If the bible says do not swear on Gods name and the constitution says that there needs to be a separation of church and state, then why do we swear to God when someone is elected into public office? Or when we are sworn to tell the truth in court? This is violating the two areas that most people use to mold their lives. This whole topic came to fruition for me when one of my idiot friends started rambling on and on about Keith Ellison swearing in on the Koran when he was elected. First off, why rehash a two year old topic that has been over analyzed and its stupid. The whole topic is so much more complex than “keep it my way, because we’ve been doing it like that.” We shouldn’t be doing it in the first place.
His platform was something along the lines of: we shouldn’t have allowed him to take office if he was not going to adhere to our American belief system? He went on to say: America has always been” TO GOD.” I swear to God, in God we trust, etc… Well there is way more to this than that raggedy defense of his own comments. Unfortunately, way too many people think that one form of thought, for a long period of time, makes it the truth. Well it isn’t. To put it bluntly, we shouldn’t be swearing to god in any political forums. First, it undermines what God expects from us on that very bible he was talking about.
“Swear not at all (Matt. v.34 AND James v.12). Second, the oath doesn’t require you to swear to God. That was an option that was started by George Washington.” Many people have done it but it has never been required. Just because we have done it for many years does not mean it is to be omnipotent. Slavery was around for many years and how messed up was that?
Anyone whose opinion is not reflected in the latter comments may want to review the First Amendment to the Constitution which protects the free exercise of religion. FIRST, not second, third or sixth but FIRST. You would think that was a little important. It also states the government can’t create a national religion. Many people focus too much on “create” and say that it hasn’t created a religion but the simplistic dictionary definition is not the case here. Just using the definition is stifling your brain. The statement has to mean something far greater than the obvious textbook answer. For this to have significance, it must mean that our government can’t endorse or support any religion. It can’t hinder it either, it simply needs to remain in the middle of the road; taking no sides. Let’s not forget Article IV, no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.
Even though many of the authors of the Constitution were Christians, they were Christians that knew what it felt like when government shoved religion down their throats. How they made them hide their true belief system or even punish them. This is probably why it is the FIRST Amendment. They wanted to create a secular government untainted by the massive problems that sectarian divisions, religious violence and Christian bigotry had inflicted on them in Europe.
If they wanted the oath to be only to a Christian God, it would have been so easy for them to say it. Instead, they used every measure to detour that way of thought. When the issue with the Quakers came about, they added affirmation. This clearly reflects that they had some form of judgment on this process and in favor of a secular government. If they wanted the bible in the constitution, they could have just used the bible to run the country. But I am sure they did not create the constitution because they felt as if they needed to improve upon the bible.
For argument sake, let’s just say that Ellison would not have sworn on the Koran and did it on the bible as other non Christians have done. Then he “swore to God.” What does this tell us about the oath itself and the way in which we view what an oath really means to us? If you are a Christian and you want a Muslim to swear on your Christian bible, don’t you think that is a little unholy? Do you even remember the Ten Commandments?
“And ye shall not swear by my name falsely…”Lev. 19.12. I believe that is bearing false witness and taking his name in vein all rolled up in one dumb ass belief system. An oath was once considered the highest possible guarantor of truthful testimony from an individual. It is your personal testimony, to a power you believe to be greater than yourself, to show your community you are to be trusted. And some people want to incorporate a lie into our American oath in order for them to perpetuate their own religious agenda. Am I the only one who sees how freaking stupid this is?
In John 18:36 Jesus Christ says to Pontius Pilate that “My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.” And in Matthew 22:21, says “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s.” NO MORE BIBLE QUOTES – I swear to God!
Now, let’s wrap up the whole God and the founders of the constitution thing. Jesus did not see tooling around in politics as being worthy of his righteousness. He was too busy preparing people for the afterlife. Jefferson saw religion as inherently corrosive to government. The only issue he had was assuming the average person had more brain activity than they really did. Throw in bible thumping and the cells die off even quicker.
With all this good stuff on swearing to God and what an oath should be, let’s look at what the oaths to God have been in the past. If this is so important to all the Christian bible thumpers who are in fear of losing control of “their government” we need to go a little further.
Do we really need to defend God’s supposed place in the constitution or do we need to defend the constitution from the very people swearing to God? The constitution has never really needed defending. Not until now. Warrentless searches, wiretapping, torture in the name of national security, top government officials lying about facts to go to war, and the list goes on and on. The actual oath has each and every one of these officials swearing to uphold the constitution. Here is the actual oath for the president:
"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." Well we all know he isn’t living up to this.
The one that really gets me is the one taken by all US Senators: I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. The reason why the US Senators oath gets me even more is there are so many more of them. As far as the president’s oath goes, maybe “W” is just too dumb. But this can not be the reason for everyone else. It has to be an error in our system; complacency in our lives and the American dream. Problems that have been going on were never defended until recently and only because it began affecting a lot more people. But this is another blog.
Both of these oaths give you no choice but to defend the constitution from both foreign and DOMESTIC. Your oath does not mention you can defend the Constitution only when it fits your political agenda; or only if it doesn’t cause you political suicide. You do it because you swore to YOUR God that you would do it. The founding fathers made defending the Constitution such a big part because they understood the natural tendency of political systems to descend into tyranny. By this wonderful and important piece of our American legacy, the founding fathers wanted to leave us a form of protection to remain free citizens against the unchecked power of the tyrant.
We shouldn’t have a problem with a political figure placing a hand on a book, bible, Koran, or simple raising your hand to your heart. They are nothing more than a public gesture assuring those onlookers that “I” can be trusted because I am swearing on something I deem important to my morale character. Those gestures do not ensure the truth has happened or will happen. The real way to get the truth lies in our hands. It lies in the community, the jury of peers, and others whose job it is to decide if this person, who took this oath, is living up to their duties. The outcomes of the duties preformed are far more important than the meaningless gestures that proceed them.
The " PINKY SWEAR" is intended to seal a deal between two people and if one of the people breaks the deal, they have to cut their finger off. I do believe this could really fix the swearing to God ordeal. 
