Why should the USA Pledge of Allegiance Be Revised, by Gwen Wilde

 Analysis:

Issue: Should the Pledge of Allegiance be revised, omitting the words “under God”?

Conclusion: Yes, the Pledge of Allegiance should be revised omitting the words “under God”.

Type of Argument: Prescriptive because a recommendation is provided by the author

Reasons:

1.      The original pledge did not include the words “under God”.

2.      The words “under God” are inappropriate.

3.      The words “under God” are needlessly divisive.

4.      The Pledge requires all Americans to say something that some Americans do not believe. 

5.      The words “under God” cannot be uttered in good faith by many Americans.

6.      Although a majority of Americans say they have a religious affiliation, nevertheless several million Americans do not believe in God.

7.      If one remains silent while others are reciting the Pledge, or even if one remains silent only while others are speaking the words “under God,” one is open to the charge that one is unpatriotic or “unwilling to recite the Pledge of Allegiance.”

8.      It is a patriotic observance, and it should not be connected with religion. 

9.      When we announce that we respect the flag – that we are loyal Americans – we should not also have to announce that we hold a particular religious belief, in this case a belief in monotheism, a belief that there is a God and God rules.

10.  Since millions of loyal Americans cannot say it, it should not be included in the statement in which Americans affirm their loyalty to our great country. 

11.  Those who wish to exercise religion are indeed free to do so but the place to do so is not in a pledge that is required of all school-children and of all new citizens.

Ambiguous Language:

Inappropriate – who determines what is appropriate and what is inappropriate?

Deeply religious – people have different definitions of this. How could this be measured?

Majority of Americans – how much of a majority? Could be 51% or 97%. (Careful because it says “approximately another 3% say they are Jewish” so don’t put 99%!!)

Affiliated with some form of Christianity/religious affiliation – open to interpretation. Affiliation needs to be defined.

(Notice we cannot include “loyal Americans” because the author defines it for us as people who “respect the flag”)

Value Assumption:  Freedom of speech/Freedom of choice

Value Conflict:  Patriotism

Descriptive Assumptions:

(Reason 3) – The assumption is that people who do not say the words “under God” in the Pledge feel divided from those who do say the words

(Reason 4) – The assumption is that there are many Americans who just can’t say the words “under God” because they lack a faith

(Reason 7) – The assumption is that if one refrains from saying “under God” they are called unpatriotic…by whom?

(Reason 8) – The assumption is that American money and the Pledge of Allegiance are equal because of the word “God” in both

(Reason 10) – The assumption is that not all loyal Americans feel a kinship to one God

“…these Americans—loyal people who may be called upon to defend the country with their lives…” assumes there is a military draft, which was not in effect the year this article was written (nor has one been in effect for over 40 years!)

Evaluation

Fallacies:

(Reason 7) – False Dilemma – either you say “under God” and are considered patriotic or you don’t say the words and are deemed unpatriotic

Appeal to Emotion – “peer pressure does compel all but the bravest to join in the recitation”

Explaining by Naming – “un-American”

Appeal to Popularity – “70 or even 80% of Americans say”

False Analogy – the words “In God We Trust” appear on our money

Wishful Thinking – “reciting the Pledge is to be taken seriously, with a full awareness of the words”

Evidence:

Authority – the United States Congress included the Pledge in the U.S. Flag Code (4 USC 4, 2006), thus for the first time officially sanctioning the Pledge.  Strong because it is a government authority that has power to make changes, and this information is provable.

Authority – in 1954, President Dwight D. Eisenhower approved adding the words “under God.”  Moderate to strong evidence because the position is able to make changes, and this information is provable.

Statistics – Something like 70 or even 80% of Americans say they are affiliated with some form of Christianity, and approximately another 3% say they are Jewish.  Weak evidence.  Where did she get the percentages?  They have a gap of 10%...why?

Analogy – the words “In God we trust” is on American money which makes it analogous to “under God” in the Pledge.  Weak because having to having to voice an affirmation is much different than having an option to look at the phrase printed on money.

Intuition – “I think” “everyone knows” weak because there is not scientific basis to the statement

Rival Cause:  Not applicable.  This is not a causal claim.

Significant Omitted Information:

The author should have shared the opinions of those who don’t want to say “under God.”

There isn’t any valid statistical evidence regarding people’s faith choices.

The paper is mostly the author’s opinion with authorities included; what about hearing from the faith community and how they feel about the Pledge of Allegiance.

Is the author only speaking for herself?  She only includes her opinions and her feelings without referring to any individuals or groups who agree with her.

Multiple Conclusions:

The two versions of the Pledge of Allegiance could be alternated and said every other month.

We could return to saying the original Pledge of Allegiance.

A new Pledge of Allegiance could be written.

Is the author a good critical thinker?

For this section, remember that you should include both attitudes and skills that you are evaluating in the author and in the presentation of their argument.  Good luck on all your final exams!! J