Conundrum

[Ronin]

"As an Humanist, with no belief in Gods, I promise to protect and serve the people and uphold the U.S. Constitution to the best of my ability as I have done for many years."

I am an atheist, a Humanist and a police officer facing an official promotional ceremony in four days.

My particular problem is that more and more people at my department are learning of my worldview and, due to some exchanges, I am feeling certain angst about continuing my proactive expression as it may be more of a deterrent to my career path.

Thursday is a watershed event for me as I will be quite exposed and face the standard religious oath test provided by the Mayor.
To compound matters, I work for a city whose population generally holds the same position as their city council (http://www.americanhumanist.org/press/gulfport.html). Their tolerance for certain diversity, in other words, leaves something to be desired.

So, my problem is this:

After the standard oath presented to a large contigent of officers being promoted enmasse...do I utilyze the brief moments after the obligatory "So help me God" not with the expected "I do", but rather with the above statement or some salient shorter equivalent?

I am both seeking opinions from the general members here and stating my honest perspective for any lurkers who may read it.

[viscousmemories]

I admire the hell out of your dedication to your principles, Ronin. But I honestly think if it were me, this isn't one of the battles I'd pick. If I were as committed as you are to serving the people in the capacity you do, I'd take an oath to SpongeBob Squarepants. I can't help but think that your actual contributions are far more important than the ceremonial nonsense it entails.

Of course whatever you choose to do I wish you the best.

[ceptimus]

I'd just go along with the God oath thing. If they believe in god, and you pretending to believe in god makes them happy, why not? It's the same thing with kids and Santa Claus.

[livius drusus]

I'm with vm and cep on this one, Ronin. I honestly don't think it's worth it to make the full humanism statement in the ceremony. You make it every day in the work you do, when you affirm on the witness stand, at home with your family.

"So help me God" doesn't bother me anyway. It's not at all like swearing on the Bible, imo. I say "thank God", "Lord help me" and that kind of thing all the time, so I'd probably say "I do" in that circumstance without a second thought.

Alternatively, I say go with the SpongeBob plan. :sponge:

[lady cop]

Hi Ronin...since we have a new sheriff, our commissions expired when he was sworn on jan. 1. we had a swearing-in en masse which i did not attend due to a health problem, the sheriff called me to come up to his office and be sworn individually...so i did. what was on my mind was "what about the separation of church and state?" since i had just sworn to uphold the constitution etc. and then was required to say "so help me God". you know, i just realized it is simply a tradition and harmless...you and i both know what we're swearing to. i think, in my humble opinion only, this is not the time to create an issue.and it is not a reflection on your committment to your beliefs...you are in a professsion where it is necessary to take that oath and you accepted that. i don't think they're going to let us write our own oaths anytime soon. great about promotion! :detect:

[Clutch Munny]

I think it might be worth quietly inquiring about an understatedly different oath, if I were taking it individually and reciting the whole thing myself.

But if it's just a big Barrel o' Cops chanting "I do" in unison, in response to an oath read by someone else... I'd just say it. And vote for a different mayor.

[seebs]

I would probably ask how they feel about people whose moral systems frown on that kind of oath.

Although I doubt you've ever had a Quaker on the force, many many "oaths" in the legal system may be replaced by an affirmation.

Keep in mind, many Christians (IMHO, all the ones who are actually reading the silly book instead of hitting people with it) will refuse to swear oaths, because such is directly and specifically forbidden, especially swearing by God.

[Dingfod]

Just answer it with "Fuckin-A!"

[lady cop]

Just answer it with "Fuckin-A!"
that certainly would have made an indelible impression on MY sheriff ! :yup:

[Ensign Steve]

Yeah, dude, it's just tradition. At least you're not a doctor.

I swear by Apollo Physician and Asclepius and Hygieia and Panaceia and all the gods and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will fulfil according to my ability and judgment this oath and this covenant:

[Petra]

I agree that you should just go with the flow.

You can challenge protocol at a later date; not for yourself, but for those in the future.

Over here, we get the option (including police officers, armed forces, etc) of taking an oath or making an affirmation. Perhaps you will be instrumental in your region progressing in this way in the future - but don't rock the boat just now. Patience, grasshopper.

[wildernesse]

I would probably ask how they feel about people whose moral systems frown on that kind of oath.

Although I doubt you've ever had a Quaker on the force, many many "oaths" in the legal system may be replaced by an affirmation.

Keep in mind, many Christians (IMHO, all the ones who are actually reading the silly book instead of hitting people with it) will refuse to swear oaths, because such is directly and specifically forbidden, especially swearing by God.


I would also ask if there was an alternative affirmation if it were an individualized ceremony. However, since it seems like an en masse type of event, and people aren't giving individualized responses, then I'm not sure how the affirmation would work.

I'm sure you will make the best decision for your circumstances. :yup:

[Petra]

Yeah, dude, it's just tradition. At least you're not a doctor.

I swear by Apollo Physician and Asclepius and Hygieia and Panaceia and all the gods and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will fulfil according to my ability and judgment this oath and this covenant:



Hey, I like the doctor's one! That's pretty cool.

[Brimshack]

A part of me wants to say that I'd refuse the religious oath, but I think that's the ornery part of me, which I sometimes mistake for the part in charge of keeping principles. If it's a serious threat to your carerr, then do what you have to do.

I am trying to figure out if you will get a separate oath or if you are simply saying yes with all the others. If it's the latter, then by all means just say I do and let it go at that. If it's the mayor, then could you send a request asking him to affirm, leaving out the God part. That way you can just say you do, and hopefully people will not find it worthy of comment. If you have to make a conscious effort to correct the wording, it will be much more noticeable than if the oath is imply different. Then if anyone wants to give you shit about it, you point out that they are the ones causing waves, not you.

[Ensign Steve]

I would also ask if there was an alternative affirmation if it were an individualized ceremony. However, since it seems like an en masse type of event, and people aren't giving individualized responses, then I'm not sure how the affirmation would work.

When I swore into the military (an en masse type of event), the guy who was feeding us the lines said "do hereby swear or affirm" and we had to reply with either "do hereby swear" or "do hereby affrim." There was still that "so help me God" bit on the end, though.

[JoeP]

Have a care, vm. There are self-confessed worshippers, nay, evangelists for SpongeBob SquarePants on this board!

[Zoe]

Have a care, vm. There are self-confessed worshippers, nay, evangelists for SpongeBob SquarePants on this board!

Hmmm. I wonder who?

:chin:

[maddog]

I would approach the mayor's people directly, well before the ceremony, and make an inquiry. All you have to say is that you have a conscientious scruple against swearing and against oaths using God's name, and can the ceremony be conducted as an affirmation, instead of an oath closing with "so help me God." As seebs says, someplace in the NT, it admonishes NOT to "swear by God" -- something about not by heaven, for it is God's throne, nor the earth, for it is God's footstool, or some such. Someone more knowledgeable than I could give you chapter and verse, to cite during your inquiry.
#207

[Godless Dave]

Could you just say "affirm" instead of "swear", and leave off "so help me God"?

[livius drusus]

From what I gathered all he and his colleagues have to say is "I do". Someone else is reading off the rest of it.

[xouper]

Ronin: So, my problem is this: After the standard oath presented to a large contigent of officers being promoted enmasse...do I utilyze the brief moments after the obligatory "So help me God" not with the expected "I do", but rather with the above statement or some salient shorter equivalent?
My guess, and it comes with a money back guarantee, is that if you want to make an issue of this (such as defending your First Amendment rights), you may find it more effective to pursue it under other circumstances where you have more control of the consequences, rather than during an oath ceremony where you may be misinterpreted as a troublemaker. I'm guessing that a ceremony is not the place where you want to draw negative attention to yourself. I could be wrong, though. I'm just thinking out loud here.

[Ronin]

But if it's just a big Barrel o' Cops chanting "I do" in unison, in response to an oath read by someone else... I'd just say it. And vote for a different mayor.

Well, I live in Biloxi so I won't be able to effect the upcoming elections in Gulfport.

Oh, and remember Councilman Hewes from the earlier link?

Election 05 (http://www.wlox.com/Global/story.asp?S=2802714)

Thanks for all of your perspectives on the matter. I have been able to discreetly use MS rule of evidence 603 (http://www.mslegalforms.com/CourtRules/mre/603.html) in certain courts by briefing prosecutors ahead of time.

While one ADA might have assumed the religious conviction motive (as pointed out by seebs), he and others have realized that it is the atheist motive by some letters I have had printed. Nothing has changed and I have made some inroads by maintaining an subtle, non-confrontational insistence upon a non-religious oath prior to my personal testimony. Other times I do just let it pass if a judge requires all witnesses stand and take the oath at once.

This upcoming ceremony is, as liv pointed out, a reading by the Mayor (or his representative) and an expected group response. I don't really need any grief over this issue and will probably just abide the tradition (as long as no specific religion is represented).

These are really good people, basically, and if they do need the comfort of their traditions to motivate them then I would be doing my own principles a disservice by contesting their faith. That said, however, I feel a little like I am failing to effect change for a more inclusive and understanding society by not bringing these issues to the forefront.

And you're right, xouper.

I don't want to be perceived as a trouble maker by expressing fairplay as directed in Article 6 section 3 of the Constitution...it disappoints me that I will most likely be perceived negatively, even "un-American" if I make an issue of it.

Then, in a strange turn of events, if I dismiss the issue and take the religious oath to "uphold the US Constitution"...

I will be violating it.

[Dingfod]

Then, in a strange turn of events, if I dismiss the issue and take the religious oath to "uphold the US Constitution"...

I will be violating it.Well then, by all means, immediately after uttering the words, arrest yourself. Twist your own arm up behind your back and throw yourself to the ground. If you resist, pummel yourself good, maybe even pepperspray yourself. Of course, the knee in the back thing might be a bit difficult achieve, but you could try. :wink:

[Goliath]

If I were you, Ronin, I would refuse, under any circumstances, to swear an oath to any god of any kind. I'd also contact a lawyer before the ceremony, so that if reprecussions do occur, you can sue the hell out of your department.

[Dingfod]

Yeah, be confrontational, that always wins friends and influences people.

[Goliath]

Yeah, be confrontational, that always wins friends and influences people.

Yes, it certainly can influence people. And who said anything about winning friends?

[maddog]

Well, you know, the official text probably has parentheticals: "I do solemnly swear {affirm} that I will faithfully discharge the duties ... etc." The {so help me God} is just a parenthetical (it's probably not in the official printed text, but said because it's customary) during which you remain silent and opt out; then at the end, everybody catches up together and says "I do" to the substantive part -- i.e., what they are actually swearing or affirming. If it's possible to alert the ceremonial people well beforehand and inquire about leaving the ostensibly parenthetical phrase out, well and good. If not, it's not a hill to die on.

Another (probably pretty unlikely) option might be to ask for a private one-on-one ceremony rather than the mass one, in which an affirmation, rather than an oath, would be recited.

The "lawsuit" idea is a nonstarter. There is a huge downside and at this point no upside. Not without a lot of other things that would have to be done first. There just isn't time to do the necessary groundwork. And, if you want to make yourself crazy, become a litigant. Even with justice on your side, the costs are enormous. And I'm not just talking aobut money, either. So, you won't win any friends, you'll only lose them in this situation. And you won't influence anyone, either.

P.S. I've (stupidly) only just tumbled to the pregnant implication in this whole discussion: Ronin's being promoted!! Yay! Congratulations and well done, Ronin!

210

[TomJoe]

Fun situation Ronin.

A couple of months back, here at the university that I work at, we were notified that we had two weeks to sign a "Loyalty Oath" to the laws and constitution of the State of Oklahoma. If we didn't sign, they would withhold our paychecks... just before Christmas.

Fun stuff.

I wasn't too keen on signing a loyalty oath, especially since I didn't know if I agreed (I'd abide, no problem, but it asked for my support and agreement) with every law set forth by the State of Oklahoma, or I would agree with every law passed after I signed the form. Being issued a speeding ticket literally thirty feet from my doorstep the week before wasn't helping matters either.

So I was left with a choice... the choice based on principle: To hell with this loyalty oath... let them withhold my pay and I'll see them in court... or the one based on practicality: Heck, I'm a few months removed from graduating, I'm leaving this pit of a state for a better environment eventually, so just sign the stupid form, get paid so I can eat ham and turkey on Christmas day, and let this blow up in the universities face some other time.

Perhaps I'm a pansy, but my stomach won out.

So what am I saying? It sounds like when you have to give testimony, you're already discreetly voicing your concerns to those you must interact with, so I'd just go along with the public brou-ha-ha and handle it as your conscience dictates in the times that it matters most.

PS: Thank you for your service. Police and firefighters have the most thankless, but most important jobs I can imagine.

[Ronin]

Well, you know, the official text probably has parentheticals: "I do solemnly swear {affirm} that I will faithfully discharge the duties ... etc." The {so help me God} is just a parenthetical (it's probably not in the official printed text, but said because it's customary) during which you remain silent and opt out; then at the end, everybody catches up together and says "I do" to the substantive part -- i.e., what they are actually swearing or affirming. If it's possible to alert the ceremonial people well beforehand and inquire about leaving the ostensibly parenthetical phrase out, well and good. If not, it's not a hill to die on.

Another (probably pretty unlikely) option might be to ask for a private one-on-one ceremony rather than the mass one, in which an affirmation, rather than an oath, would be recited.

The "lawsuit" idea is a nonstarter. There is a huge downside and at this point no upside. Not without a lot of other things that would have to be done first. There just isn't time to do the necessary groundwork. And, if you want to make yourself crazy, become a litigant. Even with justice on your side, the costs are enormous. And I'm not just talking aobut money, either. So, you won't win any friends, you'll only lose them in this situation. And you won't influence anyone, either.

P.S. I've (stupidly) only just tumbled to the pregnant implication in this whole discussion: Ronin's being promoted!! Yay! Congratulations and well done, Ronin!

210

Thanks maddog and to everyone. It took quite a bit to get here and I think that the inroads I have been making slowly and steadily by example has been a good thing overall.

While I can understand the position you offer Goliath, I am simply not confident that such a confrontation is worthwhile. My Great-Grandfather stood down and assimilated his native family into the prominent worldview of his day for a survival beyond just his existence.

After all, other than some words, I cannot assert that I am really being oppressed or denied a seat at the front of the bus. My Chief and much of the admin know of my worldview and affiliation and have still presented me with awards of recognition...and, obviously, promotion.

The more I bounce this around, and with all of the help here, I think I will simply continue with the steady progression of humanistic principle.

[Ronin]

Fun situation Ronin.

A couple of months back, here at the university that I work at, we were notified that we had two weeks to sign a "Loyalty Oath" to the laws and constitution of the State of Oklahoma. If we didn't sign, they would withhold our paychecks... just before Christmas.

Fun stuff.

I wasn't too keen on signing a loyalty oath, especially since I didn't know if I agreed (I'd abide, no problem, but it asked for my support and agreement) with every law set forth by the State of Oklahoma, or I would agree with every law passed after I signed the form. Being issued a speeding ticket literally thirty feet from my doorstep the week before wasn't helping matters either.

So I was left with a choice... the choice based on principle: To hell with this loyalty oath... let them withhold my pay and I'll see them in court... or the one based on practicality: Heck, I'm a few months removed from graduating, I'm leaving this pit of a state for a better environment eventually, so just sign the stupid form, get paid so I can eat ham and turkey on Christmas day, and let this blow up in the universities face some other time.

Perhaps I'm a pansy, but my stomach won out.

So what am I saying? It sounds like when you have to give testimony, you're already discreetly voicing your concerns to those you must interact with, so I'd just go along with the public brou-ha-ha and handle it as your conscience dictates in the times that it matters most.

PS: Thank you for your service. Police and firefighters have the most thankless, but most important jobs I can imagine.

That is an amazing story, TomJoe.

It gives the world a fresh new perspective on "The land of the free..."

<doubletake>

You were given a speeding ticket by police and are still thanking me for my service?

You've made my day.

:thankee:

[livius drusus]

For you, TomJoe: :pansy: Your handle is a keyword and everything. :giggles:

[Petra]

Your handle is a keyword and everything. :giggles:



Nice. :giggle:

[viscousmemories]

Just thinking aloud...

You are a paid public servant. The citizens you protect and serve have certain expectations of what that means, and I'd venture to say that one such expectation is that you will submit to the authority of the institution you're a part of. I suspect many people would argue that as such you're in no position to be an ideologue (which, true or not, is surely how you'd be seen if you made a stand on this).

Anyway I know you'll do the right thing and I wish you the best, Ronin. Congratulations. :yup:

[Dingfod]

A couple of months back, here at the university that I work at, we were notified that we had two weeks to sign a "Loyalty Oath" to the laws and constitution of the State of Oklahoma. If we didn't sign, they would withhold our paychecks... just before Christmas. Man that sucks. Oklahoma has what is probably the lengthiest and most comprehensive constitution (http://oklegal.onenet.net/okcon/) of any state or nation anywhere. They are constantly amending it for this or that.

[HelenM]

it disappoints me that I will most likely be perceived negatively, even "un-American" if I make an issue of it.

Yes, there's a disappointing irony here. Whatever you do, the presuppositions of your hearers probably will cause them to be somewhat misled. And taking pains to be honest may end up giving a more misleading impression of you, overall, than going along with words which you know, strictly speaking, aren't completely true of you.

If your hearers don't have a box labelled "decent person who doesn't believe in God", then making an issue of your non-belief (for the sake of honesty) isn't going to bring it into existence.

Nevertheless, I respect the convictions of those who will not go along with words which aren't true of them, no matter what the consequences, because to them that would be lying and they refuse to lie.

Helen

[Dingfod]

Yeah, be confrontational, that always wins friends and influences people.

Yes, it certainly can influence people. And who said anything about winning friends?Nobody. But like the old saying goes, you can attract more flies with honey than with vinegar.

[viscousmemories]

Nobody. But like the old saying goes, you can attract more flies with honey than with vinegar.
I believe godfry debunked that (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?p=24500#post24500), actually. :D

[Ronin]

Just thinking aloud...

You are a paid public servant. The citizens you protect and serve have certain expectations of what that means, and I'd venture to say that one such expectation is that you will submit to the authority of the institution you're a part of. I suspect many people would argue that as such you're in no position to be an ideologue (which, true or not, is surely how you'd be seen if you made a stand on this).

Anyway I know you'll do the right thing and I wish you the best, Ronin. Congratulations. :yup:

Thanks, vm.

I think I am able to accept a certain level of personal hypocrisy on those grounds.

For the greater good, I suppose.


If your hearers don't have a box labelled "decent person who doesn't believe in God", then making an issue of your non-belief (for the sake of honesty) isn't going to bring it into existence.

That seems right, Helen (good to see you again, btw).

I think that I have made some converts with the slow, steady approach.

It may be better to continue that methodology so that more boxes can become labelled "decent person who doesn't believe in God", which is a goal of sorts for me, afterall.

:wave:

[LadyShea]

I agree with everyone here Ronin. You can say "I do" honestly about the actual oaths, so I wouldn't worry about the little "so help me God", which is meaningless anyway. What exactly are they asking God to help them with?

Oh and hearty congrats!

[TomJoe]

But like the old saying goes, you can attract more flies with honey than with vinegar.

I thought you used honey for bees. I've always noticed that flies are attracted to copious amounts of crap and roadkill... however that hardly makes for a wisdomly adage.

You catch more flies with a dead, liquidizing animal than vinegar. :chin:

[TomJoe]

Nobody. But like the old saying goes, you can attract more flies with honey than with vinegar.
I believe godfry debunked that (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?p=24500#post24500), actually. :D

Dang it... a day late and a dollar short again.

[Dingfod]

Nobody. But like the old saying goes, you can attract more flies with honey than with vinegar.
I believe godfry debunked that (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?p=24500#post24500), actually. :DDepends on the species of fly. Fruit flies might be quite drawn to honey and repelled by vinegar.

Bartleby's, on flies, honey and vinegar. (http://www.bartleby.com/59/3/youcancatchm.html)

The Straight Dope. (http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mflyhoney.html)

[viscousmemories]

Depends on the species of fly. Fruit flies might be quite drawn to honey and repelled by vinegar.

Bartleby's, on flies, honey and vinegar. (http://www.bartleby.com/59/3/youcancatchm.html)

The Straight Dope. (http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mflyhoney.html)
And people wonder why I'm agnostic...

[Dingfod]

And people wonder why I'm agnostic...You don't believe I'm god?

[viscousmemories]

You don't believe I'm god?
I don't know.

[Ronin]

Well, the festivities have come to an end and I now possess a pair of golden chevrons.

It went off pretty much as I expected, but with some pleasant surprises.

As the PD Chaplain (Baptist) approached the podium for the invocation at the invitation of the Chief (Methodist)...the Chief called out to some late comers (apparently from the Methodist church) to take the seats along the front row which were left vacant by the Baptists. Some polite laughter ensued and the invocation began. That took some brass ones.

At the Chaplain's request to bow heads and pray, I began a survey of the rather large crowd for others not performing the rather harmless exercise. I actually caught the eyes of several folks who were simply letting the message play out. Of course, a couple of them I knew were just checking on me, in good humor, to see how I would respond ...and I expect some conversations will emerge fairly soon about it.

The actual oath was rather longer than expected (mostly involving being committed to service) and I made no issue of the last four words.

Later, after the reception and general chit-chat subsided, I sat at my desk and began reading through the formal color pamphlet that was given out to everyone as they had entered.

Aside from the list of ceremonial events, it included the following message:

"This is the beginning of a New Day.
You have been given this day to use as you will.

You can waste it or you can use it to make your Community a better place to live.

What you do today is important because you are exchanging a day of your life for it.

When tomorrow comes...this day will be gone forever; in its place will be somethiing you left behind...

Let it be something good."

No Gods, no Monsters, no scripture...just a simple humanistic message.

I greatly appreciated that touch and think that I made the right decision.

Thanks again for all the personal opinions and perspective.

[Ensign Steve]

Congratulations, Ronin. I'm glad your day went well. :)

[viscousmemories]

Great news, Ronin. Congratulations! :)



So... what're you gonna do with two golden gas stations? :chin:

[lady cop]

Congrats Sarge! :yessir:

[livius drusus]

It sounds like you had a great day, Ronin. Many felicitations. :appl:

[viscousmemories]

many felicitations
Whoa! if I knew blowjobs were being handed out...

[livius drusus]

You'd what? Sign up for the police academy and hope they don't notice that whole felony record thing? :giggle:

[Petra]

Nice. :yup:


Congratulations, Sergeant.

/me salutes

[Brimshack]

I think you did make the right decision Ronin. One other thing that occured to me thinking aout this is that anyone with a minority intellectual view is at a disadvantage in ceremonial contexts. People will interpret what you do in light of their own beliefs. And if you are to have a hope in Hell of getting them to understand your pov, you will need to actually talk to them. Strong symbolic statements just won't give you the opportunity to do that. Better to pick your fights on more advantageous grounds.

Congrats!

So, now that you're a Sarge, can you look into whether or not it's okayto be a Kiwi? Honestly, I think some arrests ar in order.

[Ronin]

So, now that you're a Sarge, can you look into whether or not it's okayto be a Kiwi? Honestly, I think some arrests ar in order.

You're kidding, right?!

She's been angling for the :cuffs: for quite awhile now.

I ask you...how would that ever be a deterrent for such aberrant Kiwiness?

Thanks again for the congrats everyone!

[Petra]

She's been angling for the :cuffs: for quite awhile now.

Heheh. In the few times I have been arrested I have never been handcuffed, despite my best efforts.

I ask you...how would that ever be a deterrent for such aberrant Kiwiness?

Indeed. You can jail us, beat us (at board/bored games), handcuff us to the bed and thrash us mercilessly with the rough underside of your tongues - but the Kiwi in the Kiwi will remain. Fear is not a factor for us. :cool: