I think teaching patriotism is extremely important. Children should be learning it at school and having it reinforced at home. My children love America and understand the importance of appreciating our way of life and respecting our country. I have taught them to be proud to be Americans. This is not a political thing, but rather an identity thing.

For the record, although I have issues with Bush, my 7 year old thinks he is great . . . I allow him to believe as he wishes and make his own mind up about the President, and further, I think it is important for me to model to him a respect for the *position* of President of the United States of America. I don't fuss about Bush in my 7 year old's presence, and I don't belittle his opinions. I think the simple and positive way he views the presidency, as only a child can, is beautiful. I have no desire to disrupt that.

I think the pledge you shared above is a terrific little motto for kids (and adults), but I don't think it should be a replacement for the pledge of allegiance.

I think the pledge you shared above is a terrific little motto for kids (and adults), but I don't think it should be a replacement for the pledge of allegiance.

But it isn't a replacement...it's an addition.

I allow him to believe as he wishes and make his own mind up about the President, and further, I think it is important for me to model to him a respect for the *position* of President of the United States of America. I don't fuss about Bush in my 7 year old's presence, and I don't belittle his opinions. I think the simple and positive way he views the presidency, as only a child can, is beautiful.

I agree that you should allow him to believe as he wishes, but I also think you can openly share with your son your opinion. There's a reason that he "loves" George Bush and I doubt it's from his own critical analysis. I think too many children feel that they're not allowed to be upset with what the President does right now. It makes parents who voice themselves against Presidential decisions the "bad guys."

My 11 year old pointed out the difference in the present pledge to the rest of his Cub Scout pack

Interesting that you'd have the word removed for, perhaps not being PC, but then place your child in Cub Scouts which is criticized for its lack of Political Correctness regarding homosexuality.

Fair enough, but I'm just encouraging you to show your child that though it's great that he loves the President with his rose-colored perceptions, it would be just as okay if he didn't.

It is interesting to me that so many have expressed their offense at the use of the word "God" but few seem bothered that their children are pledging their "allegiance" to their government.

That is because the pledge isn't pledging allegiance to the government, it's pledging allegiance to the country.  The flag represents the United States, not the government of the United States.

I agree that you should allow him to believe as he wishes, but I also think you can openly share with your son your opinion. There's a reason that he "loves" George Bush and I doubt it's from his own critical analysis.

Yes, but.....is he old enough to have a "critical analysis"? He's only 7. When I was a kid, Jimmy Carter was in office, and I had a picture of him. Thought he as great. Later I discovered Ronald Reagan, and just how rotten a president Jimmy Carter really was.++

That is because the pledge isn't pledging allegiance to the government, it's pledging allegiance to the country. The flag represents the United States, not the government of the United States.

Exactly. There's no reason at all that we shouldn't be loyal to and love our country, no matter what your opinion of the present administration running it.

Reply #10 By: Rightwinger - 9/29/2004 2:35:52 PM I've always thought that the Pledge should be explained as it's taught....broken down, word-for-word. When I said it as a child, I was just reciting it by rote, as I'd learned it. It was only years later when I finally started to understand what all those big words meant. What does it really mean to kids who don't understand what it means, anyway? As far as the "three letter word" goes...."god" is not just the "official" Judeo-Christian name for their deity. It's also the generic word for any divine being, be it Jehovah, Allah, Buddha, Krishna, Shiva.....whatever divine being you choose to worship. I say leave it in. Only thin-skinned people looking for reasons to be offended find offense where none is intended.

Hear, Hear!!! Well said!

Only thin-skinned people looking for reasons to be offended find offense where none is intended

In this PC world, people are offended at everything.  Hell, I am sure that people get offended when somebody is offended by the word "god".

As far as the "three letter word" goes...."god" is not just the "official" Judeo-Christian name for their deity. It's also the generic word for any divine being, be it Jehovah, Allah, Buddha, Krishna, Shiva.....whatever divine being you choose to worship. "God" is a big word, for only having three letters. I say leave it in. Only thin-skinned people looking for reasons to be offended find offense where none is intended.

I disagree with your point in general here. But I do agree that the name "God" could be used for all people's conceptions of an all mighty being.

I do not believe in an all mighty being. So let me ask you this: If someone told you, as a Christian (I suspect you are, if not forgive me) to say "Under Allah", what would be your reaction? I think you would be offended. That is the same for me. People say to be tolerant of all religions both from the Christians and non-Christians. I just believe those who have no religion should be respected for their views too.

Before you label me as a radical please don't. I respect all people who believes there is an all mighty, but I will not stay quit if they wish to disrespect my belief that there is none. I will take my children to the different churches in the area and let them chose there belief or none belief. Then support their choice.

I believe there should be Chaplains in the Military, because they are not only moral support but also are the psychology support for all.

I respect traditions like Christmas and other historical traditions that date back over one hundred years. But I will not respect something added recently. Everybody was fine not to use the statement for over 150 year, why do we want to start discriminating against one's beliefs now. The founding father wanted everybody to respect each other's beliefs, but I guess if you have a non-belief you should not be respected.

That's My Two Cents

Dr. Miller, slavery was ok with the american public... so should we have left that alone? Thats what your reasoning suggests. Do you know why we have a republic and not a democracy? Its because the american public is not always right.

Reply #18 By: Lee1776 - 9/29/2004 3:48:43 PM I'm sorry Lee1776 but, this is just *more* PC stuff. Because *you* do not believe in a higher being (your choice and is respected by at least me.) does *not* give you the right to say "Take that word out of the pledge of alligence". It's been okay with the American populace in general as it is for the last 50 years, leave it alone. Just remember if you was told to say "under Allah or Wika" what your reaction would be. If it was you reacting it would not be called PC right.

Wrong. Your reply is siteing 2 specific higher beings. YOU, your self said *God* could be used for MANY different ones. So in that respect your reply won't hold water.

The flag represents the United States, not the government of the United States.

Great point!--otherwise, the pledge would have to be changed everytime we have a new prsident--"under God...and Bush, Clinton, Kerry[?], etc. 

This is an interesting addition on several levels for me. First, the idea of pledging to "personal responsibility" is an idea that I wish had been around when I was young. I can remember clearly that as a child I never really understood what I was "pledging allegiance" to. It was like a prayer to the people who govern the area in which I lived. Even then i couldn't grasp what that entailed or what kind of weight it carried. Today, it seems like a fairly robotic announcement that most people only say at sporting events simply because they do not want to be the only one not saying it. It would be interesting, were he still alive, to hear what my grandfather would say. He was a naval officer during the Korean War, which is a horribly over looked piece of history in and of itself. I'm not proclaiming to be a history buff here, but in this world of me me me, now now now, I can't imagine the majority of children who recite this knowing what they are reciting. And that is exactly what they are doing, RECITING. I spoke the Pledge because it was REQUIRED TO DO SO. I didn't grasp the concepts behind it. Now that i'm of an age where I can understand what one is doing when speaking the pledge, it's easier for me to understand.

Does pledging your allegiance mean that you will die for everything your government does and never question it's actions? I would hope not. I am proud of where I live, and proud to say that I come from here. I'm not always proud of the actions that are carried out in my name however. If I were to be stifled of my opinion because I was FORCED to pledge to something, then I obviously wouldn't be living here.

As far as the God issue goes, I can understand both sides of the coin. Yes this country was founded on Christian beliefs. But do I think we should make that pronounced in governmental bodies? No. Does that mean that governments based on Hinduism or Buddhism or Islamic faith should have to change their ways to make it more acceptable to people who don't follow those beliefs? No, I don't. But this country was founded as a region where all mixes of people can come and dwell together, solidly and live without worry of how their religious beliefs are seen by their neighbors. Thus, if your going to use the word God (which I think we can all agree carries Christian religious tendencies behind it for the most part) in a public forum be that as an educator or politician, then you must also recognize in the same fashion those other religious beliefs that exist within our borders. Excluding them causes strife from within, and that is where problems begin.

This addition to the Pledge, in my eyes, allows those other beliefs to coexist without pointing fingers. It allows the person speaking to bring their personal faiths and experiences to the table without forcing them on others. They can all coexist and still be individually owned at the same time. Although it doesn't rid us of the "three letter word", it allows said word to be born not of a one faith majority, but softens it's meaning to allow those who believe in a different God to bear witness to him/her/it on an individual basis within a gathered public setting. Should the three letter word be rid of? I think so. But does this addition help? Most certainly.

I think I like that GX. Lets have a government issue that states that in refering to god in the pledge and in currency everywhere else, we are refering to a Divine Entity who may exist but not for all so if you don't believe in him or her than that is just fine, if you do and whatever name you have for him or her that is just fine too.. or maybe we can say god is the memory of our founding fathers.. or no.. god is the constitution. by god we mean the consitution.. because in this country the constitution really is god... I like that. One nation under god.. and by god i mean the constitution. Lets ring in the new pledge