This month, the Pledge of Allegiance turns 122 years old—but it has only included the phrase “under God” for half of that time.

Fittingly, the American Humanist Association (AHA) has launched a campaign asking Americans of all faiths and beliefs to boycott the Pledge (or "take a stand by sitting down") until it is restored to its original "under God"-less state.

For the AHA, this isn’t just about history—they argue that the inclusion of "under God" is discriminatory, and that support for it reflects cultural anti-atheist bias. However, they think a history lesson could help, suggesting that educating Americans about the Pledge's secular past could help increase public support.

But while that may be an effective strategy for some, education alone probably isn't enough—which is why their request that believers join the campaign in solidarity is hugely important.

For starters, the call for a Pledge without God faces an incredibly steep uphill battle. The campaign's survey report, conducted by the Seidewitz Group, lays out the current climate:

In September 2013, LifeWay Research conducted a poll of 1,001 adult Americans about their attitudes towards the Pledge of Allegiance. Their poll found that only 8 percent of Americans felt the phrase "under God" should be removed from the Pledge, compared to 85 percent who felt it should not and 6 percent who were unsure.

The Seidewitz Group report goes on to suggest that educating people about the history of "under God" in the Pledge increases support for its removal. I'd like to see additional research into this claim (especially in light of serious questions about the survey's phrasing), but I do believe that educating more people about the Pledge's history could be valuable.

However, if we want to help people truly understand why language like "under God" marginalizes atheists, we need to work with religious people and focus on building relationships with believers.

Why? For starters, here's what their survey said about American attitudes toward nontheists:

A belief by one quarter of the U.S. population that atheists are less moral than religious people demonstrates the risk of discrimination and dehumanization based simply on an atheist American’s belief system. Dehumanization of and discrimination against subgroups are often the result of fear, misperceptions and lack of familiarity. The survey results suggest up to a quarter of Americans may believe negative stereotypes about atheists as a result of misperceptions and lack of familiarity.

Their survey is not the first to suggest that lack of familiarity contributes to anti-atheist attitudes. Earlier this year, Pew released the results of a poll measuring people's feelings about different religious and nonreligious groups. Atheists were among those viewed least favorably. But, importantly, there was a strong link between attitudes and familiarity:

Knowing someone from a religious group is linked with having relatively more positive views of that group... Atheists receive a neutral rating of 50, on average, from people who say they personally know an atheist, but they receive a cold rating of 29 from those who do not know an atheist.

There is likely some merit to the claim that telling people about the history of "under God" in the Pledge increases support for its removal. But for many people, that will not be enough. Increasing support for a more inclusive and secular Pledge will require relationships.

Last year, Pew reported that the biggest reason 14 percent of Americans have gone from opposing same-sex marriage to supporting it in the last decade is having "friends, family, acquaintances who are gay/lesbian." Education has been important to advancing LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) equality, but knowing LGBTQ people humanizes the issue in a way that facts often can't. Movements calling for inclusion need to win hearts as well as minds.

Knowing a nontheist will reach some people who are unmoved by learning about the Pledge's history. And while many theists already support the separation of church and state, some may not automatically recognize that "under God" is inherently exclusionary. So the AHA's invitation to theists is vital; their voices are greatly needed in the campaign for a Pledge that makes no mention of God.

Those who want to see "under God" removed from the Pledge should certainly educate—but they should focus on building coalitions and relationships with believers, too.

Update: For more on the AHA campaign, see Brian Pellot's RNS post "Why I stopped saying America’s Pledge of Allegiance."