Should atheists who refuse to say ‘so help me God’ be excluded from the Air Force?

The Volokh Conspiracy ^ | September 8, 2014 | Eugene Volokh

[right-wing agnostic]

The Stephen Losey (Air Force Times) reports (see also the American Humanist Association’s letter to the Air Force Inspector General):

An atheist airman at Creech Air Force Base in Nevada was denied reenlistment last month for refusing to take an oath containing “so help me God,” the American Humanist Association said Thursday….

Air Force Instruction 36-2606 spells out the active-duty oath of enlistment, which all airmen must take when they enlist or reenlist and ends with “so help me God.” The old version of that AFI included an exception: “Note: Airmen may omit the words ‘so help me God,’ if desired for personal reasons.”

That language was dropped in an Oct. 30, 2013, update to the AFI. The relevant section of that AFI now only lists the active-duty oath of enlistment, without giving airmen any option to choose not to swear an oath to a deity.

[right-wing agnostic]

This seems to me that this is clearly unconstitutional according to art. VI cl. 3 of the U.S. Constitution. Since the military is clearly a federally controlled entity, mandating that a service member to say "So help me God" as part of his oath, it amounts to a religious test to hold office. I'm not saying that I, as an agnostic, am against the oath generally. But dismissing a service member who is unwilling to say "So help me God" is clearly a violation of his constitutional rights. We're heading down a slippery slope by instituting this policy./rwa

[Trapped Behind Enemy Lines]

Yes.

[Ouchthatonehurt]

No. But Heaven is another matter entirely.

[Gay State Conservative]

As a guy who's proud to be,and feels fortunate to be,a Christian I'm not certain that they should be *required* to say it.They should,however,be *allowed* to say it.IIRC when one takes an oath,in a courtroom for example,they're allowed to “swear or affirm”.

[Responsibility2nd]

I think Article Six applies here...

 

All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

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.

[B212]

millions of airman/women, have obeyed the rules....but this lone reject, would like the world to change to suit his concepts....Home hardware looking for stock boys, and there is no pledge of allegiance there....

[drbuzzard]

Personally I think that anyone who doesn’t believe in a god shouldn’t much care if he does say such a thing, and getting bent out of shape over it is indicative of larger issues with the person.

Now granted, I do agree that it is a questionable requirement given freedom of religion.

[lee martell]

We as Christians have bigger fish to fry. This was policy was just started last year. I think someone is trying to keep traditions as they have always been, and I understand why that would be of value. Things have changed, more people are willing to speak put about their honestly held differences. I would be more concerned about someone who would not swear to protect and defend the United States from dangerous intentions. In todays world, you will waste time, energy and money fighting to keep that as a requirement.

[gdani]

When Government requires belief in a god (or gods) from anyone then religious freedom, by definition, does not exist.

[Olog-hai]

There are no “bigger fish to fry” than problems of private morality. You knock over a society’s foundations, it cannot stand.

[Olog-hai]

Herbert Hoover apparently omitted “So help me God” from his oath of office.

This country was founded by men whose slogan was “No king but King Jesus”.

[southernmann]

I don’t really think that’s our call, is it?

[SkyDancer]

Since atheists don’t believe that G-d is real to them what would be the big deal? Just say “yeah, yeah, whatever” ... like saying the Chevy VOLT is the best car out there.

[vetvetdoug]

This Airman already has a problem with authority and with this action shows that he would be a liability to his mates and his officers. Without any belief or respect of a higher being, this arrogance becomes a liability to those charged with the duty of a superior. In an extremely stressful situation, he has no one with which to ask for comfort other than his own arrogance. If he were to lay dieing would he be afforded a chaplain to comfort him into passing? Even if one were to give a rock to a Pagan, the Pagan would take comfort in that the Earth would see him pass. The atheist has only himself.

The military is not for everyone, it works only if there is respect for authority and faith in others. What purpose does one get from refusing to say, so help me God? If one doesn't believe it then it doesn't mean a thing to go ahead and say it.

This man is a troublemaker and is not material to have others depend upon him for anything. This is my opinion.

[southernmann]

Who among us should be the fryer of private morality?

[all the best]

I believe the Bible says to let your yeahs be yeahs and nays be nays. No need to invoke the name of God in such an affair. If a man’s word is not good it hardly matters what he invokes.

[C19fan]

Those English Catholics were troublemakers for fighting for 150 years to remove oaths requiring them to deny Transubstantiation and stating other Catholic beliefs were “superstitious and idolatrous” in order to serve in the Royal Navy or British Army or hold any public office in the UK.

[RJS1950]

No, the action to exclude the airman from reenlistment barring any other disciplinary or performance issues is illegal. I reenlisted numerous airman during the 80s and 90s and enlisted my son into the army in the 90s. I remember that they were told that when repeating the oath they could omit the reference to God. That may have been unofficial policy at the time but their oaths were considered fully taken. They are swearing an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, not any particular belief.

[NRA1995]

Yes

[Mr Rogers]

According to public law, the words are required. Congress specified the exact wording and gave no one authority to delete it.

I think it is wrong, but this is a problem with Congress, not the military. When the AFI was revised, they simply corrected it to align the AFI with the law Congress passed. The USAF has no say in the matter.