Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
If the pledge said "One nation, under Allah"...?
would Christians be opposed to saying it?
If so, is it because you do not want someone else's God in your national pledge of allegiance?
If not, what about "under God or gods"?
Einstein -- you are hilariously ignorant.
43 Answers
- Experto CredoLv 71 decade agoFavorite Answer
Keep in mind that the "under God" proviso was added in the 50s, so it isn't original
- mikalinaLv 41 decade ago
Wow, in 3 minutes, 5 different people have tried to forward the misconception that this is a CHRISTIAN nation. Can we add those references to the drinking game yet? Or would we all end up at Betty Ford too quickly?
I would love to see us try to put that in, or "Under the Goddess", "Under Buddah", etc.
Realistically, I would prefer to go back to the pre-McCarthy days, which is what I do when I have to say the Pledge. I skip the "additional detail" of under god.
**EDIT: by the time I submitted this answer, an additional 10 people declared this nation to be Christian. How sad that nobody knows their own history.
- Cheshire CatLv 61 decade ago
It's about oppressing others.
For example, what would you think of this:
A parent puts a cookie jar on the floor and tells their 2 year old that they shouldn't eat any cookies and then walks away, leaving the child alone with the fat uncle that loves eating cookies, but prefers to eat them with company. The parent returns to find the kid eating a cookie with the uncle and decides to throw them both out on the street for disobeying orders.
*** Keep in mind that this is a 2 year old we are talking about - however, the difference in power between an adult human and a child is still a miniscule metaphor for the difference between the power difference between ANY human being and a supposedly omnipotent deity.
*** Keep in mind that the uncle is irresponsible and the parent knows it.
Now, all blame is to be dumped upon the kid. Nothing will excuse the crime of the kid and all of the offspring of the kid will likewise be held accountable, ad infinitum.
Luckily, the parent has another kid, which happens to be really blessed by the parent and can go around doing pretty much what he likes, but still acts reasonably good. Since the punishment of the first kid sounds little disproportionate to the crime, the parent decides to send the second kid to tell the first kid how to behave and then, to make sure the first kid understands how much the parent loves him, has the second kid tortured and beaten to death for them.
Making sense so far? O.k., great!
So the second kid is brought back to life to show how merciful the parent can be and then heads off on some vacation afterwards, pretty much never calling again. BUT, they do put the irresponsible uncle in charge of everything before going away, so that the kids know that someone isn't just ignoring them.
Now, these Christian people are the kids that LIKED that parent.
How do you think that sort of person is going to respond to a problem of double standards?
There is ONE way out for them: "God" is technically a generic religious term, which could also be synonymous with not only Jehovah, but also Yaweh and Allah, as well as various other imaginings of a "higher power."
As for all the fun religious quotes from the Founding Fathers, it's interesting to note that while a great number of them were educated at either Harvard or Yale divinity colleges, said colleges were surveyed and showed that none of those graduating at that time still believed in God, but they DID know how to use "the word of God" effectively to persuade others. It is likely that a few, like one of my direct ancestors, were devout Christians, but they had more temporal things on their minds.
To point out a few important details that keep getting left out that have been passed down to me via family history:
1. Separation of Church and State was considered vital in response to the recent Salem Witch Trials scandal.
2. The development of checks and balances was considered vital in response to violent anti-monarchist sentiments and the 2nd amendment was put in place so that the anti-monarchist population could legally SHOOT any part of government that attempted to ursurp "unitary executive control" as would a dictator or monarch. This attitude towards royalty remains for those loyal to the REPUBLIC.
3. My family has remained active in the clergy and still understands the difference between personal beliefs and what you tell your congregation. It's showbiz, people!! Get your Sunday morning entertainment OUT of my government!
Source(s): History of higher education textbooks, oral family histories, and my own understanding of what the Bible is really telling us: that "God" trains us to accept tyrants for leaders. - 1 decade ago
God and Allah are the same God. Christians and Muslims and Jews all believe in the same God. To a Muslim, when he or she would say one nation under God, they mean Allah. That is only the Muslim name for God.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- DiminatiLv 51 decade ago
Ah, Rev. Einstein wnts to play the quote mining game. OK, I'm in.
The Christian God is a being of terrific character- cruel, vindictive, capricious and unjust
-Thomas Jefferson
To talk of immaterial existences is to talk of nothings. To say that the human soul, angels, god, are immaterial, is to say there are nothing, or that there is no soul, no angels, no god. I cannot reason otherwise...I am satisfied, sufficiently occupied with the things which are, without tormenting or troubling myself about those which may indeed be, but of which we have no evidence
-Thomas Jefferson
Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone upon man
-Thomas Jefferson
During fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been it its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolences in the clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution
-James Madison
Lighthouses are more useful than churches
-Benjamin Franklin
This would be the best of all possible worlds if there were no religion in it
-John Adams
As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation. But how it has happened that millions of fables, tales, legends have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed
-John Adams
I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has produced- the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced.
-John Adams
Treaty with Tripoli, 1797:
As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion, as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitian nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of harmony between the two countries.
Shake off all fears of servile prejudices, under which weak mines are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear.
-Thomas Jefferson
- You wishLv 41 decade ago
What should it matter? If there is one God as BOTH religions claim, who cares which name is used? Why can't God be a general term instead of making such a monumental change? But if you want to get to the nitty-gritty, Muslims did not build this country, Christians did (btw I am not a Christian) so yes I think they would have a problem with that.
I think it should be removed as our forefathers intent was to have a separation of church and state.
- 1 decade ago
I would be opposed, because there is only one God, not gods, and it is not Allah....
so if that were the pledge, I'd be like some people today and just not say it
Source(s): my wisdom - Anonymous1 decade ago
It would be better in its original form without any silly deity mentioned.
Wow, Rev. Einstein - you are a bold faced liar. Honestly, I can't believe that people in this day and age still trot out that tired old "christian nation" horse-crap. The only thing sadder than those who say it are those who believe it.
Edit: The funny thing is; those who disagree with me always have a lot of lies, half-truths, and out-of context quotes to try and back themselves up. Morons.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
yes, isn't that arabic?
The language generally spoken in the U.S is English; God is how we say it in English.
Under God because the United States were built on Christian values which are founded with the belief in 1 God. People will keep trying to change this.
- 1 decade ago
"Allah" is simply the Arabic word for God.
Christians in Lebanon, etc use it to refer to God just like the Muslims do.
So, "one nation under Allah" means the EXACT same thing as "one nation under God"