Monday, October 8, 2007

I will argue the con side of the argument

I have selected the con side of the argument (take the words out) because there is a more cogent argument on that side. It will be easier to argue against the religious believers because our constitution protects all people from religious bias.

My strongest arguments will be that the Constitution protects all people's rights all the time. Our Constitution also prohibits the establishment of a formal religion in our country. It protects individuals with no religious beliefs as well as individuals with countless religious beliefs.

I can convince readers to agree with my position by citing Supreme Court cases on seperation of church and state, and get them to see my point of view by showing that even if a person is not forced to recite the pledge, they are still forced to listen to it. The reference to God prohibits a person who is athiest or polythiestic to recite the pledge, even if they want to express their patriotism.

As I'm preparing to argue the con side of the argument, I am definitely conflicted. For every argument I can come up with, I can think of one that counters it. Since I personally don't have that strong of an opinion on the subject, I figured I could argue the more cogent side. However, I fear that I cannot counter-argue the fact that 'In God we Trust' is engraved on our currency. Or that religion has played a major role in shaping how our country was formed.

No comments: