At the beginning of each day in many public and private schools across the country, students stand and recite the Pledge of Allegiance. In fact, 35 states have passed laws requiring the Pledge to be recited daily. This issue has been a source of controversy for years. On the one hand there are families and educators who believe in citizenship and the patriotism that the recitation of the Oath brings with it (Chiodo, 2011). On the opposite side, families and educators argue the possible threat to individual First Amendment freedoms. Before analyzing the controversy described above, we must first examine the history of the Oath itself. Written by Francis Bellamy, it was originally titled “Pledge to the Flag” and was created in the late 1800s to celebrate the 400th anniversary of the discovery of America. It originally read: “I swear allegiance to my flag and to the republic it represents, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all” (McCarthy, 2005). Changes were later made to include the words “of the United States” and “of America” to indicate which flag was being referred to. The final changes to the Pledge occurred in 1954, when it was officially titled the “Pledge of Allegiance” and the words “under God” were added after “one nation.” This addition to the pledge was intended to support the United States as a religious nation. In signing the law to enact this change, President Eisenhower said, “Thus we will constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which will forever be our country's most powerful asset in peace and war” (McCarthy, 2005). Many parents, educators, and school officials defend the Pledge of Allegiance and other rituals and symbols for the themes of... middle of paper... Allegiance without any examination of its meaning and history; 2) Participants agreed that Engagement should be an important aspect of public education; 3) Participants identified the Oath as having “educational value” as it is useful in transmitting shared values ​​of loyalty, respect, patriotism and common beliefs for the future. In conclusion, supporters of making the Pledge of Allegiance compulsory in schools justify their beliefs by arguing that the Pledge has pedagogical value. These advocates seek to use it as a tool to share themes of community, loyalty, and respect in the midst of diversity and social change. Opponents, on the other hand, disagree that the pledge has educational value and instead believe it violates a person's First Amendment rights. Ultimately they try to demonstrate that commitment is ineffective in transmitting values ​​in public schools.