God should be removed from the Pledge of Allegiance.

Thank you very much for your thorough and factual response! I apologize for my failure to specify a structure for the rounds, as I certainly did not make my points past a short introduction. Because the mistake was on my part, I greatly apologize and will include my rebuttal to my opponent’s argument along with the points I had originally planned to make. I would like to make it clear, however, that I am by no means arguing that the United States is an atheistic nation, but rather that it is secular…Which should be evident, at least, in the Nation’s Pledge. You first bring up the point, toward the beginning of your argument, that “In God we trust is in no way religious though it is theistic. Thus is it is secular. The purpose was twofold, first to counter the Supreme Court decision of 1947 and second to combat atheistic propaganda.” How is it that anything containing a theistic reference is secular by any means? While theism is not necessarily a religious concept, it is spiritual, and therefore should not be considered secular. In C2, you state that “…the pledge appropriately appeals and affirms the loyalty of the majority of citizens within the country, thus leaving ‘under God’ within the pledge confirms the most efficacious form of the pledge of allegiance.” Key word: “majority.” Ridding the pledge of any religious implications altogether would change “majority” to “entirety.” While majority should be considered over minorities, removing God altogether would consider both and create equality. While Separation of Church and State is not clearly stated in the constitution, it originated in Tomas Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists in 1802, as you have mentioned. The portion of the letter addressing Separation of Church and State reads: I contemplate with sovereign reverence 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," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. (1) Because Thomas Jefferson is, indeed, one of America’s Founding Fathers, it seems that his opinion should be taken into perspective when making decisions that impact the Nation so directly. You have made the claim, however, that Thomas Jefferson’s idea of Separation of Church and State was taken out of context. What separation, then—if not between Church and State as assumed today—was Jefferson citing in his letter? Because there is no clear metaphorical or otherwise non-literal meaning to his statement, it is proper to assume the letter was meant literally to avoid interpretational conflict that may favor one side of the argument above the other. My opponent then made the statement that “the idea that we are NOT an atheistic state but that secularism is maintained to avoid any religious preference. What my opponent seems to be proposing that America is an atheistic state, rather than a secular one, which is clearly not the case. We are not ‘without God, but we are without specific denominational preference.” I am confused as to what it was that I said that gave you the impression that I am proposing that America is an atheistic nation rather than a secular one. Since we are, as you stated, “without specific denominational preference” (which I agree with entirely), how is it appropriate to include one specific deity in the nation’s Pledge rather than another? Removing all religious references altogether would not turn the nation into an atheistic one, but rather equalize it. If we are without a specific denominational preference, we would be without God. While no specific denomination is mentioned, monotheism is; therefore monotheistic religions are favored above atheistic, agnostic, polytheistic, pantheistic, etc. religions. No specific religion is being favored, however one theistic classification is. Making references to God is excluding every religion that does not worship one God, making many feel as if they are not American citizens because part of America’s Pledge does not apply to them…And while America is not an atheistic nation, it is also not a theistic nation. The Treaty of Tripoli states, in article 11, that “…as the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.” (2) Your second point deals, for the most part, with Eisenhower’s reasons for including “Under God” in the Pledge. Regardless of the ultimate reason, when considering America’s growing diversity in religion it’s clear that including theistic references in the Pledge is discriminatory against those who do not fit the mold set by it. One could argue that segregation is historical and should therefore be preserved, but the general population would agree that abomination of segregation was necessary because it is a negative aspect of history. You made the statement that “…Clearly atheists who have submitted to the propaganda should not be complaining about a tactic being used to combat their propaganda.” The atheists who were responsible for that particular propaganda are not the ones complaining. Atheists (and people of many differing religious groups) who had nothing to do with the Communist propaganda are suffering from past occurrences that they had absolutely no control over. This part of the Pledge was added in 1954, and times have changed immensely since then. The original reasoning for “Under God” being added to the Pledge is irrelevant, and the ever-changing religious dynamics in America should be taken into consideration because it concerns current-day status. One could say the same about Christianity—that it has been responsible for horrific crimes and should therefore be opposed in the Nation’s Pledge. Since Christianity has been the basis of various hate crimes and wars, should “without God” be inserted in to the Pledge in opposition? I may be mistaken, but I doubt that would be considered a reasonable approach on the situation—I certainly do not believe it is. I would like to close my argument by posing the following question to my opponent: What group of citizens would be negatively affected by removing all theistic references from the Pledge? Again, I thank you very much for engaging in this debate. It’s been a pleasure, and good luck on Round 2! (1) http://www.loc.gov... (2) http://www.tektonics.org...