The society of the United States of America is directly affected by the group mind of Christian religious believers. The Christian Church has always been a part of American society, even since the beginning. This influence of Christianity negatively affects members of our nation. Not all Americans are Christians, and when the Church affects a national decision it too affects those who are not Christians. Such as in the case Michael Newdow of Sacramento has brought to the National Supreme Court. His case against the inclusion of the words “under God” in the pledge of allegiance will affect almost every member of American society. Christianity is protesting against this case, which offends them, it is their opinion that those words should remain in a national pledge that is recited daily by thousands of Americans, even Atheists who do not believe in the existence of a supreme being or deity. If the Christian Church were to get its way, its opinion will affect even those who do not share its beliefs. As a group mind, Christianity will be somewhat imposing its belief on those who do not believe as it does, and this is wrong.

Michael Newdow is an Atheist American from Sacramento who

Group thinking such as in the case of the Christian church can be dangerous to American society, because considering the size and influence of the religion in the United States; it can have a great influence on America’s decision making. Many powerful politicians despise the case. According to CNN.com even president Bush who believes in God calls the case “ridiculous”. As said above the opinion of the Christian Church affects the opinion of those who share that religious faith. Thus, if political officials that have power on the government are Christians they too are affected by the Church’s opinion. Therefore, the Church can have an influence on the opinion of politicians and the government. If the Christian Church were to get its way in the case presented, Newdow’s case would be thrown out. The First Amendment of the Constitution would be legally violated as a result of this group mind. Then thousands of non-believers would still be subjected to “their” nations pledge of god and support of the idea of one Supreme Being and deity.

has brought a rightful case against congress for its application and use of words “under God” in the congressionally ratified pledge of allegiance that is recited daily in public schools across the nation. His case is that as an Atheist he is offended by the admittance of the words “under God” in the pledge. He states that the use of the word God in a symbol of American patriotism is government endorsement of a religious belief. Many of the Founding Fathers of the United States were practicing Christians. They all agreed on one point though, that is that the government should be separate from religion. Thus they created the Establishment clause of the Constitution in the First Amendment. This generally states that the government cannot endorse religious beliefs of any kind. Based on this Newdow says that a government ratified pledge cannot include religious phrases or relations. A similar case was brought forth to the Supreme Court in the 1950’s about religious prayer in public schools. The Church was opposed to this case as well and felt that prayer was good in schools. Despite disdain of religious influences the court ruled to uphold the Establishment Clause of the Constitution and throw prayer out of public

Some topics in this essay:
Supreme Court, Pledge Allegiance, Doris Lessing, Christian Church, Moral Problem”, Michael Newdow, American Sacramento, San Francisco, Adolf Hitler, Amendment Constitution, christian church, “under god”, pledge allegiance, words “under god”, words “under, god” pledge, supreme court, american society, “under god” pledge, american people, ratified pledge, michael newdow, god” pledge allegiance, congressionally ratified pledge, prayer public schools,