"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
Does that sound familiar? Well its missing a certain part at the end. "So help me god." Those little words have been added to almost every presidential oath since 1800. However they are not and have never been part of the constitution. (The constitution has lines that outline exactly what a president must say when taking office;hint its the first lines of this blog.)
So I had a question that I hope will generate actual responses not just mindless reading and memorization. Do you think it would be ok for a president not to be sworn in on the bible? Perhaps sworn in on a koran? Or a blank piece of paper? There is absolutley no wording on what a president must place his left hand on when swearing his oath of office outlined in the constitution. But what do you think is right and wrong?
I personally would like to see presidents to be sworn in on the constitution.(The real one obviously) It is easily the most important paper in this nation's history and literally outlines the president's job. There will never be a 100% agreeabilty on the bible, or the koran but by being an american you agree to a social consensus with the government. You are effectivley telling the world that you believe in what america stands for, and all that is in the constitution. So now that you have my opinion, what is yours?
Have a nice day
T
George Washington, our nation's first president, was the first to add "so help me God," and proceeding presidents have honored that. I think the significance of adding "so help me God" and swearing on a Bible is to help the president recognize that he is not the source of his power and that he needs help in his decisions. Personally, I think it's a beautiful and humble recognition and have no problem with this tradition.
RESPECT LIFE
SMILE EVERY DAY
"It is poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."
~Mother Teresa
There is no evidence that George Washington said "so help be god" at the end of his Oath. In fact, NONE of the contemporary sources that report that event make any mention of him doing any such thing. In fact, there are no contemporary accounts of ANY Presidents before Lincoln that recorded the appending of "so help be god" to their oaths. This is just an unfortunately very common myth that is not supported by the historical evidence.
TTFN,
Blackout
---
A question of love.
---
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
Absolutely. I think it's fine to be sworn in on any book the Elect holds dear. Ideally, I'd have them sworn in on the Constitution. After all, it IS what they're swearing to defend.
George Carlin on Pro-lifers. Hah, I love this.
I'm Libertarian.
I'd have them sworn in on the Constitution.
I agree. It's the most important document.
The reason why presidents have constantly choosen(yes, I did say choosen) to sware in with their left hand on a bible is because the majority of America are people who place their faith in the bible and the god that goes along with it. People that believe in something are not gonna vote for a president that does not have similar beliefs as that person does. Its like saying a hard core republican voted for a democrate or vise versa. Because of the majority christian believers in our country, the president is gonna most likely be a christian as well.
The reason why I said that the president chooses to sware in on a bible because in court rooms, if you do not believe in the bible, then they will ask you what your religion is and retriece the book that would be most proper for you to sware by. It would be pointless for a person that does not believe in god to be sworn in by the bible. It would give that person the power to do whatever he/she wanted without having the guilty concious of their proper religion resting on their shoulders. Or in the court room, make it easyier to lie.
I might actually like them to be sworn in on something the entire world can relate with not just america. I say president's from now on are sworn in on Dr. Seuss' Green Eggs and Ham!!!
Corruptio Optimi Pessima
I'd much rather them be sworn in on Harry Potter...
Nicholas Aden
Fuck it, I'd like to see them sworn in on the Library of Congress. If I were president, I'd probably spend a good amount of time there, anyway.
--Mike
Check out the ProgU News Feed:
http://www.progressiveu.org/news
Have them sworn in on top of the library of congress, which will be filled with the usual assortment of books and such, but also with Green Eggs and Ham, Harry Potter, and the constitution.
Nicholas Aden
Theodore Roosevelt did not swear his 1901 Presidential Oath of Office on a Bible (or any other book). He took the Oath with simply a raised hand.
Also, it is important to note the the precise purpose of the inclusion of the phrase "swear (or affirm)" was a very conscious act which addresses this very issue. At the time of the adoption of the Constitution, there were a number of religious sects (for example, the Quakers) who believed that "to swear" (which is by definition a religiously based oath) was prohibited by the bible, and that Oaths taken on the bible, or which referenced "god" in any way were sinful. This, along with the ecognition that non-religious people were in fact very common in the Colonies led the founders to include the option "to affirm," since an affirmation is by definition a non-religious form of oath-taking.
The idea was that the President (and other officers whose oaths similarly include the "swear (or affirm)" provision, would take their oath based upon whatever source that person felt was most compelling.
percivale
-------------------------
"Vi Veri Vniversum Vivus Vici." ~ V.
presidents shouldn't associate themselves with a particular religion because not everyone in america believes the same way
i do agree. most traditions of history in this country have been discarded like last sunday's newspaper; no wonder everything goes so horribly in this country, god is allowed nowhere in it.
I agree with the constitution thing; however, I think the idea behind it is that (assuming that the president were actually pious) you would never go back on your word made to God. A little while ago, there was a congressman who swore in on the Qur'an in a private ceremony and it caused a giant uproar with the bible-thumping congress members who had nothing better to do before an election year than attack the Islamic faith.
--Mike
Check out the ProgU News Feed:
http://www.progressiveu.org/news
I'd rather have them swear on their religious text of choice than a blank piece of paper, but I was thinking the constitution right before I read your statement. So, I agree :-).
~C
Read the news: www.progressiveu.org/news
Nominate a featured blogger: http://www.progressiveu.org/node/27612