"Under God" Should be Removed from the Pledge of Alegiance

It is a pleasure to be debating noah364 on this topic so critical and revelant to our country's religions and discussion. Without any further adieu, I will now present my arguments and refute my opponents.Initial Arguments: 1. Saying "Under God" is not forced. When anyone recites the Pledge of Allegiance (hereafter POA), the words "Under God" are not forced upon anyone. They can choose to say the POA or not to say it. They also, when saying the POA, can say "Under God" or "Under Gods" or abstain from those two words all together. It is not forced by any legal means and is simply an acknowledgement of America's religious heritage (more on this later). 2. Phrase has overwhelming public support. After a decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, the Senate and House voted in keeping the POA as it stood. The Senate vote was 99–0 (with an absence); the House 416–3 with 11 abstaining. President George W. Bush and many other politicians spoke out in favor of the existing Pledge [5]. Barack Obama, the most liberal 20th century president, also supports "Under God" in the POA [6]. In the public eye, poll after poll has shown "Under God" has a massive amount of public support. A FOX News poll showed that 90% of surveyed adults support the phrase remaining in place [7]. A SurveyUSA poll showed that 97% of Republicans and Conservatives, 89% of Moderates and 81% of liberals support the statement "The Pledge of Allegiance is OK as written." [7]. In terse words, the phrase has overwhelming public support in both Congress and the population. 3. Phrase does not endorse specific Religion and only identifies Heritage and Religion in Public Life. It is known and recognized by many historians that America has roots in various religions [8 is a great video]. Of the 55 delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention, 49 were Protestants, and two were Roman Catholics [11] In U.S. Code, 68 references to God are made [12]. In every State Constitution, at least one reference to God is made [13] As it is well known, prayer and references to God are made in Congressional hearings, Supreme Court meetings and Presidential inaugurations numerous times. A Supreme Court ruling upholds the right to open such meetings with this prayer. In the ruling Marsh v. Chambers, the judges state the following: "In light of the unambiguous and unbroken history of more than 200 years, there can be no doubt that the practice of opening legislative sessions with prayer has become part of the fabric of our society. To invoke Divine guidance on a public body entrusted with making the laws is not, in these circumstances, an "establishment" of religion or a step toward establishment; it is simply a tolerable acknowledgment of beliefs widely held among the people of this country." [14] Religion has become such a central part to American political life and plays such a large part in our heritage that saying a phrase such as "Under God" is not a reference to an established religion, it is merely a government stated reference to who we were and are. Refutations: 1. For one, the "Separation of Church and State" is not in the United States Constitution. Secondly, references to God appears in many parts of US code, prayers are used to open Congressional sessions and Supreme Court meetings and, when the president is sworn into office he both is allowed to put his hand on a Bible and affirms "...so help me God." Basically, the United States government does have a non-specific religion in the government. Thirdly, there is no force occurring to make people (in schools and in general) say the POA with "Under God" or to say it at all. 2. Courts, and people, all over the country, have stated time and time again that the two words, "Under God" do not violate the establishment clause [2] [3] [4] [9] [10] [14] 3. My opponent gets his history on Eisenhower correct here. However, his other accusations on the 1954 addition of the phrase being non-unifying or that it "...movement from the Knights of Columbus..." is not supported by a source or anything other than his own words. Thus, this point is factless and meaningless. 4. I discredit that diversity is the most important thing that defines our country. But, let us say we do value this over all else. The POA does not endorse a specific religion and is merely acknowledging our American heritage with the Founders and our American public life. It is not forced, and is open to people mentioning more than one God or not mentioning God at all when reciting the POA. It is open to diversity and does not exclude it. Conclusion: I have effectively shown that "Under God" is appropriate based on its popular support and ties to our heritage while providing 14 sources. I have also effectively refuted my opponent's case. A vote for Con is strongly encouraged. Sources in comments.