Proposed revision to oath of US citizenship.

Sep 13 07:05 UTC 2003

Sep 12, 2003

Existing and Revised Versions of Citizenship Oath

The Associated Press 

The current citizenship oath: 

I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and
abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate,
state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject
or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution
and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign
and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the
same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required
by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the
Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will
perform work of national importance under civilian direction
when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely,
without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.

The proposed new oath that now will be revised: 

Solemnly, freely, and without any mental reservation, I hereby renounce
under oath all allegiance to any foreign state. My fidelity and
allegiance from this day forward is to the United States of America. I
pledge to support, honor and be loyal to the United States, its
Constitution and laws. Where and if lawfully required, I further commit
myself to defend the Constitution and laws of the United
States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, either by military,
noncombatant, or civilian service. This I do solemnly swear, so
help me God. 

AP-ES-09-12-03 2120EDT 

response 2 of 36:

Sep 13 12:59 UTC 2003

(Some people do read those licenses, y'know.)

The point is to place loyalty to the "United States" above loyalty to the
Constitution:  "that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws
of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic;
that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same" (current oath) vs
"My fidelity and allegiance from this day forward is to the United States
of America. I pledge to support, honor and be loyal to the United States,
its Constitution and laws" (proposed oath).  NB: 'the same' in the current
oath refers to the Constitution, _not_ the United States.

It's a subtle difference, but it's an important one.

How can I prevent this travesty?

response 4 of 36:

Sep 13 15:11 UTC 2003

By what Authority is this change to be made?

response 6 of 36:

Sep 14 06:31 UTC 2003

I think your characterization of it is pretty stupid. I presume you mean
that it appears pretty futile suggesting that "so help me God" be removed
from oaths in an America where it is unconstitutional. But big changes
have small beginnings, and consistent upholding of a good is better than
silently submitting to the bad. There are some encouraging signs, such as
courts finding "under god" in the pledge unconstitional, and the eviction
from a courthouse of a stone religios idol. Some of these successes will,
of course, be fought, and things will regress here and there, but I
believe that eventually our fundamental constitutional provisions will
prevail.

response 8 of 36:

Sep 14 14:16 UTC 2003

I believe there's a way to take the citizenship oath by affirming, rather than
swearing, so you wouldn't have to say the "God" thing.  That's true for court
testimony.

response 12 of 36:

Sep 14 19:03 UTC 2003

What about a compromise: eliminate the religious citation and make the
official version some kind of affirmation, but provide in separate
legislatiion for people to substitute their own preferred version of
affirmation from whatever their beliefs are. Then religion is not forced upon
anyone while at the same time the free practice thereof is not prevented.

response 14 of 36:

Sep 14 22:43 UTC 2003

That's where you're wrong.  Opposing the "principles of this nation," as 
you put it, and acting to destroy the them are two very different things.  
The former is expressly accepted, and the latter is not.

If what you suggest were true, then the definitions could easily be 
expanded to make your staement mean that anyone who expresses opposition 
to any law should be expelled.

response 16 of 36:

Sep 14 23:23 UTC 2003

So you're saying that anyone who supports any amendment to the 
constitution does not belong here?

response 18 of 36:

Sep 15 17:07 UTC 2003

Article 6, Sec 3 of the US Constitution reads:

"3. 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."

Hence all oaths including the phrase "so help me God", or any other
religious stipulation are and have always been unconstitutional. 

Nevertheless, they are rampant. I did some web surfing on the question and
the subject phrase is everywhere in oaths. Still, in particular cases,
state courts (e.g., South Carolina) have also declared the requirement
unconstitutional and voided such laws. In fact, the laws specifying
oaths in some states, following the closing "So help me God", add
parenthetically ("The last clause is optional.").

response 20 of 36:

Sep 15 17:53 UTC 2003

I'm working on it. The biggest problem will be recalling all the old
currency with the phrase. Perhaps we could send all of that to Iraq.

response 22 of 36:

Sep 16 00:04 UTC 2003

scg, you could just affirm that you will do that, and leave God out, if you
like.

response 24 of 36:

Sep 16 00:32 UTC 2003

I tend to think that requiring people who may not believe in God to 
mouth the words cheapens religion.