CreateDebate


Debate Info

10
8
Bible, as it's been. US Constitution.
Debate Score:18
Arguments:27
Total Votes:20
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Bible, as it's been. (7)
 
 US Constitution. (6)

Debate Creator

Mint_tea(2531) pic



When the President is sworn in, should he take his oath on the Bible or the Constitution?

When a President is sworn into office he usually places his hand on the Bible to give his oath.  Should that be changed to swear the oath upon the US Constitution as that is what he is upholding?

Bible, as it's been.

Side Score: 10
VS.

US Constitution.

Side Score: 8
2 points

Bible. It's comforting to know our President swears on top of the stories of murders, rapes, and slavering, all in the name of God. That makes him kind of a bad @ss.

Side: Bible, as it's been.

Hahahahaha oh my God I fucking. love your posting style.

Side: Bible, as it's been.
1 point

LOL, nice. I don't know if it's as comforting to me though.....

Side: Bible, as it's been.

Since the Oath is always meaningless and every president is inevitably acting on behalf of their sponsors and career's longevity rather than on behalf of the American people (especially not on the behalf of those who voted the other parties) then I'd rather they tarnish the Bible's value with their fake Oath rather than the US constitution which is a little more sacred in my eyes.

Side: Bible, as it's been.
1 point

That is an interesting take on it. Personally I think it would hold more weight to be sworn in under the US Constitution since that is what he or she would be swearing to uphold.

Side: Bible, as it's been.

When taking an oath on the Bible, you are swearing to God and to the law of the land that what you are saying is the truth.

Over 80% of Americans identify as Christians, and it is harder for them to lie when swearing to God that what they are saying will be the truth.

When the President is sworn in, he is declaring an oath to both God and Constitution.

Only political correct insecure bigots would have a problem with taking an oath on the Bible. It's a symbol of our nation's Christian heritage.

If you are not a Christian, all you are doing is swearing to tell the truth. You are not being forced to be a Christian.

Side: Bible, as it's been.
Mint_tea(2531) Clarified
2 points

Only political correct insecure bigots would have a problem with taking an oath on the Bible. It's a symbol of our nation's Christian heritage.

The same could be said of someone having an issue with it being taken on the US Constitution. That is more a symbol of our heritage than Christianity is. America is a melting pot of culture and religions, yet we unite under our rights and privileges given to us by our forefathers.

To be clear, I am not attacking your thought on this, it is also one that I've considered as well (with regards to it carrying a weight of the soul -religious- when you swear upon the bible), I am playing devils advocate if you will, so I would like a cordial discussion from you please. The President isn't sworn to uphold Christian religion, however he/she is sworn to uphold the constitution. Do you not think that would hold more weight?

Side: Bible, as it's been.
FromWithin(5476) Clarified
1 point

He is not swearing to uphold the Bible! He's swearing to uphold the constitution, and doing so by putting his hand on the Bible, swearing he is not lying when saying yes.

What are you missing?

Side: Bible, as it's been.
EldonG(544) Disputed
1 point

"It's harder for them to lie..." Really? Name me one president that hasn't lied, in my lifetime. Many presidents rank among the most accomplished liars in the world.

Side: US Constitution.
2 points

Absolutely the Constitution. It's not required that they're sworn in by oath on the bible, incidentally - Roosevelt didn't, according to my information - and to make it a requirement is, in fact, against the first amendment. It's the Constitution they're sworn to protect, not the bible, nor is our law biblical law...and it damn well shouldn't be.

Side: US Constitution.
2 points

People need to understand that this country was pretty much created for religious freedom and to be free of England. The president should swear on the constitution to promise to obey the basic laws of our founding fathers. Swearing on a bible is basically calling this country prominently Catholic/Christian. And that's not the reason this country exists.

Side: US Constitution.
1 point

I swear, you "christians" never read that book you swear on:

"But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation."

KJV, James 5:12

Side: US Constitution.
1 point

If he is swearing to uphold the constitution, then shouldn't it be that way? Honestly, not everyone believes everything the Bible says. They should swear on the constitution instead. Though I do like Grenache's response on the topic ;-)

Side: US Constitution.