison was composing the Constitution and Bill of Rights, Jefferson was separated from church and state, residing in France as our minister of same - like an ambassador today. However, reading other commentary outside the Constitution, being a prolific writer, Madison is clear that his thinking was more proximal to the idea that church and state had intersections, not a wall; that both could cooperate in some regard to work together for the common good.  "Whether this is a convenience of interpretation has been a raging debate ever since the modern era introduced the question in the Supreme Court decision of Everson v. Board of Education (1947), which upheld a New Jersey law allowing government funding of school buses to deliver children to school, including parochial schools. The New Jersey law stipulated the bus service because it applied to all children, regardless of religious belief, or no belief whatsoever."   
#17
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 3,205
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@fauxlaw
Hm, fair point, it's not something I've thought deeply about before.
And I admit I don't see those words exact, in the Amendment.

Amendment I
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.

Is a public school, a parochial school, though?

I'd argue there's a difference between a school formed with the 'intention, that it houses and educates a faith.
And public schools at 'large, pushing specific religious faith.
#18
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@Lemming
That was the whole point of Everson v Board of Education.  The Court did not see a distinction between public and parochial schools with regard to bussing. The point was, neither parochial, nor public education was conducrted on busses, so why not provide the service for both?
#19
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 3,205
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@fauxlaw
Hm, there 'is a distinction between public and parochial schools though.
I'm 'pretty sure you're not saying that all public schools are parochial schools.

There's a difference between funding communities to teach as they see fit,
And passing legislation that communities shall have students pledge allegiance to God and Country.
The government did not pass a law establishing religion 'into public schools for Everson v Board of Education.

They 'did pass a law establishing religion with addition of "Under God." I 'think.

"From this day forward, the millions of our school children will daily proclaim in every city and town, every village and rural school house, the dedication of our nation and our people to the Almighty.... In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country's most powerful resource, in peace or in war." -  Eisenhower
#20
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,323
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@fauxlaw
You mean like the Holy Bible should only be properly rendered in Hebrew and Greek? Translation is fine as long as it is done correctly, by people who understand both the from and to languages,.....

 So here you are again , rendering  the holy Christian bible written in English useless, pointless and redundant. And from a "High Priest" too. #36

 You will be telling us next  that the word  -  IF -  is also a redundant word too , when it suites you, won't you?   Oh sorry, you have already done that too haven't you. 

#30   fauxlaw  If is, by utility, the most useless word in existence because it acknowledges only that which is currently not true.



#21
SkepticalOne
SkepticalOne's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 1,720
3
3
7
SkepticalOne's avatar
SkepticalOne
3
3
7
-->
@fauxlaw
@Theweakeredge

Theweakeredge:
Yes it is - capital "G" god, specifically refers to the gods of the abrahamic religions, don't try to pull that semantic stuff. 


fauxlaw:
"...the liberties of a nation cannot be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God." - Thomas Jefferson

"...our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people and was wholly inadequate for the government of any other."' - John Adams

I'm not following the thought process of this response to Weakeredge.




#22
MisterChris
MisterChris's avatar
Debates: 45
Posts: 2,897
5
10
11
MisterChris's avatar
MisterChris
5
10
11
I fail to see a reason to include religious language in the pledge other than tradition. I say this as a conservative Christian. 
#23
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@Lemming
Oh, how I wish y'all would stop depending on Wiki as a solitary source. Such as, following through with a source indicated in the text of your reference [8] to Eisenhower to discover that the reference to "under God," the inclusion to the pledge made in 1954 during Eisenhower's administration, was a reference, not to "a Christian God," as many people stipulate, without a clue what they're talking about, but to a "supreme being," which could be understood as generic to cover all worshipped divine entities by a diverse group of Americans.


One might also realize, contrary to allegations by whomever, that the nation was not established in 1619, on slavery, and not in 1776 by the Revolutionary war, but in 1788 on the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, "...in order to form a more perfect union." The rest is fronted by people with noses pushed out of shape, who also don't know what they're talking about.
#24
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
@ Stephen

rendering  the holy Christian bible written in English useless, pointless and redundant.
Nope, wrong again by complete misinterpretation. My post #15 to Conway was in response to his  #6, saying

I think it would seem to be some sort of reference to the Qur'an, which is properly rendered in Arabic.
I'm saying that translating holy writ in any other language that its original is flawed by errors of syntax, corruption, and culture. You're so bent on my claiming the Bible to be a farce, you can't see the forest for the trees. Again, for the umteenth time, I recognize the Bible's translation from Hebrew and Greek was not done from original texts, was done with poor understanding of the relative cultures, which beget language, and by corruption. I have also said there are means to find what is truth and what is not, but you refuse to acknowledge the means and refuse to try. That's on you, bud, completely. Put your finger back in your pants and shut up.
#25
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@SkepticalOne
Sorry, I didn't reference which response by Edge to which I was speaking . It was his #2. 
#26
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@MisterChris
See my #23 responding to Lemming.
#27
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@fauxlaw
sure
#28
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,580
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@fauxlaw

"...our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people and was wholly inadequate for the government of any other."' - John Adams
hey thats one of my favorite quotes!
#29
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Glad you like it.
#30
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 3,205
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@fauxlaw
Eh, Wikipedia's an easy source of information.
That it's a smaller source 'step towards larger sources, is no bother to me.

Whether it's under a "supreme being,"
Supreme beings,
The tao,
Or an energy field created by all living things, that surrounds us,  penetrates us and binds the galaxy together.

I don't agree with it being in a robotic and meaningless indoctrination of children.
Though I don't mind religious schools, households, or schools holding some sort of Bible play.
I 'mind a false oath being on people's lips.

Mind you, if all God means to you in this pledge is a supreme being, then I imagine you have no problem with schools using the phrase Allah, Yahweh , or Moloch,   instead?