East students omit 'under God' from Pledge, causing stir among conservatives


The Madison School District acknowledged Tuesday that students at East High School twice omitted “under God” when reciting the Pledge of Allegiance during morning announcements last month, after allegations in a blog post circulated widely among conservative circles this week.

But spokeswoman Rachel Strauch-Nelson said the claims made by an East High junior reported by a conservative Appleton teen that East also had not offered the Pledge on a daily basis, as required under law, until January 2013 are untrue.

Strauch-Nelson said the school has offered the Pledge daily, and has not removed any words from it. But she said that during two days in March, students reciting the Pledge during the morning announcements skipped words on the first day and replaced “under God” — which was added to the Pledge in 1954 — with “under peace” on the second day.



I don’t see the big deal. :rolleyes::shrug:


Eh. Leave it out. What’s the big deal?


Kids being kids.No big deal.


Pax Christi!

I didn’t know anyone still said the Pledge.


God bless.


It seems trivial, but that is a major shift. This country used to acknowledge, publically, in all humility not only the existence of God but our relationship to him, that we were under him.

Now, the country is moving in the direction of not wanting to acknowledge God. We’ve seen this with Christmas, where it’s all about Christ’s birth, and now, it’s possible to celebrate Christmas in a secular way, never mention him.

Easter is the same way now with the Easter bunny replacing Christ and the resurrection.

We are purging all references to God, little by little.

The next move would be to take all other references to God off money, out of courts.

It will be a tremendous task to try to remove God completely from our lives, since he is throughout our history, in all kinds of references from B.C. to A.D., caving in to atheists.

I used to be a proponent to this movement as a strict interpretation of separation of Church and State but I admit I was terribly wrong. I had no idea of the broader implications of this, regret my previous decision to try to remove God from our lives.

It reminds me a little of an old fashioned book burning. Well, we aren’t suddenly burning books, because that’d cause an uproar of our freedoms. Inside, very gradually and quietly, one by one, having it okay to mention anything else, except the word “God”.

It’s like the frog being slowly boiled to death, never realizing the danger. If this happens, the country will have fallen prey to the atheists, which are supposedly only a tiny minority, and the majority gets this modified idea.

This modification seems innocent, but if Satan were in charge of the Pledge, be sure he’d be on the side of opting for the removal of God from the Pledge, the courts, everything. We’re doing his work for him.

We’re trying to make it as if God never existed.

Thanksgiving used to be about thanking God for what we have. Now, it’s, too, been secularized. It’s a movement to think we are all there is, that we are not below God or anyone. It’s selfish pridefulness, though I didn’t used to realize it.

We don’t want to admit we owe loyalty to God before the state. If this continues, it will be one stroke against religion in the US.

I used to be married to an agnostic. When we married, I had been away from my faith, didn’t understand the danger.

Then, I found my faith again. My ex-husband used to stand up and walk out of the room when the word “God” was mentioned. I kid you not. If we were at a political meeting, and it began with the “Pledge of Allegiance”, he would stand up, walk out! Same thing happened with Thanksgiving. If anybody tried to say grace, he would walk out of the room. He could not stand the word “God” (except perhaps in cussing in which case he would not be offended, not leave the room).

So, it actually was NOT the word “God” that was offensive. It was how it was used. If it’s used in prayer or the Pledge to honor God, it must be eliminated. If it’s used in cussing, it’s “Freedom of speech”!

Mark my words, if we allow them to change the Pledge, more will follow, and it will not be pretty for people of faith.


You are exactly right. It honestly reminds of the Dictatorship of Relativism which then Pope Benedict XVI spoke about.

There is also the fact that our freedoms are being taken away. We’ve had the HHS Mandate as an attack against our religious freedom, I’ve heard of attacks against the freedom of the press here in the United States, the IRS scandal in which conservatives were targeted, and there are also the incidents in which people cannot practice their faith with their business by refusing to provide services for “gay weddings”.

Also, as you mentioned, if you put a frog in boiling water the frog will immediately jump out but if you put the frog in water and slowly turn up the heat, it’ll boil to death. Unfortunately I fear that this is quite similar to what is going on in the United States. We have been steadily marching towards secularism and it needs to stop.


Well, the Pledge has changed several times since it was created in 1892. The ‘Under God’ bit wasn’t added to the Pledge until the 1954 as an anti-Communist measure.


It was added in the 50s so for a long time it was never mentioned. I don’t see it as a big deal. All over my Facebook on Easter young people were posting Jesus was the reason and “He is risen.” They may not be all Catholic, but they knew what Easter was all about.


I’m just concerned about secularism is all, and I know you say it’s not a threat. I maintain it is. We’ll see in the end what happens, right?


This all has much broader ramifications that may not be clear yet, but if this continues, it will be with the passage of time.

Well, it’s a little like with the case of abortion. Initially, it was only to be very extreme situation, rape or incest. Later, there was health of the mother. “Health of the mother” then became to be interpreted as pretty much anything. We’ve had first trimester, second trimester, and third trimester abortion. We have a film out talking about what happens to babies which are old enough that can survive the procedure. We wonder what to do about them.

Abortion was supposed to be rare. Little by little, this got gradually over a long period of time expanded. Had people said that we want these things on day one, they would have protested .

Something similar has been happening with gay marriage. It started off with things like acknowledging gay civil unions…then it was marriage…gay adoption. Now, we had a throuple trying to see if that would fly.

Do you see what I’m saying? If we start down this road, it WILL progress. It will not stay as taking out the word “God” from the Pledge. It will be, “Well, we succeeded in getting the word ‘God’ taken out. Then, we should be able to get the word “God” off the money and out of the courts, and all the rest”.

After they do all that, I’m not sure what the next logical step will be, but I’ve seen that it’s generally meant a persecution of people of faith.

When gays were granted their “right” to marry and adopt, they used it against people of faith. A lot of people didn’t see that coming, were surprised that gays would go to, say, a Catholic adoption organization, now that they had the “right” to adopt, then if they were denied this “right”, people who were opposed were not practicing their religion but were bigots, breaking the law, discriminating.

So, we used to wonder what the harm would be to accept a couple of guys marrying, and before we knew it, Catholic Social Services adoption unit in Massachusetts and other places were closing their doors.

Now, I predict, if we take the word “God” out from the Pledge, it will in some fashion later hurt Catholics, Christians, and people of faith. Like the above examples, when this all plays out over time, people will say they “didn’t know” all this was going to happen. They will be surprised. I’m just saying if this happens, it will be taken as a victory, and it will lead to a series of other victories which will tend to go against people of faith.


It could have been. When I came to the US from the UK (back in 1956) I thought they were saying “under guard” and that’s the way I memorized it. No one bothered to correct me. They probably didn’t know it either.


At the same time as the ‘Red Scare’ and the Hollywood witch hunt. I am continually amazed by people who think those who are not radical Tea Party members must automatically be Communists or Socialists. Don’t they know there is a lot of room in between?

But I keep forgetting where I am. :frowning:


You are absolutely right, our Govt knows exactly how to reach its goal, they know slow and methodical is the best method, as most people wont even recognize whats happening!

Its a shame so few people realize whats going on in the US, right under their noses!! LOL

A patriot in the US would be considered a domestic terrorist today, whats even worse, majority of the population would buy into this and side with the Govt!! That is so unbelievable to me, I cant help but shake my head!


So you think that everyone, including atheists, polytheists, agnostics, those who worship a female deity or otherwise believe that ‘God’ is the wrong appellation, should all be forced to publicly affirm your beliefs on a daily basis?:eek:

Is it not right and proper that public national symbols such as the pledge, the money, the presidential oath and so on should represent all the nation and serve to unite them, not be used as a way for one faction to emphasise its dominance over the others?

As Christ and the resurrection replaced Eostre? :wink:

You are still free to celebrate Easter (or any other festival, whether of pagan derivation or not) however you wish.

Is this not about you wanting to force your beliefs on others, not vice versa?

As it was ‘not pretty’ for those of other faiths or none when they let you lot change the pledge?

After all, this is just changing it back, is it not?


But are such things the cause of secularism or merely symptoms of secularism? As others have pointed out, the “under God” phrase didn’t exist until the 1950s. Prior generations of school children grew up without it, and its absence did not affect their faith or attitude towards the world. The secularism we are experiencing really took hold in the 1960s, after the “under God” phrase had been in existence for a decade or so. The phrase seems irrelevant to predicting secularism or piety.


From the late William Safire’s On Language column in the NY Times:

The most saluted man in America is Richard Stans. Legions of schoolchildren place their hands over their hearts to pledge allegiance to the flag, “and to the republic for Richard Stans.” With all due patriotic fervor, the same kids salute “one nation, under guard.” Some begin with “I pledge a legion to the flag,” others with “I led the pigeons to the flag.”
This is not a new phenomenon. When they come to “one nation, indivisible,” this generation is as likely to say, “One naked individual” as a previous generation was to murmur, “One nation in a dirigible,” or “One national and a vegetable.” …


I think that it might be a symptom of poor education as well. The 50’s also “introduced” “In God We Trust” on our currency, causing a stir of controversy. Unknown to most a similar phrase had already been on the currency…in Latin.


And the Second most saluted man is Jose, who’s ability to see the game is invoked at nearly every sporting event in the country.


Interesting claim… But “in God we trust” was put on US coinage long before that, by the Coinage Act of 1864. In English, and given the restrictions of the Coinage act of 1837, there was clearly no pre-existing Latin motto.

It was added to paper money in the 50s, but I’ve not found a reference to a Latin version before that, and it seems to be lacking from any of the images I’ve found online of US bank notes before that.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.