Should the Bible have any place in the Inauguration?

This nation was not founded on the Bible or the Ten Commandments. In fact, freedom was the foundation of this nation, including freedom of (and from) religion. Agree or disagree, but all evidence points to that.

What I'd like to discuss, though, are the points made in this segment of The Last Word, especially this:

“We will ensure that whoever delivers the benediction rejects the same parts of the Bible that President Obama rejects and most Democrats reject, even though every word of the Bible is the word of God,” O’Donnell said. “As I’ve pointed out … no one accepts all of the teachings of the Bible. No one. … Still, the president, following one of our most absurdest traditions in the government that invented the separation of church and state, will put his hand on this book filled with things he does not believe – filled with things that no one in the United States of America believes – and with his hand on this book he will recite the oath of office. ”

(Bold and italics are mine, not O'Donnell's)

The video is worth watching, too - especially when he talks about the parts of the Bible that command death to prostitutes, death to those who work on the Sabbath, etc.

Answer Question

SHARE THIS QUESTION:

Asked by jsbenkert at 1:40 PM on Jan. 11, 2013 in Religious Debate

87630 Level 37

Answers (24)

I don't see the issue here so long as the President has the choice! If we were electing a Non-Christian, she/he shouldn't have to swear on a bible. They should have their choice as to what they want to swear on. It could be their own holy book or the constitution. The point is not really WHAT they are swearing on, but that they are swearing and that they feel a connection to whatever "higher power" they feel they are "signing that contract" with.

Answer by SabrinaMBowen at 1:04 PM on Jan. 29, 2013
Credits: 122985 Level 40 Religious Debate Major

Found an answer to your question?
Like us on Facebook!
I think it's extremely odd. Butterfly is spot on, POTUS should swear on the COTUS (sounds like a good rally sign) AND furthermore, if he breaks any of the rules of the COTUS or the Bill of RIghts, he should be tried for treason, and punished accordingly. ( like he has already done so much, with his executive orders, not just him but many of our presidents.)

I do take issue with the notion that this nation was formed with freedom being the foundation. Freedom if you were a white male with money. Ask the Native Americans and then the slaves how much freedom they enjoyed!

Answer by JackieGirl007 at 3:47 PM on Jan. 14, 2013
Credits: 72114 Level 35 Religious Debate Major

Found an answer to your question?
Like us on Facebook!
“As I’ve pointed out … no one accepts all of the teachings of the Bible. No one. … Still, the president, following one of our most absurdest traditions in the government that invented the separation of church and state, will put his hand on this book filled with things he does not believe – filled with things that no one in the United States of America believes – and with his hand on this book he will recite the oath of office. ” I'm sorry, but that simply isn't true. There are people that believe everything in the Bible or else the book would've faded into history centuries ago.

Since the president isn't forced to use the Bible it's not braking any laws. I see this as no different that putting one's hand on the Bible before testifying in court (which is also a choice, not a requirement) or the many references to God throughout our government.

Answer by HHx5 at 8:48 AM on Jan. 12, 2013
Credits: 16828 Level 23 Religious Debate Minor

Found an answer to your question?
Like us on Facebook!
The whole putting hands on a holy book and swearing thing seems like some kind of folk magic to me. How does the book make your swearing more true?

Answer by SWasson at 4:55 PM on Jan. 11, 2013
Credits: 104118 Level 38 Religious Debate Minor

Found an answer to your question?
Like us on Facebook!
But what he puts his hand on has no bearing on... well, anything. Though the president has to be sworn in to be acknowledged as the President he could place his hand on a box of chocolates if that is what was meaningful to him. By banning his ability to choose what book he 'swears' or 'affirms' on that is imposing on his freedom.

Answer by But_Mommie at 3:18 PM on Jan. 11, 2013
Credits: 169774 Level 43 Religious Debate Minor

Found an answer to your question?
Like us on Facebook!
Not only should it not be done it should be banned. Our presidents should be swearing on our constitution as this is what they are to uphold. Not one chosen religion over another.

Answer by sahmamax2 at 3:12 PM on Jan. 11, 2013
Credits: 73412 Level 35 Religious Debate Degree

Found an answer to your question?
Like us on Facebook!
*John Quincy Adams.

Answer by But_Mommie at 2:56 PM on Jan. 11, 2013
Credits: 169774 Level 43 Religious Debate Minor

Found an answer to your question?
Like us on Facebook!
Even Quincy Adam's choice was for show. He swore in on the book of law not because he disagreed with the Bible but because he wanted to make a statement about the separation of church and state. I wonder if he believed in everything inside that Law book...?

Answer by But_Mommie at 2:55 PM on Jan. 11, 2013
Credits: 169774 Level 43 Religious Debate Minor

Found an answer to your question?
Like us on Facebook!
I think it doesn't matter- no matter what your hand is on - the oath is what comes out of your mouth the rest is all for show.

Answer by But_Mommie at 2:53 PM on Jan. 11, 2013
Credits: 169774 Level 43 Religious Debate Minor

Found an answer to your question?
Like us on Facebook!
So . . . should the president (or anyone) swear on a book, the contents of which he or she does not believe? Is it meaningful if the person does not believe in the book, or the bulk of it?

Comment by jsbenkert (original poster) at 2:51 PM on Jan. 11, 2013
Credits: 87630 Level 37 Religious Debate Degree