Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I'd like to swear allegiance to Sheogorath when I take my oath. Can I do that?

 Kojiro wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

God means any deity, and is not specific.

No it doesn't. It specifically means the Christian god. That's why it appears as 'God' and not (insert deity of choice). We all know what a god is and we all know what is being referenced when someone says God.

To put it another way, I could say god is loving, but you'd have no idea who I'm talking about. Or I could say God is loving and you'd *instantly* know I mean the Christian god, because capital 'G' God is ONLY used for that particular god. Like it or not that oath refers to Christianity and I would bet my house if you asked those who voted for it that was their understanding.

God with a capital G is not only used for the Christian God. It is used in English anytime God is used as a proper noun, and is sometimes used in English by those of other faiths including Islam, Hinduism, certain Native American religions, and Baha'i, among others. You can make a valid claim that "God" most often refers to the Christian God when used by Christians, but it is not the case that they are the only ones who refer to God with a capital G in English.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
Then 'obviously' there is no need to tread on a tradition, because its not currently fashionable to some. Tradiotns need not blow like the wind being chopped and changed whenever an individual complains, settle for that and you will have no culture of value.

Traditions: srious bizness vary important! Freedom of conscience: who the hell cares?

 Hordini wrote:
Allah is just the Arabic word for God. Arabic-speaking Christians and Jews pray to Allah as well, so there really isn't a problem with a Christian saying "so help me Allah," theologically speaking.

What about “So help me Satan”? Would Christians be okay with it? Because sure if some of the Bible is true, I do not feel more respect for God than they have for Satan.

Why would you ask a ridiculous question like that? Do you think Christians would be okay with "So help me Satan?" And I'm not sure what you mean with your last sentence.

 LordofHats wrote:
I'd like to swear allegiance to Sheogorath when I take my oath. Can I do that?

Only if you say the whole oath backwards.

ecitcarp emos deen annog m'I

The plot thickens

Over the past week, a controversy has erupted on the internet centered on an airman stationed at Creech Air Force Base in Nevada who has been notified that his re-enlistment will be denied because he scratched out the phrase “so help me God” on his written enlistment oath. The situation has prompted a passionate discussion about the role of faith in the military, but its genesis has more to do with legal and bureaucratic issues than it does with cultural ones.

Leave it to the USAFto be different and skewer it left and right

“Reciting ‘So help me God’ in the reenlistment and commissioning oaths is a statutory requirement under Title 10 USC 502,” Air Force spokeswoman Rose Richeson said Thursday. AFI 36-2606 “is consistent with the language mandated in 10 USC 502. Paragraph 5.6 [and] was changed in October 2013 to reflect the aforementioned statutory requirement and airmen are no longer authorized to omit the words ‘So help me God.’”

Leave it to Congress..

- See more at: http://www.moaablogs.org/battleofthebilge/2014/09/sohelpmegod/#sthash.rhybVsja.dpuf

 Kojiro wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

God means any deity, and is not specific.

No it doesn't. It specifically means the Christian god. That's why it appears as 'God' and not (insert deity of choice). We all know what a god is and we all know what is being referenced when someone says God.

To put it another way, I could say god is loving, but you'd have no idea who I'm talking about. Or I could say God is loving and you'd *instantly* know I mean the Christian god, because capital 'G' God is ONLY used for that particular god. Like it or not that oath refers to Christianity and I would bet my house if you asked those who voted for it that was their understanding.

To this point:

The names of God, specific deities, religious figures, and holy books

God the Father
the Virgin Mary
the Bible
the Greek gods
Moses
Shiva
Buddha
Zeus
Exception: Do not capitalize the nonspecific use of the word "god."

Taken from https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/592/01/ a site hosted by Purdue University.

The oath across the entire DoD, specifically uses God with a capitol G, which specifically means the Judeo-Christian-Muslim variety.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

The oath across the entire DoD, specifically uses God with a capitol G, which specifically means the Judeo-Christian-Muslim variety.

No, it doesn't.

Specifically, God with a capital G is used anytime God is being used as a proper noun, which, in English, is not exclusive to the God of the Abrahamic faiths.

 Hordini wrote:


Specifically, God with a capital G is used anytime God is being used as a proper noun, which, in English, is not exclusive to the God of the Abrahamic faiths.

I literally JUST posted the English language rules for the use of the word god, from a major US university no less... God is only used as a proper noun when talking about the Christian one. For instance, if I hold Thor as my chief diety, I STILL must refer to him as "my god" not "my God"

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Hordini wrote:


Specifically, God with a capital G is used anytime God is being used as a proper noun, which, in English, is not exclusive to the God of the Abrahamic faiths.

I literally JUST posted the English language rules for the use of the word god, from a major US university no less... God is only used as a proper noun when talking about the Christian one. For instance, if I hold Thor as my chief diety, I STILL must refer to him as "my god" not "my God"

Did you read my previous post? I went to the link. I'm not trying to be a dick, but your interpretation of that information is not correct. "Nonspecific use of the word god" does not mean that God is only used to refer to the Abrahamic God.





Automatically Appended Next Post:
Your Thor example is correct, but that doesn't support your point.

"Thor is my god," is correct.

You could also say "Thor is God," because in that case God is being used as a proper noun, rather than a common noun. Similar to words to mother, father, mom, and dad, the word "god" can be used as both a common and proper noun.

 Hordini wrote:

You could also say "Thor is God,"

And if you wrote that, and turned it in to an English teacher it would be circled in red ink. Right or wrong, it is in fact, how our society has deemed the "correct" usage of the word.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Hordini wrote:

You could also say "Thor is God,"

And if you wrote that, and turned it in to an English teacher it would be circled in red ink. Right or wrong, it is in fact, how our society has deemed the "correct" usage of the word.

Why would it? Unless she thought it was a typo and I meant, "Thor is a god," which does not have the same meaning as "Thor is God."

God is capitalized when used as a proper noun, which includes more than just when referring to the God of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. Nothing in the link that you posted contradicts what I've said. Read my previous post.

Going to throw this out.

How is the word "God" view in publications.....mainly FM's governing Religion

What do you mean FM?

 Hordini wrote:
What do you mean FM?

Jihadin needs his own special mouse over dictionary some days.

[quote=Shadow Captain Edithae 614473 7191984 5d42f8b6fbac0029cbdc070da02a0759.jpg


So you're against a requirement to swear allegiance specifically to the Christian, but you're against people of no religious belief choosing to opt out? Effectively what you're saying is Religious people have Freedom of Religion, but a-religious people do not have the Freedom of no Religion because...its a tradition? (which as others have pointed out is a lie, it was a recent addition).

How the hell do you rationalise hypocrisy like this?

 motyak wrote:

 Hordini wrote:
What do you mean FM?

Jihadin needs his own special mouse over dictionary some days.

I just realized he might mean field manuals. Is that what you're referring to, Jihadin?

If so, my answer to your question is, "I have no idea."

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

So you're against a requirement to swear allegiance specifically to the Christian, but you're against people of no religious belief choosing to opt out? Effectively what you're saying is Religious people have Freedom of Religion, but a-religious people do not have the Freedom of no Religion because...its a tradition? (which as others have pointed out is a lie, it was a recent addition).

How the hell do you rationalise hypocrisy like this?

There is no hypocrisy, the words of the oath haver bearing to the service, no belief in a deity is assumed of the oath swearer, or atheists in the past will have been unable to have sworn the oath.
No freedoms are infringed, the person swearing the oath need only affirm their duty to the constitution, the president and to the officers above them, not to any God.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

People should learn to be a little less butthurt, especially if they are going to join a fighting profession.

Likewise, Christians (yourself included) should be a little less butt hurt when other people choose to opt out from your religious beliefs.

Go ahead opt out, however there is a difference between opting out and saying remove the text to fit my feelings. You are opting everyone out, like it or not.

 carlos13th wrote:


That's ridiculous. By not wanting to swear a false oath to something they do not believe in atheists are not enforcing their beliefs on anyone. else. They are having the religious beliefs of another group enforced upon them by a government agency something that is explicitly non constitutional.

Nobody is asking the person joining the USAF to believe in God.

 carlos13th wrote:

Yeah I agree they are ignorant but these are the same people who claim that an atheist should just say the words because it doesn't matter.

The ignorance is your own, no God is specified. ther words are a cultural suffix not tied into any one religion. However the actual coponents of the oath are specified.

 Kojiro wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

God means any deity, and is not specific.

No it doesn't. It specifically means the Christian god. That's why it appears as 'God' and not (insert deity of choice). We all know what a god is and we all know what is being referenced when someone says God.

It is generally polite to use capitalisation for a deity. Judaism and Islam use far more strict restrictions for writing the word God than Christianity does. Hinduism and Krshna consciousness also capitalises the word God in its works using the Latin script.
An oath specifically to the Christian God will normally have a different form anyway, usually invoking the Trinity. Catholics oaths do, some of Protestantism doesn't usually include formal oaths are oaths are forbidden in New Testament law.

James 5:12
Above all, my brothers and sisters, do not swear--not by heaven or by earth or by anything else. All you need to say is a simple "Yes" or "No." Otherwise you will be condemned.

Consequently oaths of this sort are taken very loosely and not religiously at all, to do so would be contradictory. The main text is what is important. Again specifically to this oath the promise to serve the President and appounted officers. Note that the wording does include the option to swear or affirm this is in keeping with the Biblical instruction. Were this a 'Christian oath' the option to swear would have to be removed from the text.

 Kojiro wrote:

To put it another way, I could say god is loving, but you'd have no idea who I'm talking about. Or I could say God is loving and you'd *instantly* know I mean the Christian god, because capital 'G' God is ONLY used for that particular god. Like it or not that oath refers to Christianity and I would bet my house if you asked those who voted for it that was their understanding.

Just as well you didnt bet the house. The terms of the oath are loosely cultural and not specific to any one religion as proven above.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Traditions: srious bizness vary important! Freedom of conscience: who the hell cares?

Military tradition is important. And no freedom of conscience is impaired. Atheists have been joining the US military for a long time, this has only cropped up now. Someone insists that the whole of society revolve arouhnd them and that the oath odf service be rewritten for thier personal advantage. Freedom of consciousness is a moral standpoint, not a point of self-centred divisiveness.

 Hordini wrote:

What about “So help me Satan”? Would Christians be okay with it? Because sure if some of the Bible is true, I do not feel more respect for God than they have for Satan.

Again no specific divinity is mentioned. If you spoke the words and had Satan in mind thats up to you. The only specificity in the wording is towards the officers and the President. If you want to you can think that the President is Satan also, whatever floats your boat.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Why have the other services not complied?

Not sure what exactly you mean, but both times that I reenlisted in the army, during the "pre oath interview/practice" each time the officer who was reading the oath would brief me to repeat after them, but that I did not have to end the oath with "God"... so the Army's re-up oath ends with either "So help me." or "So help me god"
....

What I mean is that the Air Force oath used to be like your army oath -- non-Christians could "affirm" rather than swear by the name of God -- and the Air Force changed it a few years ago. They have given as their reason that a new law by Congress compelled them to change it to the Christian only version.

Why is it that the other armed forces have not found it necessary to change their oath too? Did Congress pass a law that only applied to the Air Force? If so, why?

Given that the current Air Force oath seems to violate the constitution the whole situation is murky.

FM = Field Manuals
AR = Army Regulation
Pam =.......

Actually I posted this link once so I post again
http://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/165_Series_Collection_1.html

Your looking for AR-165-1

Orlanth, you messed up your quote brackets. I didn't write you have me quoted as saying.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

Given that the current Air Force oath seems to violate the constitution the whole situation is murky.

As I said before, that's probably part of why the other branches haven't changed their oaths.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Why have the other services not complied?

Not sure what exactly you mean, but both times that I reenlisted in the army, during the "pre oath interview/practice" each time the officer who was reading the oath would brief me to repeat after them, but that I did not have to end the oath with "God"... so the Army's re-up oath ends with either "So help me." or "So help me god"
....

What I mean is that the Air Force oath used to be like your army oath -- non-Christians could "affirm" rather than swear by the name of God -- and the Air Force changed it a few years ago. They have given as their reason that a new law by Congress compelled them to change it to the Christian only version.

Why is it that the other armed forces have not found it necessary to change their oath too? Did Congress pass a law that only applied to the Air Force? If so, why?

Given that the current Air Force oath seems to violate the constitution the whole situation is murky.

Air Force tried to comply with what Congress approved

“Reciting ‘So help me God’ in the reenlistment and commissioning oaths is a statutory requirement under Title 10 USC 502,” Air Force spokeswoman Rose Richeson said Thursday. AFI 36-2606 “is consistent with the language mandated in 10 USC 502. Paragraph 5.6 [and] was changed in October 2013 to reflect the aforementioned statutory requirement and airmen are no longer authorized to omit the words ‘So help me God.’”

Air Force should have done what the other three branches did (four with Coast Guard) and violated the KISS rule of "One can only add but never take away".

 Jihadin wrote:
Air Force tried to comply with what Congress approved

So either the Air Force was singled out becuase they would do it, or they were the only branch that followed through with it when the others didn't. Seems to be a problem either way.

It's kind of like making someone of the Jewish faith eat pork for some atheists.

 Orlanth wrote:
Military tradition is important.

And that is why they decide to change the rule to make that God art compulsory, lol.

 Orlanth wrote:
And no freedom of conscience is impaired.

Yes, you are just asking people to pretend to believe in God, what is wrong with that?

 Orlanth wrote:

 Hordini wrote:
What about “So help me Satan”? Would Christians be okay with it? Because sure if some of the Bible is true, I do not feel more respect for God than they have for Satan.

Again no specific divinity is mentioned. If you spoke the words and had Satan in mind thats up to you.

Quote error (that was me, not Hordini).
God is pretty specific. Even in the broadest meaning of the term, It means the deity from a monotheism. No polytheism, no atheism, and, yes, no satanism.

 Orlanth wrote:

Just as well you didnt bet the house. The terms of the oath are loosely cultural and not specific to any one religion as proven above.

Then why does it have to be (captial G) God? Why can't it be a blank section, like the others, personal and filled in by the person swearing the oath?

Saying that it could- and this is the United States- mean something other than God is reaching at best, and as I said the members of Congress who put this back in, I will assure you, were not thinking of any other god than God. If you want to keep insisting that it's anything but a deliberate insertion of Christianity into a military branch, go right ahead. But it was *added* explicitly and deliberately where it was once *optional*. Was the old way so broken it needed that God needed to be enforced by Congress?

According to this page...

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2012-title10/pdf/USCODE-2012-title10-subtitleA-partII-chap31-sec502.pdf

The words "So help me God" were added in 1962. Therefore all of the armed forces have arguably been noncompliant with the oath since then, until the Air Force decided by itself last year to require the phrase to be used.

 Orlanth wrote:

 carlos13th wrote:


That's ridiculous. By not wanting to swear a false oath to something they do not believe in atheists are not enforcing their beliefs on anyone. else. They are having the religious beliefs of another group enforced upon them by a government agency something that is explicitly non constitutional.

Nobody is asking the person joining the USAF to believe in God.

They are asking them to swear an oath to god. One they do not believe in completely invalidating the oath.

 carlos13th wrote:

Yeah I agree they are ignorant but these are the same people who claim that an atheist should just say the words because it doesn't matter.

The ignorance is your own, no God is specified. ther words are a cultural suffix not tied into any one religion. However the actual coponents of the oath are specified.

It seems in your rush to get defensive and insulting you didn't actually read what the conversation was about. The ignorance I was referring to was in regard to people who don't know that Allah, God and Yaweh are all words for the same deity. Unless you didn't know this it wasn't you I was refearing too.

Your attempts to make the discriminated against (the non religious or anyone who wants to join the airforce but does not believe in God) seem like they are doing the discriminating for not wanting to turn their enlisting loath into a lie is not only blatantly dishonest but extremely common among the Christian majority in the United States. You are not free to enforce the majority belief on a minority no matter how much you wish it show. The separation of church and state is their for a reason, this is unconstitutional.

Their is no doubt that in this instance as in pretty much anytime an American uses the word God such as "In God we Trust." Or "One nation under God" to the airforce "So Help me God" they are referring to the Christian God. To claim they are not is intellectually dishonest. Also to say that they should carry on due to tradition is also intellectually dishonest considering that traditionally neither of these references to God were in there but they were added later.

Since apparently there is a stipulation in the constitution that offices should not have a religious test, to require a religious oath is unconstitutional whatever the religion that might be involved.

sirlynchmob wrote:

IMO, the other branches have more real issues to worry about than trying to force people to say god.

Namely killing people and cleaning the pebble beds outside the HQ building.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

IMO, the other branches have more real issues to worry about than trying to force people to say god.

Namely killing people and cleaning the pebble beds outside the HQ building.

Always in that order or is it at the CO's discretion?