by Valentine Logar

Created on: September 02, 2007   Last Updated: April 14, 2009

A important first question is what is the purpose of using the Bible as the prop for swearing in ceremonies and in courts of law. Does swearing on the Bible mean that the truth of the statements to follow will have more meaning or be more truthful? What if this isn't the Holy book the person making their oath believes in? What if the person being sworn in isn't Christian? Or even they are Christian but this isn't the version of the Bible that they follow, remember that there are several versions of the Christian Bible and they can be distinctly different in their interpretations.

Does it make sense to ask a Muslim, Jew, Buddhist, Hindu, Pagan, Agnostic, or Atheist to swear on a Christian Holy book? Will their promises or sworn testimony under these circumstances have veracity? We are a country of diverse religious beliefs; why do we continue too demand swearing in ceremonies be taken on a single religions Holy Book? Would it not make more sense to ask a person to swear on the Holy Book or other item of their personal faith? Then there are those of the Christian faith who believe that swearing on the Bible or in Gods name is itself a sin.

I find myself at a loss to understand why in the 21st century we continue too cling to the belief that testimony sworn or promises given on the Bible will be any truer than other testimony or promise. We are not still so superstitious that we believe the promise breaker or perjurer will suddenly be struck with boils due to his lack of honesty under oath, are we? Certainly we are not so awestruck by the Christian Holy book that we believe an oath sworn by those of another faith will be binding on them.

Isn't it time that we evaluate this particular ritual? We have a diverse culture within this country with varied religious beliefs. This mixture includes all of the major world religious, as well as, many schisms of Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. It is now time to revise our swearing in rites to be more inclusive of our population. Shouldn't our ceremonies include recognition of our diversity? I was recently called for jury duty and in a room of approximately 300 people of clearly diverse backgrounds we were asked too stand and take an oath. Included in this oath was the promise "so help us God" that we would serve too our best ability as jurors if selected. We were asked to repeat these words, I did not repeat those words as I will not make oaths to God, not to any God. I was fortunately sent home without being selected but the person standing next to me in that room full of people noted that I did not repeat those words and asked me why. I explained that I objected to the wording and also explained that I did not owe her an explanation. Had I been selected I would have also refused any oath on a Bible or that included the words "so help me God".

The use of a single form, the Bible, as proof of truth telling is outmoded and fails to recognize the diverse nature of this country. Submission to an oath on a religious artificat to prove the veracity of ones honor or words is a relic of our superstitious past and one that we should move foward from. If we must require some artifact upon which to swear our oaths of office or oaths of truth telling, at least let us make certain they are relevant to the one being sworn it may be still they will be foresorn as so many others have before them. But in this way at least the rituals will be more personally relevant than they are today.

Learn more about this author, Valentine Logar.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.