Why do most United States Presidents swear to “defend and protect the US Constitution”, while taking their oath over the Bible?

Because nobody in the USA can find a copy of the Constitution of the republic, on which to take said oath? Just asking.

Why did Theodore Roosevelt refuse to take his oath by using the Bible?

Because T. Roosevelt wanted to show that Church and State should be separated. Although he was a devout Christian and a Bible fanatic, Roosevelt remembered that the US Constitution is very clear on the principle of separation of State and religion.

That principle of separation was reinforced by a joint work of the first two US Presidents, Washington and Adams, in 1796-97 (the Treaty of Tripoli, elaborated by Washington’s administration, made into law by Adams). As presidents G. Washington and J. Adams put it: “…the government of the United States of America is NOT, IN ANY SENSE, founded on the Christian Religion… “.

The growth of superstition in the USA is directly related to the increasing decay of the USA. To get an inkling of this, readers can consult Paul Krugman’s excellent essay [New York Times, January 19, 2008] on how superstitious thinking prevents to solve the financial crisis [whereas a similar crisis was solved correctly twenty years ago]. Meanwhile more offerings are made to the plutocratic Gods of America.

The Bible is studied carefully all over the USA, but history, very little. Why should history be studied? To find out that the world was not created the way the Bible say? That would be too complicated, and unpatriotic beside: the nation is “under God” [an oath in public school], in whom it “trusts” [the motto of the USA and the currency since 1956]. So why to change? Is not God’s creation already perfect? Yes we can what? Is not God all in charge? Why to take any responsibility for anything? Is not God in charge? Why to learn anything really new? Why trying to form new thoughts? Is not every thing worth knowing in the Bible already? US citizens do not have to ask, they know.

The metaphysical connects to the psychological, and the psychological to the industrial. It is difficult to love progress, while loving the Bible, and ignoring history. In recent years, the rallying cry of those who supported Bush’s policies was against “progressives”.

Without progress, one will stay in the can. Yes, we can, because we are inside the can. The can, in the USA, is the Bible. The Bible is not just in all hotel rooms, it boxes in all too many American minds, and all too much. American thinking is canned, by the Bible [team sports watched on TV do the rest].  And if one is canned, one can’t get no satisfaction.

So, next time, let’s get some real progress, and please find a copy of the Constitution, to take an oath on. It should be less difficult.

Tags: , ,


  1. Amna Says:

    Hello Patrice.

    I am in agreement (again? What is going on!!). Though, in Obama’s case, I would be willing to entertain the idea that he chose to swear over the Bible for the same reason why Hillary chose to come across as a little less liberal than she probably really is. For the same reason why the bible thumping reverend was chosen to open up the inauguration.


  2. Patrice Ayme Says:

    I agree 100% with you, Amna!

    Obama is a politician, he has to navigate, not just for himself, but also to navigate the entire ponderous ship of state, to waters it does not usually go, or has never gone before, or absolutely does not want to go.

    I do not even believe that Obama is a “believer” in superstition [there is powerful evidence that he does not]. But he had, and has, to play one on TV, because such it is in today’s USA [it will not last, hopefully]. Thus now, he slipped in his speech a call for respecting “Non believers” on the same level as respecting “Christians”, “Muslims” or “Hindus”. One calls that subliminal a message. There were others. Obama sneaked in several references to truth as the ultimate arbiter and reference of national programs, or ultimate values. Somehow, the deity had flown away with Bush’s helicopter.

    Obama also intents to use Warren, as you said, because Warren, one of my official philosophical enemy, views big pictures such as Global Heating, as major sins, and wants to orient his culturally and mentally challenged flock just in the direction where common sense progressives want to go. Warren, between us, makes such a bad case for Christianity, that I wonder if he is not, actually, a double agent planted by the Anti-Christ…

    Speaking of this, I am preparing a more severe frontal attack against Jesus and company…

    Thanks for the input!


  3. Robb Says:

    Patrice: please do keep up the good work.


What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: