| Well, that is the problem when the current Pledge is a settled custom, regardless of only being 48 years old. Most of the country grew up saying it in its current form. Making an issue of the phrase, at this point, is simply hostile to religion, and suggests that atheists should have a veto over cherished customs, even when they seem harmless. On the other hand, there is the putative coercive element, and the alleged violation of conscience, which bears on the "free exercise" clause. Is saying "don't utter the phrase if it offends you" sufficient, or is making them participate in a group recitation too much of a violation? Would excusing them from recitation suffice, or would it inadvertently stigmatize them, and therefore result in a coercive situation, where loyalty to parents was challenged by peer pressure? Since I take the phrase "under God" as generic, and equivalent to the Alcoholics Anonymous dictum of relying on a Higher Power however you conceive it, I do not think that expecting participation, absent parental insistence, is too much. They can think of it any way they want, including as representing the best in human aspiration. And, if they would prefer to sidestep the issue, let them skip the words. In this situation, I think that the burden on the minority is minor, compared to the offense to the majority of making an issue of the matter....... |
