Respuesta :
Answer:
When Baptist minister Francis Bellamy composed the Pledge of Allegiance in 1892, he had a definite purpose in mind. Aware that different ethnic groups in the United States were intermingled yet often at odds, Bellamy hoped the pledge would encourage those groups to put aside their differences and coalesce into a unified nation. He wanted the men, women, and children who recited the pledge to feel an affiliation with the United States and its democratic ideals. Since Bellamy also wanted the pledge to be used by other nations adhering to similar principles, he did not mention the United States by name. Unfortunately, Bellamy’s refusal to specifically name the United States caused significant discord over time, and the pledge itself often proved to be a source of contention rather than cohesion.
Bellamy’s original Pledge of Allegiance read, “I pledge allegiance to my flag and the republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.” Then in 1923, a rupture opened between Bellamy and the National Flag Conference when members changed the words from “my flag” to “the flag of the United States of America.” Bellamy hated the change and protested, but his objection was ignored. The new wording stayed.
In 1954, the addition of the words “under God” became another source of heated conflict as atheists insisted that the phrase produced in them a profound sense of alienation. As non-believers, they were angered by a Pledge of Allegiance that forced faith upon them. In addition to the atheists, some of the faithful were also displeased. They argued that reciting the pledge on a regular basis could be a mind-numbing exercise that undermined serious religious beliefs.
Another controversy broke out in 2002 when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled that reciting the pledge in the schools was unconstitutional because it blurred the separation of church and state. Needless to say, the decision proved divisive, sparking so much violent disagreement that a union of political and religious groups took out public ads proclaiming the need to keep the pledge in the schools. Michael Newdow, who had brought the issue before the courts, even received several death threats.
Explanation:
When Baptist minister Francis Bellamy composed the Pledge of Allegiance in 1892, he had a definite purpose in mind. Aware that different ethnic groups in the United States were intermingled yet often at odds, Bellamy hoped the pledge would encourage those groups to put aside their differences and coalesce into a unified nation. He wanted the men, women, and children who recited the pledge to feel an affiliation with the United States and its democratic ideals. Since Bellamy also wanted the pledge to be used by other nations adhering to similar principles, he did not mention the United States by name. Unfortunately, Bellamy’s refusal to specifically name the United States caused significant discord over time, and the pledge itself often proved to be a source of contention rather than cohesion.
Bellamy’s original Pledge of Allegiance read, “I pledge allegiance to my flag and the republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.” Then in 1923, a rupture opened between Bellamy and the National Flag Conference when members changed the words from “my flag” to “the flag of the United States of America.” Bellamy hated the change and protested, but his objection was ignored. The new wording stayed.
In 1954, the addition of the words “under God” became another source of heated conflict as atheists insisted that the phrase produced in them a profound sense of alienation. As non-believers, they were angered by a Pledge of Allegiance that forced faith upon them. In addition to the atheists, some of the faithful were also displeased. They argued that reciting the pledge on a regular basis could be a mind-numbing exercise that undermined serious religious beliefs.
Another controversy broke out in 2002 when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled that reciting the pledge in the schools was unconstitutional because it blurred the separation of church and state. Needless to say, the decision proved divisive, sparking so much violent disagreement that a union of political and religious groups took out public ads proclaiming the need to keep the pledge in the schools. Michael Newdow, who had brought the issue before the courts, even received several death threats.
