Um, and need I point out that the point of having a Bible there to begin with is to impress upon the swearer the seriousness of their oath? Therefore IT ONLY MAKES SENSE TO MAKE SOMEONE SWEAR ON A BOOK THAT THEY THEMSELVES HOLD SACRED?
I mean, just how compelled would the average Christian feel to keep an oath they swore on the Egyptian Book of the Dead?
(And of course, it goes without saying that anyone worthy of a high ranking government post should be mature enough to keep promises without the threat of divine retribution).
Why not use the text of the relevant paragraph of Article VI of the Constitution for this purpose? It seems to sum up the entire issue rather concisely:
"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."
10:47 AM, December 06, 2006
...I'm taking my oath of office on a stack of items consisting of The Communist Manifesto, Sam Harris' atheist polemic The End of Faith, and bunch of skanky porn DVD's just to piss off people like this: An "action alert" from the American Family Association:1. Send an email asking your U.S. Representative and Senators to pass a law making the Bible the book used in the swearing-in ceremony of Representatives and Senators.Representative-elect Keith Ellison (D-MN) taking an oath on the Koran shouldn't even be controversial. In fact, in the official swearing in, no holy books of any kind are used at all: Prager’s patriotic prattling is misinformed on the facts, too. No Member of Congress is officially sworn in with a Bible. Under House rules, the official swearing-in ceremony is done in the House chambers, with the Speaker of the House administering the oath of office en masse. No Bibles or other holy books are used at all. Members may, if they choose, also have a private ceremony with family and friends. At these unofficial ceremonies, Members frequently solemnize the event by taking an oath while holding a personal family Bible.As long as there are people screaming about this kind of issue, I don't think anyone can be accused of being alarmist for using the terms "theocon" or "Christianist". It's infuriating how persecuted these people feel for not being able impose their religion in the civic sphere.
"If I'm ever elected to public office..."
3 Comments -
Um, and need I point out that the point of having a Bible there to begin with is to impress upon the swearer the seriousness of their oath? Therefore IT ONLY MAKES SENSE TO MAKE SOMEONE SWEAR ON A BOOK THAT THEY THEMSELVES HOLD SACRED?
I mean, just how compelled would the average Christian feel to keep an oath they swore on the Egyptian Book of the Dead?
(And of course, it goes without saying that anyone worthy of a high ranking government post should be mature enough to keep promises without the threat of divine retribution).
1:59 AM, December 06, 2006
Thanks for mentioning that. Indeed, that it is what it is there for, not to foist Christianity on the multitudes.
2:11 AM, December 06, 2006
Why not use the text of the relevant paragraph of Article VI of the Constitution for this purpose? It seems to sum up the entire issue rather concisely:
"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."
10:47 AM, December 06, 2006