Republican Wants to Force Military Cadets to Swear an Oath Containing So Help Me God

Timshel

New member
Oversight of the NSA... no, but remove a religious oath and the supposed limited government conservatives take an interest.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friend...dets-swear-an-oath-containing-so-help-me-god/

Sam Johnson (R-TX), once named the most conservative Member of Congress by National Journal, thinks atheists in the military should be forced to acknowledge God and swear a pledge to the Almighty. He’s even introduced a bill to make that happen.

On his blog, he writes:
In response to the U.S. Air Force Academy’s unilateral decision to make the phrase, ‘so help me God’ of the Cadet Honor Oath optional, I introduced H.R. 3416, a bill that would require congressional approval prior to any change to Oaths of Office. I was joined by original co-sponsor Congressman Pete Olson (TX-22).

Our Founding Fathers declared we are, “One nation under God,” and you better believe I’ll fight like mad to keep it that way. I can tell you from experience, there are no atheists in foxholes. We are the land of the free because of the brave. Many people don’t know this, but when you survive a near-death experience you realize that the only thing you had to hold on to was your faith in God.​
 
pretty sure you can switch it out and say "i affirm" instead or something like that, right?

You can say I do swear or I do affirm. But other than that it's part of the oath. Also all awards, promotion warrants, official announcements and such are dated "In the Year of our Lord".

I'm just not seeing it as a big deal. I mean, making it a matter of law is stupid, no question. But the whole issue itself seems...well dumb.
 
The Air Force has decided to make it optional. It, obviously, should be.

Well, I'm not AF so I wouldn't know. But again, I just don't see why either side should really get worked up over it. It's not like people take the substantive part of the oath seriously, why should we give a damn about to what power we are swearing it.
 
Well, I'm not AF so I wouldn't know. But again, I just don't see why either side should really get worked up over it. It's not like people take the substantive part of the oath seriously, why should we give a damn about to what power we are swearing it.

Why should you have to swear to a power at all?
 
Well, I'm not AF so I wouldn't know. But again, I just don't see why either side should really get worked up over it. It's not like people take the substantive part of the oath seriously, why should we give a damn about to what power we are swearing it.

The USAF decided to change it after receiving complaints. It should not be a big deal. Nobody sued, they just noted their distaste for that part of the oath. This guy wants to make it a big deal and pass legislation intended to prevent it.
 
Well, I'm not AF so I wouldn't know. But again, I just don't see why either side should really get worked up over it. It's not like people take the substantive part of the oath seriously, why should we give a damn about to what power we are swearing it.


then it should not exist at all.
 
Back
Top