By the Second World War, most schools required students to recite it. Some churches, however, objected because they believed that the Bible prohibited such a declaration of allegiance. In , the Supreme Court ruled that schools could not force students to recite the pledge. During the Cold War, patriotic and religious groups began to lobby Congress to include a mention of God in the pledge to contrast the United States from atheistic communist countries.
The meaning of the establishment clause continues to be hotly debated. The U. Supreme Court, however, has ruled that the First Amendment prohibits prayers and other religious observances in public schools because they amount to an establishment of religion. In deciding what is and is not legally permitted under the establishment clause, the Supreme Court has developed several tests in its decisions Lemon v. Kurtzman , ; Lynch v. Donnelly , , and Lee v. Weisman , According to these decisions, an act violates the establishment clause if it:.
Supreme Court had never directly ruled on the constitutionality of the Pledge of Allegiance. Only one other federal appeals court has made a decision on the pledge. On March 24, , the U. Newdow argued his own case before the highest court in the land. The following summary of the arguments in this case come from the written briefs and oral arguments presented by both sides.
The petitioners argued that Sandra Banning was the final decision-maker. Only she could object to her daughter reciting the pledge. In fact, Banning was raising her daughter as a Christian who believed in God and willingly participated in the pledge. By her saying the pledge, Newdow stated, she was essentially saying her father was wrong about there not being a God.
The government, Newdow said, was interfering with his right to teach his daughter about religion as he saw fit. Historical: Whether the pledge is the same as references to God in other documents in U. Ceremonial: Whether the pledge serves a harmless ceremonial function. Purpose: Whether the pledge serves a religious purpose.
Entanglement: Whether the pledge entangles religion and education. Coercion: Whether children are forced to say the pledge. Historical: The petitioners argued that mere references to the role of God and religion in American history do not establish a religion. Ceremonial: The mention of God in such things as the Pledge of Allegiance is a ceremonial activity that lends seriousness to public occasions like presidential Thanksgiving proclamations. Purpose: The purpose of the pledge is to promote patriotism.
Endorsement: The pledge does not endorse any church, sect, or religious doctrine. Entanglement: Saying a school prayer is religious. Reciting the pledge is not religious. It does not excessively entangle religion with public education. Historical: References to God in historical documents or in other public expressions are not the same as young children standing in a classroom and swearing in unison their allegiance to both the nation and God.
Ceremonial: The pledge is not some harmless ceremony, but a declaration that excludes and fosters prejudice against atheists. The original pledge included every American. Purpose: The pledge is a means for the government to convince children to accept the religious belief that there is a God. That was made clear in a U. Supreme Court decision, West Virginia v. If there are any circumstances which permit an exception, they do not now occur to us.
In , the U. Instead, a five-justice majority said that atheist Michael Newdow did not have legal standing to bring the case on behalf of his daughter because he did not have legal custody of her. According to the Religion News Service , the plaintiffs in this new case are arguing that the recitation of the pledge discriminates against non-believing students and thus violates the guarantee of equal rights contained in the Massachusetts Constitution.
In times of uncertainty, good decisions demand good data. Please support our research with a financial contribution. It organizes the public into nine distinct groups, based on an analysis of their attitudes and values. Even in a polarized era, the survey reveals deep divisions in both partisan coalitions. In February , a judge ruled in favor of the school district.
An event in drew attention to the ability of states to require students at public schools to get parental permission before opting out of the pledge, when a sixth-grade student was arrested in a pledge dispute. That case was dropped in March , but the incident harkened back to Frazier v. Winn , a lower court decision that the U. Supreme Court did not take on appeal.
0コメント