The 1950's Red Scare & The History of God in U.S. Government

6-27-02 | Tired of Taxes

[Tired of Taxes]

The original Pledge, composed by Francis Bellamy, read:

"I pledge allegiance to my Flag, and the Republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all."

1923 - At the first National Flag Conference, the words "the Flag of the United States" are inserted.

1942 - Congress officially recognizes the Pledge.

1943 - The U.S. Supreme Court rules that youngsters cannot be compelled to recite the Pledge in WEST VIRGINIA BOARD OF EDUCATION v. BARNETTE, 319 U.S. 624 (1943). The case is heard on behalf of parents and students belonging to the Jehovah's Witnesses sect, who argued that their religious faith prohibited them from saluting the symbols of a worldly government.

1950s - The Red Scare: In a search for "commies", congressional committees and state legislative panels question citizens about their political and religious beliefs.

1952 - The Knights of Columbus adopts a resolution urging the inclusion of the word "God" in the Pledge.

Flag Day, June 14, 1954 - President Eisenhower signs a measure adding the words "under God" to the Pledge.

1956 - The secular phrase "E Pluribus Unum" ("Out of many, one") is replaced with "In God We Trust" as the national motto. President Eisenhower first institutes the annual "National Prayer Breakfast" held in the White House. The phrase "So help me God" is added to the oath taken by Federal judges and other officials.

Many of you continue to assert that the Founders would've endorsed this mixture of God and government. But, as you can see, these religious slogans and practices were not adopted until much later during the Red Scare.

[Tired of Taxes]

"All of those subjects you listed are the product of a Dip worldview

Not every atheist endorses such a view, nor is every theist critical of them. I, for one, don't think the homosexual agenda or pro-abortion positions should be taught in public schools, either. My position is that they violate the religious rights of parents. So, even though I'm an "atheist", I agree with many Christians in those particular issues. Therefore, my position is consistent.

" and the arguments against them are not, as far as I know, based upon a reading of the first amendment."

What are the arguments against them, then?

[KC Burke]

grebu does a nice job of answering you but leaves out when this judicial activism of the "wall" was instituted. Knowing the FDR Supreme Court in 1947 reversed the first 170 years of our nation's history and court decisions in this matter, gives the insight missing in your timeline.

Hayek's feared Rationalistic Totalitarian Democracy, the Secular Humanism of Dewey, a humanism without Virtue or Truth, the metaphysical tramp of Rousseau's boots and the rise of world socialism, all are seen quite well in that attempt to thwart the heritage of our nation.

[Tired of Taxes]

"And I was only asking for an honest evaluation of this ridiculous ruling."

Which I have given again and again. Apparently, you're way too emotional to hear it.

"What court has ruled in their favor on the basis of an imagined "right not to hear" something,"

I asked for your position on the issues, not whether a court case was won or not. What is your position?

Do you think public schools should continue to instruct children in ways that oppose their parents' religious beliefs?

If your position is that evolutionary theory, pro-abortion and gay agendas should NOT be taught in public schools, then you should also support removing "under God" from the pledge. They are all the same issue: Parents deciding what to teach their children about "God". Otherwise, your positions are contradictory.

Let me go further: Atheists who argue that "under God" should be removed from a Pledge, but who see nothing wrong with teaching Darwin's evolutionary theory and pro-abortion agenda to public school students are being inconsistent, too. Their positions are contradictory, too.

Again, I only ask for consistency in your positions.

[Tribune7]

That's not correct. As noted at the top of this thread, "In God We Trust" wasn't placed on our currency until the 50's.

BZZZT. Wrong-o. It first appeared on US currency in 1864

It first appeared on paper money in 1957, but the word currency applies to coinage as well in the first definition of the word.

[Pietro]

"What are the arguments against them, then?"

The arguments, at least as I understand them, are that they represent a Dip worldview w/o any other views being allowed. And of course there exists neither a theistic nor a Dip monoculture, there is a spectrum of opinions on both sides of the fence.

Adopting a Dip standard of public expression as default is de facto endorsement of that world view. That's the problem and one that I hope will be engaged by this silly court decision.

[Tired of Taxes]

The problem with that argument is that, if you allow all viewpoints in public schools, then you also keep the door open for everyone else. Not only religious and atheist teachings, but also abortion, homosexuality, and so on. I don't know about you, but I just want reading, writing, and arithmetic taught in public schools, not someone else's political or religious agenda.

[mc5cents]

I was probably in the 6th grade when the pledge was changed. Adding "under God" wasn't upsetting to anyone, as I remember it. After all, we were usually reciting the Lord's Prayer right after the pledge. (And yes, this was a public school.)

That reminded me of one of my most embarrassing moments as a school boy. I went to catholic school, kindergarten through 12th grade. But one year I had a chemistry teacher which was, well, bad. Hated his job I think. Anyway he flunked the whole class except for, I think two, and so I had to go to "summer school" to make it up. Summer school was at the public school. Well, back then they not only said the Lords prayer but there was a bible reading to open the class. This was about 1959-60 We took turns. Now even though I went to catholic school and we of course said prayers to begin the day there, we did not read the bible. Back then it was not a priority. So I did not have a clue what to read. So I just opened the book up and picked a section. Well.... let me say it was one of those parts that had nothing but begats in it. I was really embarrassed. You had to be there I guess. Now it seems funny but it was not at the time.

How far we have come since then. From praying and reading the bible every day, in public schools, to... what?

[ganesha]

The phrase "In God We Trust" came from the Huntington Bible Company

[hellinahandcart]

Which I have given again and again.

No you haven't. I have yet to hear any of you explain how religion is established by two words "under God", or how the First Amendment was violated by its inclusion, I've merely heard your assertion that you believe both to be true. You can say "the words 'under God' establish religion" until the cows come home but

(1) that doesn't make it true. I can argue just as long that they establish nothing at all. If the words were "one nation under the clear blue sky" they have not established the atmosphere.

(2)Even if you were able to prove that religion were established by those two words, it is not unconstitutional to recite them in school or in a government office. It simply isn't. You may argue "fair or unfair", but that is a different matter altogether than "unconstitutional". Make new law. If you want the mention of the word "God" in any government-related or taxpayer-funded setting to BE unconstitutional, you'll have to finally pass that Separation of Church and State amendment.

In this asinine attempt to remove the two words, however, the First was bent out of any recognizable shape or meaning. THAT is what bothers me, and should bother you.

By the way, I don't have kids, but if I did, and had a problem with the curriculum, I would go about resolving it in a way other than whining to a court to invent a mythical right for me where none exists.

[Pietro]

"...not someone else's political or religious agenda."

A noble & seemingly "reasonable" opinion, however, religion and politics are so tightly interwoven into every aspect of our lives that such a dream is impossible.

Given that, as well as my earlier point that the lack of a choice is still a choice such that nuetrality is not possible, the current state of affairs is that the traditionl position, that is an undefined/nondenominational nod to the godhead, has been replaced w/ a Dip position of a Serendipitous universe.

And it is that worldview tradition that there is no "truth" which must lead inevitably to an amoral ciriculum. How could it not?

As an adherent to Dipism you must recognize it is precisely your worldview that enables relativistic comparisons of homosexual/heterosexual unions, sin free abortions, etc. Whether you yourself condone these things isn't really an issue because your stated philosophy sustains it.

One final point and this concerns the humbug of requiring multiple religious interpretations as co-equals. This nation was originally settled by Christians, our cultural hertitage was and is overwhelmingly Christian. Other religions have remarkable latitude in free expression of their faith, even radical Dipism. That free expression is the fruit of our Christian heritage. To deny that fact is to deny a large portion of our history and will, in the end, bring about a cultural amnesia that will render us impotent when threatened by a more virile culture.

[Tired of Taxes]

Hmmm... you didn't tell me your positions on the homosexual and pro-abortion agendas taught in public schools. That must mean that you realize your positions are inconsistent. ;)

"I have yet to hear any of you explain how religion is established by two words "under God", or how the First Amendment was violated by its inclusion, I've merely heard your assertion that you believe both to be true."

OK, I'll try one more time: The First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."

Here's one of the definitions of "religion": "Recognition of God as object of worship" or "recognition on the part of man of a controlling superhuman power entitled to obedience, reverence, and worship." Look it up yourself in a dictionary.

When the American people are forced by taxation to pay for government-run schools and by truancy laws to send their children there, and then government representatives (called "public school teachers") lead those children in a pledge of allegiance to "a nation under God", the gov't is indeed establishing "a recognition of God as an object of worship" (i.e. religion), and it is indoctrinating children in that belief.

This is not about "fairness". I could care less about "fairness". It IS about constitutionality. The First Amendment is supposed to protect us from government intrusion on our religious beliefs. If one believes that there is no "God", but the gov't attempts to convince his child that there is a "God" and that our nation is beholden to this entity, then the gov't is indeed establishing religion (i.e. recognition of God as object of worship).

I can't make it any more clear. You don't have to like the Court's decision. (The judge has already caved in to mob rule). But you have to admit that the argument is a compelling one.

[Tired of Taxes]

religion and politics are so tightly interwoven into every aspect of our lives that such a dream is impossible.

It wouldn't be impossible if more people started voting for separation of SCHOOL and state. That way, gov't wouldn't control the information fed to our children.

it is precisely your worldview that enables relativistic comparisons of homosexual/heterosexual unions, sin free abortions, etc. Whether you yourself condone these things isn't really an issue because your stated philosophy sustains it.

There is no "stated philosophy" among atheists. There are certain political atheist activist groups who assume a socialist agenda, but they don't represent all atheists. In fact, here's a little-known secret: They even have trouble getting atheists to join them! The only issue on which most (though not all) atheists seem to agree is "separation of church and state." In fact, I could argue that the atheist viewpoint would lean to a pro-life stance because we don't believe in an afterlife. For example, "Atheists Agnostics for Pro-Life" has the slogan: "Because life is all there is."

The media paints a picture of us that does not accurately portray us. And, if the majority of Americans are Christian, then I would point out that they must comprise the majority of parents sending their children to public school and not complaining at all about the agenda there.

I must add that there may be a "stated philosophy" by many religious groups, but not all theists agree nor do they abide by them.

[Tribune7]

Not only religious and atheist teachings, but also abortion, homosexuality, and so on. I don't know about you, but I just want reading, writing, and arithmetic taught in public schools, not someone else's political or religious agenda.

The federal government should have no say in what is taught in a school. If a local school board wants to promote wiccanism or atheism or whatever, I would certainly oppose the action but the feds should not step in either through judicial fiat or Congressional legislation.

School choice is the solution to all educational disputes.

God's existence, of course, should be simply treated as a cultural axiom.

[Pietro]

"separation of SCHOOL and state"

yeah, that's gonna happen. Why is it everytime a libertarian or a Dipist is faced w/ a practical obstacle to one of their theories the answer is always along the lines of; "well if we could just get gravity to stop pulling stuff down'?

Likewise, while I will readily acknowledge a spectrum of positions w/i each camp, it can't be argued that the practical results of Dipism is an amoral relativism the purpose of which is to debunk traditionalist western values.

And if you haven't noticed that parents have been screaming bloody murder about the way the public schools are being run, then...gee...where do you live?

[Tired of Taxes]

"Why is it everytime a libertarian or a Dipist is faced w/ a practical obstacle to one of their theories the answer is always along the lines of; "well if we could just get gravity to stop pulling stuff down'?

Now, Pietro, I sincerely doubt that an atheist ever said anything like that. ;)

And if you haven't noticed that parents have been screaming bloody murder about the way the public schools are being run, then...gee...where do you live?"

I live in the northeast section of the country. Sure, there are people screaming on TalkRadio. But, then, everyday the vast majority simply hand their children over to the government for an education without a peep.

[anka]

mattdono, in the face of the following quotes by a group of our founding fathers I don't see how you can justify your 3rd point.

Regarding your 4th point: The Government is NOT taking sides with any religion, that is why the judgement (no matter how strongly you believe in GOD, is correct). The separation of Church and State is absolutely NOT a farce. It was/is one of the most important items expressed by our founding fathers and in OUR Constitution.

Finally, I think it is YOU who suffers from a great misunderstanding of the men who created our great nation. While being pious men, they understood that Religion has NO place in the governance of our nation. Beliefs are meant to be private and not to be dictated to the citizens of our nation by any one religion.

Words of men, to whom we owe our thanks for establishing this great and free nation we live in.


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 preserved--the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!"--John Adams in a letter to Thomas Jefferson

"But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, hae been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed.--John Adams in a letter to F.A. Van der Kamp, Dec. 27, 1816, 2000 Years of Disbelief , John A. Haught

"The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity. Nowhere in the Gospels do we find a precept for Creeds, Confessions, Oaths, Doctrines, and whole carloads of other foolish trumpery that we find in Christianity." --John Adams


Benjamin Franklin:
"Lighthouses are more helpful than churches."--Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard , 1758

"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason."--Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard , 1758

"I cannot conceive otherwise than that He, the Infinite Father, expects or requires no worship or praise from us, but that He is even infinitely above it." -- Benjamin Franklin, Articles Of Belief and Acts of Religion , Nov.20, 1728

"I wish it (Christianity) were more productive of good works ... I mean real good works ... not holy day keeping, sermon-hearing ... or making long prayers, filled with flatteries and compliments despised by wise men, and much less capable of pleasing the Deity." -- Benjamin Franklin , Works Vol.VII, p.75

"If we look back into history for the character of the present sects of Christianity, we shall find few that have not in turns been persecutors and complainers of persecution. The primitive Christians thought persecution extremely wrong in Pagans, but practiced it on one another. The first Protestants of the Church of England blamed persecution on the Roman church, but practiced it on the Puritans. They found it wrong in Bishops, but fell into the practice both here (England) and in New England"--Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard , 1758

"When a religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it does not support itself, and God does not take care to support it so that its professors are obliged to call for help of the civil power, 'tis a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one." -- Benjamin Franklin, 2000 Years of Disbelief by James A. Haught
"Religion I found to be without any tendency to inspire, promote, or confirm morality, serves principally to divide us and make us unfriendly to one another."--Benjamin Franklin


Thomas Jefferson:
"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State."--Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association on Jan. 1, 1802, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson Memorial Edition , edited by Lipscomb and Bergh, 1903-04, 16:281

"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."--Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia , Jefferson the President: First Term 1801-1805 , Dumas Malon, Boston: Little Brown and Company, 1970, p. 191

"...no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship ministry or shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief, but all men shall be free to profess and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise.. affect their civil capacities."--Thomas Jefferson, Statute for Religious Freedom , 1779, The Papers of Thomas Jefferson , edited by Julron P. Boyd, 1950, 2:546

"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical."--Thomas Jefferson, Statute for Religious Freedom , 1779, The Papers of Thomas Jefferson , edited by Julron P. Boyd, 1950, 2:545

"...our civil rights have no dependance on our religious opinions, any more than our opinions in physics or geometry"--Thomas Jefferson, Statute for Religious Freedom , 1779, The Papers of Thomas Jefferson , edited by Julron P. Boyd, 1950, 2:545

"I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the Constitution from intermeddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises."--Thomas Jefferson in a letter to Samuel Miller, 1808

"I am for freedom of religion and against all maneuvers to bring about a legal ascendancy of one sect over another."--Thomas Jefferson to Elbridge Gerry, 1799, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson Memorial Edition , edited by Lipscomb and Bergh, 1903-04, 108

"I know it will give great offense to the clergy, but the advocate of religious freedom is to expect neither peace nor forgiveness from them."--Thomas Jefferson to Levi Lincoln, 1802, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson Memorial Edition , edited by Lipscomb and Bergh, 10:305

"No religious reading, instruction or exercise, shall be prescribed or practiced inconsistent with the tenets of any religious sect or denomination."--Thomas Jefferson, Elementary school Act, 1817, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson Memorial Edition , edited by Lipscomb and Bergh, 10:305

"(When) the (Virginia) bill for establishing religious freedom, the principles of which had, to a certain degree, been enacted before, I had drawn in all the latitude of reason & right. It still met with opposition; but, with some mutilations in the preamble, it was finally passed; and a singular proposition proved that its protections of opinion was meant to be universal. Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting "Jesus Christ," so that it would read "A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantel of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohametan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination."--Thomas Jefferson, from his autobiography, 1821, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson Memorial Edition , edited by Lipscomb and Bergh, 1:67

"Question with boldness even the existence of God; because if there be one, He must approve the homage of Reason rather than that of blindfolded Fear." -- Thomas Jefferson in a letter to Peter Carr, Aug. 10, 1787, 2000 Years of Disbelief by James A. Haught

"Christianity...(has become) the most perverted system that ever shone on man. ...Rogueries, absurdities and untruths were perpetrated upon the teachings of Jesus by a large band of dupes and imposters led by Paul, the first great corrupter of the teaching of Jesus." --Thomas Jefferson, Six Historic Americans by John E. Remsberg
"I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition one redeeming feature. They are all alike, founded on fables and mythology."--Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Short, Six Historic Americans by John E. Remsberg

"Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned, yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity . What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites."--Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia (1781-85), Oxford Dictionary of Quotations

"The proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to offices of trust and emolument unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion is depriving him injuriously of those priviledges and advantages to which, in common with his fellow citizens, he has a natual right."--Thomas Jefferson, Statute for Religious Freedom , 1779, The Papers of Thomas Jefferson , edited by Julron P. Boyd, 1950, 2:546

"The clergy converted the simple teachings of Jesus into an engine for enslaving mankind and adulterated by artificial constructions into a contrivance to filch wealth and power to themselves...these clergy, in fact, constitute the real Anti-Christ." -- Thomas Jefferson

"I contemplate with soveriegn reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof', thus building a wall of separation between church and State."--Thomas Jefferson, letter to Danbury Baptist Association, CT. The Complete Jefferson by Saul K. Padover, pp 518-519

"History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose."--Thomas Jefferson to Baron von Humboldt in 1813, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson Memorial Edition , edited by Lipscomb and Bergh, 14:21

"All persons shall have full and free liberty of religious opinion; nor shall any be compelled to frequent or maintain any religious institution."--Thomas Jefferson, 1776


James Madison:
"Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other sects?" -- James Madison, A Memorial and Remonstrance, addressed to the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of VA, 1795

"During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution." -- James Madison, A Memorial and Remonstrance, 2000 Years of Disbelief by James A. Haught

"Ecclesiastical establishments tend to great ignorance and all of which facilitates the execution of mischievous projects. Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise, every expanded project."--James Madison, 2000 Years of Disbelief by James A. Haught

"And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in showing that religion and Government will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together."--James Madison in a letter to Edward Livingston in 1822

"It may not be easy, in every possible case, to trace the line of separation between the rights of religion and the Civil authority with such distinctness as to avoid collisions and doubts on unessential points. The tendency to unsurpastion on one side or the other, or to a corrupting coalition or alliance between them, will best be guarded against by an entire abstinence of the Government from interference in any way whatsoever, beyond the necessity of preserving public order, and protecting each sect against trespasses on its legal rights by others."--James Madison, "James Madison on Religious Liberty", edited by Robert S. Alley, ISBN pp 237-238

"The Civil Government, though bereft of everything like an associated hierarchy, possesses the requisite stability and performs its functions with complete success, whilst the number, the industry, and the morality of the priesthood, and the devotion of the people have been manifestly increased by the TOTAL SEPARATION OF THE CHURCH FROM THE STATE."--James Madison


Other:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."--First Amendment to the U.S.A. Constitution

"One of the embarrassing problems for the early nineteenth-century champions of the Christian faith was that not one of the first six Presidents of the United States was an orthodox Christian."--The Encyclopedia Brittanica, 1968, p. 420

[hellinahandcart]

Hmmm... you didn't tell me your positions on the homosexual and pro-abortion agendas taught in public schools. That must mean that you realize your positions are inconsistent. ;)

Don't be tedious. You have no CLUE what my opinions on the above are (they would surprise you, but they are beside the point of this discussion). I just refused to let you change the subject.

The First Amendment is supposed to protect us from government intrusion on our religious beliefs.

Again with what it's "supposed to do" from the anti-pledge crowd. Here's what it "does" do--it restrains Congress on that matter, no one else. Just Congress.

When the American people are forced by taxation to pay for government-run schools and by truancy laws to send their children there, and then government representatives (called "public school teachers")

Classifying public school teachers as government representatives may be somewhat truthful but it still does not make them Congress. Do you see now why you're going to need that constitutional amendment I spoke of?

lead those children in a pledge of allegiance to "a nation under God", the gov't is indeed establishing "a recognition of God as an object of worship" (i.e. religion)

Again, nothing has been established. God was an object of worship long before there was ever a pledge. Recognition or acknowledgement is not establishment. And you can't establish what has already been established.

One more thing--you're not pledging allegiance to a nation under God, you're pledging allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the the republic for which it (the flag) stands. The rest of the words modify "republic". I know others who don't like the word "indivisible". My advice for those who don't like parts of the pledge is to slap a pair of mental parentheses around the modifiers--it's practically written that way anyway.

[hellinahandcart]

I always respond to a challenge to "look it up myself" in the dictionary, by the way. Shall we play a guessing game? I will guess that your definition came from an edition of the New Webster's Dictionary published after 1991, am I correct?

I only mention it because I have a '91 and it's the crappiest dictionary I've ever owned. I figure it only got crappier after '91 if your definition is even shorter than this one--"Religion: Belief in supernatural power which governs universe; recognition of God as an object of worship; practical piety; any system of faith and worship."

The definitions aren't even well written; "belief in supernatural power which governs universe" sounds like Frankenstein or Mongo talking. That's because New Webster's has no relationship to Original Webster's or its successors. I won't settle on tht definition. Recognition of the fact that God is worshipped does not constitute religion. Worship constitutes religion.

Anyway, here's what dictionary.com yielded up for "religion"---

American Heritage:

1. a.Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
b.A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
2.The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
3.A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
4.A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

Webster's Revised Unabridged:

1. The outward act or form by which men indicate their recognition of the existence of a god or of gods having power over their destiny, to whom obedience, service, and honor are due; the feeling or expression of human love, fear, or awe of some superhuman and overruling power, whether by profession of belief, by observance of rites and ceremonies, or by the conduct of life; a system of faith and worship; a manifestation of piety; as, ethical religions; monotheistic religions; natural religion; revealed religion; the religion of the Jews; the religion of idol worshipers.
2. Specifically, conformity in faith and life to the precepts inculcated in the Bible, respecting the conduct of life and duty toward God and man; the Christian faith and practice.
3. (R. C. Ch.) A monastic or religious order subject to a regulated mode of life; the religious state; as, to enter religion. --Trench.
4. Strictness of fidelity in conforming to any practice, as if it were an enjoined rule of conduct. [R.]

Wordnet: n 1: a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny; "he lost his faith but not his morality" [syn: faith, religious belief] 2: institution to express belief in a divine power; "he was raised in the Baptist religion"; "a member of his own faith contradicted him" [syn: faith]