Democrats officially remove "So help me God" from oaths

  • Thread starter Thread starter SteelArchangel
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
My local court removed mentions of God from it’s oath and only ask witnesses to affirm that their testimony is true. Personally I’m okay with this; not everyone that appears to testify has belief of a God. Of those that do not everyone necessarily wants to swear by God.
 
Well you know what they say about once God is removed like this…
 
Slippery slope. First this…then the churches are attacked or censored…
 
I understand. On the other hand, a completely secular oath is based on what? Fear of getting charged with perjury and nothing more? Seems so.
 
for those to whom it presents a genuine religion problem, I can see dispensing with it, although JW’s sure weren’t exempted from the draft during wartime.
 
Well, good to know they are tackling the tough issues they were elected for. Thanks for all your service elected officials, I know it’s such a sacrifice! (Sarcasm font on)
 
I read this earlier, this does seem to be just this one committee and maybe in the big picture, this one committee is not that important though, I feel a great wrong nonetheless.
 
If there isn’t any pushback on this, Dems will continue to cut out references to God wherever they can.

Dems should look to the reasoning of the phrase’s inclusion when it’s placed in oaths that are taken before giving testimony to a body of lawmakers.
 
I’ve testified in court cases in several jurisdictions over the past 30 years – I’ve never had that as part of the oath.
 
Even this article admits it’s not universal:
“While many federal oaths include the phrase “So help me God,” some – most notably the presidential oath of office – do not.”
 
1Lord1Faith said:
Dems should look to the reasoning of the phrase’s inclusion when it’s placed in oaths that are taken before giving testimony to a body of lawmakers.
Click to expand...
There’s a book by Melisa Mohr about many other things the origins of oaths by the name of God. It would be against forum rules to mention the name of the book here. But from the account in the book I don’t think that knowing the origins helps much in supporting the practice.

If you are interested in what it is that Mohr wrote I believe there is a video from “Vsauce” on YouTube about why bad words are bad (with the actual bad words filtered out) that in part covers this information.
 
ThinkingSapien said:
If you are interested in what it is that Mohr wrote I believe there is a video from “Vsauce”
Click to expand...
If there was ever a reputable source, I would expect it have a name like Vsauce.

Anyway, here is a collection of quotes that provides some insight into its reason for being used. But first, a good primer:
It was understood that persons in positions of power would have opportunities to do corrupt backroom deals for their own benefit. But if that person believed that God was watching, that He wanted them to be honest, and that He would hold them accountable in the future, that person would hesitate, thinking “even if I get away with this my whole life, I will still be accountable to God in the next.”
Click to expand...
In August of 1831, Alexis de Tocqueville observed a court case: “While I was in America, a witness, who happened to be called at the assizes of the county of Chester (state of New York), declared that he did not believe in the existence of God or in the immortality of the soul. The judge refused to admit his evidence, on the ground that the witness had destroyed beforehand all confidence of the court in what he was about to say.
Click to expand...
Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court stated in Commonwealth v. Wolf (3 Serg. & R. 48, 50, 1817: “Laws cannot be administered in any civilized government unless the people are taught to revere the sanctity of an oath, and look to a future state of rewards and punishments for the deeds of this life.”
Click to expand...
William Linn, unanimously elected the first U.S. House Chaplain, stated May 1, 1789: “Let my neighbor once persuade himself that there is no God, and he will soon pick my pocket, and break not only my leg but my neck. If there be no God, there is no law, no future account; government then is the ordinance of man only, and we cannot be subject for conscience sake.”
Click to expand...
John Adams warned Oct. 11, 1798, in his address to the 1st Brigade, 3rd Division of Massachusetts’ Militia: “We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. … Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
Click to expand...
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wnd.com/2018/12/why-god-is-found-is-so-many-solemn-oaths/amp/
 
SteelArchangel said:
Well you know what they say about once God is removed like this…
Click to expand...
I wonder what Jesus would say about it?

Oh, wait, He already told us –
“Let your ‘Yes’ mean ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No’ mean ‘No.’ Anything more is from the evil one.”
 
1Lord1Faith said:
If there was ever a reputable source, I would expect it have a name like Vsauce.
Click to expand...
It’s the most immediately accessible source. There are other sources but they are essentially behind paywalls or real walls (ex: your local library).

Melisa Mohr has a PhD, but as the book that she published some of her work in was about people using language to swearing/make oaths, speak of the sacred, and profaning the sacred (profanities) it has some material that I wouldn’t directly link to from here in CAF.

So goes back a lot further on the practice of making oaths and the beliefs from which it grew.
 
Last edited:
This seems totally appropriate in a secular republic that claims separation of Church and state. Americans rejected a religious based form of government (the monarchy) 250 years ago.
Perhaps that was the mistake. This is the natural fruit of a secular republic. President Trump was elected by the will of secular people, not anointed with sacred chrism as a Christian monarch is… why would God factor into solemn government oaths in this context?
 
SteelArchangel said:
More and more of God is being eliminated.
Click to expand...
the national dems don’t follow the rule of God in many of their programs, this is just the beginning.

in 2012 when some dems wanted to remove God from the platform, the voice vote was a toss-up. the chairman called it a no but the boo’s called him wrong.
 
SteelArchangel said:
More and more of God is being eliminated.
Click to expand...
What if the oath said “so help you Buddha”? or “Allah”? or “Gods”?

We should all remember what’s is implied in the 1st Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause that all too often got ignored in our past. We do not have an official religion here in the States according to our Constitution, so I would suggest that this should be reflected in our official public oaths.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top