Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Lurking Libertarian
...no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

The use of a Bible in the swearing-in ceremony does not constitute any sort of religious test, and it certainly does not fit the language of the portion of the Constitution that you quoted.

Actually, too, the option is therein provided that one may eitehr take an oath or give an affirmation, which provides an out for ANYONE who might have a persoanl thing about swearing on a Bible. Ellison should man up and take that option instead of raising all this stink about the Koran. Do you really think every officeholder in U.S. history has sworn their oath of office on the King James Bible?

The VAST majorty have, and without so much as batting an eyelash.

But, please, name for me those who have not.

137 posted on 11/30/2006 1:00:35 PM PST by HKMk23 (PRO-LIFE: Because a Person's a Person, no matter how small.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies ]


To: HKMk23
But, please, name for me those who have not.

I am certain Joe Lieberman and most of the other Jewish officeholders have used Jewish, rather than Protestant, Bibles. It is also likely that most Catholic officeholders have used the Douay Bible or some other Catholic Bible, rather than the Protestant KJV. In other threads on this topic (there have been at least three over the past few days), it was posted that three U.S. Presidents (Franklin Pierce, Teddy Roosevelt, and I forget the third) took the oath of office without any book at all.

139 posted on 11/30/2006 1:55:47 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies ]

To: HKMk23

"The use of a Bible in the swearing-in ceremony does not constitute any sort of religious test, and it certainly does not fit the language of the portion of the Constitution that you quoted."

Well, that wasn't addressed to me, but since I also mentioned the "no religious tests" clause I thought it would be OK if I responded to this comment.

Of course, it is not a violation of the "no religious tests" clause for an office-holder to swear on a Bible -- IF THAT IS HIS CHOICE. It would, in fact, be a violation of another constitutional clause -- freedom of religion -- to say he COULDN'T swear on a book that is sacred to him.

It would, however, be a violation of both the "no religious tests" clause and the freedom of religion clause, to REQUIRE a person to either swear on a Bible, or renounce holding public office in the US -- as Mr. Praeger misguidedly suggested in his article.


148 posted on 12/06/2006 1:16:19 PM PST by EdJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson