I mean for people who were impactful enough in the space race history he's likely the best pick. Especially since he wasn't a former OG Nazi, which a lot of them can't say.
I am fine with people who truly believe in the morals and guidence that a holy book attempts to teach swearing on it if they actually believe in it. The idea is supposd to be that the fear/shame/judgement of betraying some ideal that is greater to them would keep them in line.
It's not just the US, it's standard procedure in most of the world. In many places it is legally considered a contract, in part because you literally can't use the 'tl;dr' excuse, or do something like get a work contract nullified because of form errors, and then skirt obligations, because you were present, repeated the lines and are made aware of the severity in the presence of your superiors.
Something that you swear on as in to help hold you to your oath, tying your oath to another bond to help ensure it is not broken. "We swears on the Precious!" If you can't, by nature or situation, afford to trust someone enough at just their word, it backs it up.
I can lie on the ring or the Bible or anything. Proof, people do all the time. I think they’re just poking fun at the ritual of it as if the act itself holds power.
If something is important to someone a ritual does hold power. Marriage is a ritual, celebrating any of the winter holidays is a ritual, eating with family or friends is a ritual. The power it holds might not be physical in manefestation, but it is no less real.
So, in the U.S. this is taken from Masonic tradition and we refer to the book you swear an oath by as a "sacred book of law" and that whoever was taking the oath was at liberty to decide what that means to them and pick the book. The principal is that you are beholdant to something greater than yourself, so the book must carry personal weight. For a scientist and engineering organization, a book on the laws of physics is incredibly appropriate and I find this oddly touching.
I had to swear a very official binding oath recently, I live in Scotland, and was still swearing to god. Felt so weird, I was kinda taken aback, actually took a second of processing before I could repeat it instead of blurting out "wtf seriously?" or something. Felt wrong, given that made it meaningless to me, I thought here we'd be swearing on something more... real...? No offence intended to anyone, just figured that would be secular here.
In court you don't have to use a bible or even reference God. Seems not very progressive to make you perform a "religious" act. What if you were a Pastafarian or one of the minor religions such as Muslim?
Exactly, I was sure this country was more secular than that, I've never had to do that in court, but it was some offshoot of the courts that officiated the oath for me, so I was kinda shocked. Still said the words to get the document, didn't like doing it.
Is that "The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark"? Very nice read. In it Carl describes things which we are now all experiencing (keeping people dumb to lord over them; the dark future of internet/social media, ...)
No. Look on Amazon and you'll see that book jacket is from Pale Blue Dot. I have read Demon-Haunted World. My only criticism of it was that after he proved his point, he proved it again and again and again. Admire the heck out of him. There's also a story behind the pale blue dot photo that you have likely already heard.
"From this distant vantage point, the Earth might not seem of any particular interest. But for us, it's different. Consider again that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and
destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam." -- Carl Sagan, Pale Blue Dot
a man wrote carl sagan's book too... the issue with the bible wasn't that humans wrote it... it was that they were lying and making up explanations for events that they clearly didn't understand. any actual "creator of the universe" should know that if even one star 'fell to earth like a fig leaf' there wouldn't BE an earth afterwards... but no... revelation claims lots of stars fall to earth and... it still goes on... earth is still here... those trumpet playing angels haven't even arrived yet.
If it were actually written by god then it would actually be the word of god, which is what it is purported to be. As it stands now, it is the word of man and therefore isn't trustworthy because the very origin of the text is ground in a lie. I dunno about you, but I tend to have more trust in things that accurately represent their origins/background/basis/etc. than things that don't and a lot less in things that lie from the start.
But why the assumption Yahweh wouldn't lie or make stuff up? There are things in that book that are patently wrong or contradict other parts of the book. There are "plot holes" that are quite significant. And at no point, it is established that said diety is a trustworthy source on itself or the world.
I'm not disagreeing with that point at all: a diety could lie. But when a book is supposed to be the word of god but is actually the word of man, then the book itself is a lie. If it were at least writen by god, then at least that part would be true, but it isn't. Whether or not what it says is a lie (which given the contradictions in the bible would seem to indicate yes - it's a pack of lies) doesn't actually matter once you realize that origin is based in a lie. None of it can be trusted then.
It wouldn't proof much about their nature or trustworthyness. Mythology is full of deceitful deities and figures. Even abrahamic mythology has those prominently. And the second question would be: Are they "supernatural" or are they just other "godlike" natural beings, like they love to throw around in Star Trek a lot.
Some moron who couldn't even pronounce "bible" correctly, claiming Obama didn't swear in on a bible (fact check: 1st time he put his hand on a bible that had been used by Lincoln, second time he put his hand on two: the same Lincoln Bible AND one used by MLK) and his presidency was supposedly invalid because of it. Which is BS. You could swear the oath while placing your hands on a Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue, a Spiderman comic or god forbid, Mein Kampf, and it would be valid.
Some "news" guy (Probably Fox news? That type, anyway) who was whining that someone non-christian might not use a bible when swearing an oath of office. That was his dazed expression when told that people are legally allowed to swear on anything, as a constitutional right.
See, that's the kind of ignorance to your job that should get someone Immediately fired for gross negligence.
But then if we did that, we'd basically be destroying the entire Republican party, and where would we be then? A much better world. And Conservatives can't have that!
My friend doesn’t watch much political commentary and I’m not very good at explaining…would you be so kind to provide some context for the person in this situation?
This guy was under the impression that you can only swear an oath on the bible, and when the news anchor in the live feed corrected him, this dudes brain just did a full reboot.
Yes, is there anything else anyone is unsure about when it comes to swearing an oath on something? I'd be happy to let you know if you can for other objects as well.
What even would be an oath for NASA leadership? Do yoy swear to chuck rockets into the sky and be a building block in broadening humanities aspirations further than this ball of dirt?
It's redhat political. The guy who discovered the 3 laws of planetary motion was german astronomer Johannes Kepler. Ergo, the NASA director is an Oathkepler.
McDonald's? Probably. Being in charge of a large government department with thousands of employees, works with civilians and military, and has to budget taxpayer money while working with Congress? Not really. Even just enlisted have to take an oath and they have far less authority or resources.
I work in the NHS with millions of employees and fully funded by the tax payer and there's no oaths to the Royal family that need to be taken, even at the highest levels. I was just commenting on a cultural quirk, no offence intended.
It's archaic in the sense that is purely ceremonial. If you're the type to take an oath seriously, you are also going to be the type that's going to give an honest effort at maintaining good ethics whether you take an oath or not. Conversely, someone who's going to do shit like take bribes or sell info to enemy countries isn't going to stop and go "Oh, wait... shoot. I did promise I wouldn't, I suppose."
Yes it is ceremonial, being part of a ceremony kind of gives that away. An oath doesn't now, nor has it ever, magically kept anyone from breaking it, but that isn't the purpose of an oath. People steal but you don't make stealing legal just because the law doesn't keep it from happening. One doesn't have to attend their school/university graduation but most will; being ceremonial doesn't mean a thing has no value.
Ceremony doesn't carry the same practical value that degrees or laws do, though. A degree is evidence of formal education. Laws carry enforceable consequences. Oaths, without a backing law or contract, well... don't. I'm not saying they're meaningless (meaning in this context is subjective), but they absolutely are archaic. They're old-fashioned and done for tradition's sake, which is the very definition of the term.
Theres also some practicality behind it as NASA replaced the USAF's space program as a show of goodwill that the US wasnt exploiting space for military programs, NASA being a civilian organization. The oath is probably a hold over from that time
I didn't know you could do no book. That makes that news segment with the redneck politician talking about someone who didn't swear on the bible even funnier
Remember this is an oath because that person is in a government position while I agree a regular civilian should not swear an oath of loyalty to a nations constitution I do agree that people in positions of government no matter how minor should be required to swear an oath of loyalty to said nations governing documents as being in such a position is one where even at minor levels there is greater damage to the citizenry of said nation that can occur if they were to be loyal to some other party.
The purpose of this oath is so that we are supposed to be able to punish those who break that oath by acting for other entities behalf’s. For instance having taken that oath and then using his position as president to be more loyal to Putin than he was to the United States should be something Donald Trump Should be punished for. In theory that oath exists so we can punish those in power when they sell out to a foreign body.
(I mean, I *get* it. We do it here in Norway too, all government officials swear a one-sentence oath of office that boils down to "obedience and loyalty to Constitution and King". "So help me God" optional. They can also choose to "confirm" the oath, rather than swear it. Making it more like, well, a formal contract than an archaic oath.)
Yeah, but I am more than happy to break an oath that I swear to invisible cloud man. I'd be more honest swearing an oath on a cute little bee. At least that is real, and too cute to disappoint. But demanding truth by promising a lie that you aren't lying?
No shit, don't be stupid. That's why she's not using a Bible. "God" may be on paper but you can swear to whomever you want. That point is only there as a personal thing. "I honor/respect x enough that I wouldn't do these bad things because that would be akin to disrespecting x"
....no? "I promise I'm doing this job because I want to do the job. I don't hate you guys and am not actively wanting/trying to bring you down. I'm not trying to sabotage your shit or join just to benefit by selling your secrets to someone else. " that's the tldr. How is that racist by any means
Funny how he thinks as command in chief, the highest military position wouldn't have to take an oath to defend the country, which is the whole purpose of the position.
And they still have to bring God into it. I get that we started as banished puritans but can't we accept that there is a very high percentage of the population that doesn't have faith in diety and would still perform these job duties to the highest standards? Can't we just omit God from the dialog? The only purpose I can think of for it is to guilt believers into celestial pressure from the all seeing eye. Religion is in decline and I hope future generations will be spared this ignorance soon.
Though required by law if it is to be an oath, you actually can omit it, though it becomes an affirmation and not an oath. Also the president is specifically not required to add it in their oath of office, possibly Lincoln was the first to add it.
IIRC you don't *have* to say 'so help me god' you just have to swear on *something*, from my recollection. 'my god' is just the default phrase, I believe
Targe0
I mean for people who were impactful enough in the space race history he's likely the best pick. Especially since he wasn't a former OG Nazi, which a lot of them can't say.
TwoSpeedTony
dohcohv
westPAguy
enderite
A book worth swearing on, finally.
RatsLiveOnNoEvilStar
I am fine with people who truly believe in the morals and guidence that a holy book attempts to teach swearing on it if they actually believe in it. The idea is supposd to be that the fear/shame/judgement of betraying some ideal that is greater to them would keep them in line.
enderite
Sure. Swear on whatever is meaningful to you. Just taking a pot shot at the most commonly used item for it in the US.
spattr
Poetry in motion
galapas
enderite
okiedokiesmokey
Oh thats nice .Saved for later use .
Otomasoteraph
Science, bitch!
proxy5000
SauronsLeftNut
aww it was the late 40's everyone was doing it :)
proxy5000
XD & then there I was, trying to understand why USA supports IDF, well, somehow this image appeared
APuffOfAirTicklingYourNose
DanimalRC
Hhhhmmmmm … I feel like some of these points have been missed. :(
ThisUsernameIsTaken123
khora
Why is the USA still having grown ups do pinky promises?
enderite
We’re not really responsible to act without adults anymore. I mean… look at the state of it?
Erdanya
It's not just the US, it's standard procedure in most of the world. In many places it is legally considered a contract, in part because you literally can't use the 'tl;dr' excuse, or do something like get a work contract nullified because of form errors, and then skirt obligations, because you were present, repeated the lines and are made aware of the severity in the presence of your superiors.
khora
I'm not finding a country breakdown of oathswearing. Would be interesting to know.
Crowlands
Sure, but what does having your hand on your favourite book/a fairy tale you've almost definitely never read have to do with it?
KingXizor
Something that you swear on as in to help hold you to your oath, tying your oath to another bond to help ensure it is not broken. "We swears on the Precious!" If you can't, by nature or situation, afford to trust someone enough at just their word, it backs it up.
enderite
I can lie on the ring or the Bible or anything. Proof, people do all the time. I think they’re just poking fun at the ritual of it as if the act itself holds power.
KingXizor
If something is important to someone a ritual does hold power. Marriage is a ritual, celebrating any of the winter holidays is a ritual, eating with family or friends is a ritual. The power it holds might not be physical in manefestation, but it is no less real.
Tyggna
So, in the U.S. this is taken from Masonic tradition and we refer to the book you swear an oath by as a "sacred book of law" and that whoever was taking the oath was at liberty to decide what that means to them and pick the book.
The principal is that you are beholdant to something greater than yourself, so the book must carry personal weight. For a scientist and engineering organization, a book on the laws of physics is incredibly appropriate and I find this oddly touching.
IndianaJawns
N0tDave
I'd sooner trust someone swearing in on a Carl Sagan or even an Eckhart Tolle book before the bible.
earthling2211
This is cool.
TheSilverSeraph
EMHPicardo
EvilMasterBetty
Golly
TheDaharMaster
blurp9000
FallingStar7669
They really went for that book slap. That had to tingle after several takes.
KyndMiki
what's the source?
MarsIsAfire
Zero Hour!
ThisOldCPU
JohnSatclaire
That tagline really, uh, hits different after mid-September 2001
dualplains
I think this is from Airplane 2
Hashbrown123
Surely you can't be serious?
ward5x5
I am and don't call me Shirley
verysmoov
I had to swear a very official binding oath recently, I live in Scotland, and was still swearing to god. Felt so weird, I was kinda taken aback, actually took a second of processing before I could repeat it instead of blurting out "wtf seriously?" or something. Felt wrong, given that made it meaningless to me, I thought here we'd be swearing on something more... real...? No offence intended to anyone, just figured that would be secular here.
KipperFillets
In court you don't have to use a bible or even reference God. Seems not very progressive to make you perform a "religious" act. What if you were a Pastafarian or one of the minor religions such as Muslim?
verysmoov
Exactly, I was sure this country was more secular than that, I've never had to do that in court, but it was some offshoot of the courts that officiated the oath for me, so I was kinda shocked. Still said the words to get the document, didn't like doing it.
cosonfused
do you swear to tell the truth and nothing but the truth, so help you science?
cuddleskunk
If I ever have to swear an oath on a book, I think it would be hilarious to do so on Horton Hears a Who.
zenoshogun
Not just hilarious but actually quite fitting for some roles.
lljkstonefish
Spaceflight for dummies
Iblamemyparentstoo
Good for her!
BurrhusBacchus
TinyLiehon
Is that "The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark"? Very nice read. In it Carl describes things which we are now all experiencing (keeping people dumb to lord over them; the dark future of internet/social media, ...)
whycanttheygetgirlfriends
No. Look on Amazon and you'll see that book jacket is from Pale Blue Dot. I have read Demon-Haunted World. My only criticism of it was that after he proved his point, he proved it again and again and again. Admire the heck out of him. There's also a story behind the pale blue dot photo that you have likely already heard.
TinyLiehon
I can relate. Have to prove again and again as well on the internet
whycanttheygetgirlfriends
"From this distant vantage point, the Earth might not seem of any particular interest. But for us, it's different. Consider again that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and
whycanttheygetgirlfriends
destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam." -- Carl Sagan, Pale Blue Dot
coffeebaby
Good. Fuck the Bible (figuratively). God didn't write it. Man did. Therefore nothing in it can be trusted.
RPCharImages
SomethingSomething The Muses ensure the Bible is written correctly SomethingSomething Religion
jimplaysgames10
Instructions unclear. Dick stuck in Leviticus
Doismellbacon
LOL mine wouldn't make it past Exodus
samanthadlcruz
a man wrote carl sagan's book too... the issue with the bible wasn't that humans wrote it... it was that they were lying and making up explanations for events that they clearly didn't understand. any actual "creator of the universe" should know that if even one star 'fell to earth like a fig leaf' there wouldn't BE an earth afterwards... but no... revelation claims lots of stars fall to earth and... it still goes on... earth is still here... those trumpet playing angels haven't even arrived yet.
enderite
You had to say it.. LOOK OUT.
mercyPandaRunner
Why would it be more trustworthy if a diety had written it?
ahleron
If it were actually written by god then it would actually be the word of god, which is what it is purported to be. As it stands now, it is the word of man and therefore isn't trustworthy because the very origin of the text is ground in a lie. I dunno about you, but I tend to have more trust in things that accurately represent their origins/background/basis/etc. than things that don't and a lot less in things that lie from the start.
mercyPandaRunner
But why the assumption Yahweh wouldn't lie or make stuff up? There are things in that book that are patently wrong or contradict other parts of the book. There are "plot holes" that are quite significant. And at no point, it is established that said diety is a trustworthy source on itself or the world.
ahleron
I'm not disagreeing with that point at all: a diety could lie. But when a book is supposed to be the word of god but is actually the word of man, then the book itself is a lie. If it were at least writen by god, then at least that part would be true, but it isn't. Whether or not what it says is a lie (which given the contradictions in the bible would seem to indicate yes - it's a pack of lies) doesn't actually matter once you realize that origin is based in a lie. None of it can be trusted then.
mercyPandaRunner
I see. Yes, seen that way, that's a technicality that doesn't matter too much, given the opposite condition is true beyond a doubt.
jimplaysgames10
Like someone who doesn't eat much?
mercyPandaRunner
Touché
MCNewYorkLives
I mean, on the one hand, it would prove that deities exist, which would throw a lot of what I know into question.
mercyPandaRunner
It wouldn't proof much about their nature or trustworthyness. Mythology is full of deceitful deities and figures. Even abrahamic mythology has those prominently.
And the second question would be: Are they "supernatural" or are they just other "godlike" natural beings, like they love to throw around in Star Trek a lot.
Baron29
My only regret, is that I can only upvote this once
CoachMcgurl
I mean, you can do the oath or whatever on anything you want I think.
codenameRadical
There's a really good short essay type book called "On Bullshit", that I'm a huge fan of
TheGodEmperorOfChaos
I have a proposal.
maintenancewine
Or nothing. No book is required.
ticktockbent
I'd like to swear my oath with my hand on a heckin good boy doggo
waeraj
It's the hitchhikers guide to the galaxy for me then.
kazenoneorgel
The kamasutra as well?
Silvergreylion
Or the Anarchist's Cookbook, yeah.
CoachMcgurl
I hear that's the bomb. An explosive read.
OverpricedCrayon
That is true, some presidents have been sworn in on something that wasnt the bible. Teddy didnt use anything and Washington used a law textbook.
phantomeye
"how to lie in court"
Nognom
anything?
Astramancer
n0n53n53
"it has to be a bahbul "
HeadJamistan
Have a video
HeadJamistan
Fuck yeah that's a perfect response.
Icantthinkofacleverusernametouse
"No, I took MY oath on a BIbul"
CoachMcgurl
I don't know who this is.
HeadJamistan
Spokesman for Roy Moore.
JohnnyricoMC
Some moron who couldn't even pronounce "bible" correctly, claiming Obama didn't swear in on a bible (fact check: 1st time he put his hand on a bible that had been used by Lincoln, second time he put his hand on two: the same Lincoln Bible AND one used by MLK) and his presidency was supposedly invalid because of it. Which is BS. You could swear the oath while placing your hands on a Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue, a Spiderman comic or god forbid, Mein Kampf, and it would be valid.
hasdfgb
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFYRkzznsc0
Crowlands
Some "news" guy (Probably Fox news? That type, anyway) who was whining that someone non-christian might not use a bible when swearing an oath of office.
That was his dazed expression when told that people are legally allowed to swear on anything, as a constitutional right.
joepineapplesindrag
I think the guy in the photo was actually an elected official.
Which makes it much worse.
baturro
I think you're right. He says, in the video, that he swore on a Bible when he was sworn into something.
HeadJamistan
Close. Spokesman for Roy Moore
Crowlands
See, that's the kind of ignorance to your job that should get someone Immediately fired for gross negligence.
But then if we did that, we'd basically be destroying the entire Republican party, and where would we be then?
A much better world.
And Conservatives can't have that!
Br0doSwaggins
Kiirdel
I guffawed.
vincentleeprice
THANK YOU THIS NEEDS TO BE HIGHER
SalmySwims
"AH SWORE ON A BAI-BUL"
wheresthehill
Bai? In a red state?
SilentScreamsX
I came looking for this.
JustTawnee
CodeWarrior
My first thought was of this idiot. "You gotta swehr on that bahbul."
kahooki
Exactly. On on side it's hilarious to hear this empty potato... on the other I can't stand to hear this gibberish.
Goodnewwseveryone
My friend doesn’t watch much political commentary and I’m not very good at explaining…would you be so kind to provide some context for the person in this situation?
Barkinsons
This guy was under the impression that you can only swear an oath on the bible, and when the news anchor in the live feed corrected him, this dudes brain just did a full reboot.
DeadxWreckoning
Roy Moore, your typical dumbass republican politician who doesn’t understand how things work
https://youtu.be/WFYRkzznsc0?si=y8ChpMgGwgifr2Qi
youreathing
To be fair, that wasn't Roy Moore. That was his idiot spokesperson, Ted Crockett.
DeadxWreckoning
Oh shoot you’re right. I couldn’t remember the details and I somehow missed “spokesperson” in the YouTube title, which I was going off.
Zetor
Can I use this?
TheGodEmperorOfChaos
raftus
MajorD3rp
I am also interested in the faith.
TheBlueMuppet
On my faith.
daguq
All I can offer to the faith is lip service.
Ranndarr
Baptise me!
TodayIsSlapANaziDay
Come in and tell me more about this religion of yours.
DuelingBrothers
Yes, is there anything else anyone is unsure about when it comes to swearing an oath on something? I'd be happy to let you know if you can for other objects as well.
Howdoyoulikedemapples
kaneinencanto
In a pinch...
BladeTurMoiL
TacosAreDelicious
DrLivingstoneIpresume
in70x
Finally a faith id want to be proselytized with
OCTAVlAN
Asking for a friend. Can anyone order this book online? ...
MajorD3rp
I also want to know this
Somerandomoldguy
What even would be an oath for NASA leadership? Do yoy swear to chuck rockets into the sky and be a building block in broadening humanities aspirations further than this ball of dirt?
imaynotbeasmartmanjenny
All federal employees undertake an oath though for peons its usually just stand and repeat the the PowerPoint while doing your personnel information.
PcJunky
To not leak the fact that the aliens are already on earth.
cyberstormtrooper
That is not the exact wording but essentially, yes
ydwyrd
"I pledge allegiance to outer space..."
d0gZpAw
the secular version (no divine witness) of a sworn oath is a sworn affirmation.
coffeepot583
"Do you solemnly swear to protect the world from devastation, and unite all peoples in our nation?"
acojon
To denounce the evils of truth and love. To extend our reach to the stars above.
Elaralia
Team NASA blast off at the speed of light!
PoopShipDestroyer55
I think you just had to abandon the allegiance to the Reich and pledge to the US
Donoiw
tombeithemist
It's redhat political. The guy who discovered the 3 laws of planetary motion was german astronomer Johannes Kepler. Ergo, the NASA director is an Oathkepler.
ImHereToAssNamesAndTakeKicks
Is it not a bit archaic to recite an oath before taking on a job?
tzahtman
McDonald's? Probably. Being in charge of a large government department with thousands of employees, works with civilians and military, and has to budget taxpayer money while working with Congress? Not really. Even just enlisted have to take an oath and they have far less authority or resources.
ImHereToAssNamesAndTakeKicks
I work in the NHS with millions of employees and fully funded by the tax payer and there's no oaths to the Royal family that need to be taken, even at the highest levels. I was just commenting on a cultural quirk, no offence intended.
LoudBirb
It's archaic in the sense that is purely ceremonial. If you're the type to take an oath seriously, you are also going to be the type that's going to give an honest effort at maintaining good ethics whether you take an oath or not. Conversely, someone who's going to do shit like take bribes or sell info to enemy countries isn't going to stop and go "Oh, wait... shoot. I did promise I wouldn't, I suppose."
tzahtman
Yes it is ceremonial, being part of a ceremony kind of gives that away. An oath doesn't now, nor has it ever, magically kept anyone from breaking it, but that isn't the purpose of an oath. People steal but you don't make stealing legal just because the law doesn't keep it from happening. One doesn't have to attend their school/university graduation but most will; being ceremonial doesn't mean a thing has no value.
LoudBirb
Ceremony doesn't carry the same practical value that degrees or laws do, though. A degree is evidence of formal education. Laws carry enforceable consequences. Oaths, without a backing law or contract, well... don't. I'm not saying they're meaningless (meaning in this context is subjective), but they absolutely are archaic. They're old-fashioned and done for tradition's sake, which is the very definition of the term.
TheMicKing
Based on the current budget cuts for Hubble: "Do you promise to cut budgets, gut programs, and fire researchers any opportunity you get?"
TacoPoweredHelicopter
The aliens? Like you can't go talking about them once you are filled in. Seems pretty obvious.
FlavorIntensifies
To science as hard as you possibly can attempting to save the earth from idiots and further our knowledge of the universe
42underscores
Best comment
in70x
Absolutely… you need to stay chucking those rockets! I have a lot
Of friends as NASA and boy they love rockets
WynnCreek
I mean the first guy they hired liked firing rockets into the air, he just didnt care where they came down.
InfocalypseRising
I assume it’s just a standard loyalty oath associated with leading any govt funded organization
RPCharImages
Theres also some practicality behind it as NASA replaced the USAF's space program as a show of goodwill that the US wasnt exploiting space for military programs, NASA being a civilian organization. The oath is probably a hold over from that time
Cinammontoastcrunch
I think that's correct. And you can swear the oath on any book you want
maintenancewine
Yup. Or no book.
sunyudai
They didn't even need a book when I swore mine, just a verbal oath.
Cinammontoastcrunch
I didn't know you could do no book. That makes that news segment with the redneck politician talking about someone who didn't swear on the bible even funnier
heyletsbefriends
still gross.
wiltsjunk
How so?
Ironferrox
Remember this is an oath because that person is in a government position while I agree a regular civilian should not swear an oath of loyalty to a nations constitution I do agree that people in positions of government no matter how minor should be required to swear an oath of loyalty to said nations governing documents as being in such a position is one where even at minor levels there is greater damage to the citizenry of said nation that can occur if they were to be loyal to some other party.
Ironferrox
The purpose of this oath is so that we are supposed to be able to punish those who break that oath by acting for other entities behalf’s. For instance having taken that oath and then using his position as president to be more loyal to Putin than he was to the United States should be something Donald Trump Should be punished for. In theory that oath exists so we can punish those in power when they sell out to a foreign body.
heyletsbefriends
no, they should just sign a work contract like normal people. swearing oaths is some weird cult shit.
Frederf
If only the government swore loyalty to its citizens
UsernamesAreStupidAnyways
Honestly? Just use a fucking contract...
UsernamesAreStupidAnyways
(I mean, I *get* it. We do it here in Norway too, all government officials swear a one-sentence oath of office that boils down to "obedience and loyalty to Constitution and King". "So help me God" optional. They can also choose to "confirm" the oath, rather than swear it. Making it more like, well, a formal contract than an archaic oath.)
AmbassadorOfAndrew
What’s an oath but just a contract with some flair?
RPCharImages
Pretty much?
APuffOfAirTicklingYourNose
IndigoThursday
They should probably replace that with an NDA that doesn't mention anyone's gods
mikeatike
It's a government agency. I want there to be disclosure.
MrRandom314159
Science is powerful stuff. Imagine a world where only one nation has GPS. An oath is pretense to ensure consequences to discourage leaks.
Forensickle
Yeah, but I am more than happy to break an oath that I swear to invisible cloud man. I'd be more honest swearing an oath on a cute little bee. At least that is real, and too cute to disappoint. But demanding truth by promising a lie that you aren't lying?
childenthusiast
No shit, don't be stupid. That's why she's not using a Bible. "God" may be on paper but you can swear to whomever you want. That point is only there as a personal thing. "I honor/respect x enough that I wouldn't do these bad things because that would be akin to disrespecting x"
insanitycontinuum
I hope she also said "So hope me Carl"
somethingstupidandclever
God in this context being Carl
ElusiveThing
This is some strangely pseudo-fascist shit.
childenthusiast
....no? "I promise I'm doing this job because I want to do the job. I don't hate you guys and am not actively wanting/trying to bring you down. I'm not trying to sabotage your shit or join just to benefit by selling your secrets to someone else. " that's the tldr. How is that racist by any means
4etherling
Why can't they just say that? At least that is straight forward and not open to interpretation.
vegivamp
Fascist and racist are entirely different things, even if they often walk together.
childenthusiast
My phone autocorrected it. Facist apparently isn't a word
pandemicmodedad
Didn't trump break every part of this oath?
[deleted]
[deleted]
DrLOAC
That’s the oath for all US civil servants not just NASA.
sunyudai
1st paragraph is the oath for all civil servants, second and third paragraphs are agency specific.
3nd3rwiggin
He certainly made arguments in court that he did not swear to support the constitution.
pandemicmodedad
Funny how he thinks as command in chief, the highest military position wouldn't have to take an oath to defend the country, which is the whole purpose of the position.
Targe0
Leader of the country, nar they clearly don't have to defend the country. That would be dumb now wouldn't it. /s
Sierrahotel12
This is not the President oath
Leithoa
Which is why they specified "his oath".
TheBlueMuppet
Thith ith noth the Prethidenth oath
4etherling
And they still have to bring God into it. I get that we started as banished puritans but can't we accept that there is a very high percentage of the population that doesn't have faith in diety and would still perform these job duties to the highest standards? Can't we just omit God from the dialog? The only purpose I can think of for it is to guilt believers into celestial pressure from the all seeing eye. Religion is in decline and I hope future generations will be spared this ignorance soon.
ljj4
Though required by law if it is to be an oath, you actually can omit it, though it becomes an affirmation and not an oath. Also the president is specifically not required to add it in their oath of office, possibly Lincoln was the first to add it.
GriffinMann41
IIRC you don't *have* to say 'so help me god' you just have to swear on *something*, from my recollection. 'my god' is just the default phrase, I believe
BellicoseAlgorithm
Yeah, in the general oath most fed employees have to take, the God part is optional. (Or it was when I took one)
RichardPotato
You can skip that if you prefer, no one makes a fuss.
onlyhalfghost
"no one" = Fox News, the entire Republican Party, and about 40% of those who vote
myotheralt
So no one that cares about other people.
anarchoFeline
you can ask that god be left out or use a different god that aligns with your religious beliefs
modus0
"What does god need with a starship?"
TinyLiehon
Bro just likes to collect scale models.
myotheralt
I grew up in the small town of Ridgecrest, not too far from where they filmed those scenes at the Pinnacles at Trona.