Guest Author - Alicia Soueid

I’m sure that it comes as no surprise to people of faith that most atheists oppose the inclusion of the words “under God” in the U.S. Pledge of Allegiance. What they may not realize is that it is in their best interest as well as ours to keep God out of the Pledge.

Our founding fathers lived in a much less diverse society than we do, with the overwhelming majority of the population coming from a Protestant Christian background. Even so, the tension between various denominations was significant enough that not even the most fervent believers wanted to see another sect receive government backing as had the Church of England. This is why the First Amendment, with its Establishment Clause forbidding Congress from passing any law respecting an establishment of religion, was added to the Constitution as part of the Bill of Rights.

Those who drafted and signed the Constitution were well aware of the history of violence and persecution in European nations where church and state had been closely allied, and they considered it essential to keep the predominant religion from employing state sponsorship to overpower religious minorities. Not surprisingly, the U.S. Constitution makes no appeal to or mention of God or Jesus, in spite of the fact that so many of the men present at the Constitutional Convention were themselves Christians. Moreover, although followers of non-Christian faiths in early America were rare, religious freedom was intended to extend to them as well. This intention is made evident in the Treaty of Tripoli of 1797, which specifies that “the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion” and that “it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen” (Article 11, Treaty of Tripoli).

American society is considerably more diverse today than it was when the Constitution was written; therefore, the need to ensure the rights of religious minorities is more important than ever. Yet approximately two-thirds of the states require schools to have students recite a Pledge of Allegiance not written until 1892 (for a children’s magazine, at that), to which the words “under God” were added in 1954. A handful of states even threaten to expel students who refuse to do so, in spite of the Supreme Court having ruled such expulsions unconstitutional. Despite claims to the contrary, required recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools has neither historical precedent nor constitutional endorsement on its side.

While most Christians may feel that compelling others to pledge allegiance to “one nation under God” is harmless, what they fail to understand is that doing so requires the followers of certain Christian sects to commit heresy, while forcing atheists, agnostics, pantheists, and many followers of faiths other than Christianity to perjure themselves. Not only does this violate their first amendment rights, it also defeats the purpose of asking them to affirm their national loyalty in the first place. After all, what purpose does a pledge of allegiance serve if one has to utter a perceived untruth or heresy to recite it?

It does not strike me as oversensitive to request that the U.S. Pledge of Allegiance not require citizens to commit heresy or perjury. In fact, I find it ironic that the very people who accuse anyone wishing to refrain from reciting the Pledge of being oversensitive are often the same people who are personally threatened by not being wished “Merry Christmas” by the employees of mass merchandise retail corporations. To claim that one’s religion is under attack based on a perceived reduction in seasonal religious greetings in commercial establishments while denying others the right to exemption from government-induced sacrilege and perjury seems hypocritical at best.

As for those who argue that students should be required to recite the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools in the name of national unity, I question the sincerity of their motives. Forcing students to accept and recite the creed of “One Nation under God” seems motivated more by a desire to establish the supremacy of the predominant monotheistic religion than by a desire to unify the nation’s citizenry. If “we, the people” are truly interested in maintaining the “blessings of liberty” for all, as well as insuring “domestic tranquility,” as guaranteed by the Constitution, we should rethink the compulsory status and the objectionable wording of the Pledge of Allegiance. After all, a pledge of loyalty acquired through coercion guarantees nothing but resentment.