Analysis Essay: Phrase "In God We Trust" on American Currency
|📌Category:||Government, History, History of the United States|
|📌Published:||28 March 2021|
Dwight D. Eisenhower once said, “Without God, there could be no form of American Government, nor an American way of life”. Now, “one nation under God” should be removed from the Pledge of Allegiance because the mention of “God” in the pledge is a violation of constitutional rights, it’s also unfair as America is a melting pot of diversity which is why it is unfair to those with different beliefs if the pledge is only acknowledging Christianity.
The phrase, “one nation under God” should be removed, the inclusion of God immediately violates the 1st amendment (freedom of religion), the way it came to be was legal as it was agreed on by congress but even now courts question the constitutionality of the pledge. We see violations as such in the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation which have generic references to God which not only reflect congress’s clerical views, it seeks approval from various religious adherents. Later on, we start to see legal action taken about the usage of God in things like the pledge or the motto of America, “Tenth Circuit in Gaylor v. United States (1996), which challenged the use of “In God We Trust” on U.S. currency . . . Although federal courts have upheld the use of “In God We Trust”, they have struck down government reliance on more sectarian and denominational expressions” (Fisher and Nada Mourtada-Sabbah 690). We can identify bias as the judicial system is involved with God, which is why it should’ve been struck down because of the usage of God with these things.
America is diverse in religion and it is unfair to those with different beliefs if the pledge doesn’t acknowledge other religions. “school district is nonetheless conveying a message of state endorsement of a religious belief when it requires public school teachers to recite, and lead the recitation, of the current form of the pledge” (Davis 661). The endorsement of religion is very evident in things like national currency or the oath on a jury, which are all clear violations of the Establishment Clause (separation of church and state) and is also a violation of constitutional rights.
People are overreacting to the removal of “under God” from the pledge, meanwhile a judge dissent on the matter stated, “The danger that phrase presents to our First Amendment freedoms is picayune at most”. Completely disregarding, that the dissent was against a 2-1 vote, which doesn’t solidify the argument of the issue being insignificant as it’s a clear violation of constitutional rights making it a bigger problem than suggested.
Respect and acceptance of diversity can start with change of the pledge of allegiance for the better, the simple change could help anybody feel better about their beliefs and own it proudly instead of being in-directly peer pressured into following it. The phrase “one nation under God” should be removed from the Pledge of Allegiance.