This is the same as saying only christians are fit for office.
It is a tradition that doesn’t need fixed.
Unless you want to chip away at tradition.
Bless your lil heart.
That’s the answer.
People can finish the oath with whatever they want to finish it with.
What value does tradition for tradition’s sake have?
I’m fine with saying it.
There are people who aren’t.
You shouldn’t force it on others.
Did the daughters get any choice in that price or were they just property?
That’s ridiculous. Traditions are stopped, modified, started, every single day. We’re not beholden to repeat what our ancestors did simply because they did it. If we were we’d still be hunter-gatherers.
It’s not for the oath of office.
You are promoting the government threaten you with “So help you God” before testifying.
you can affirm that you will tell the truth.
just as you can affirm to be president.
no god required
Shush, you’ll ruin our reputation as godless heathens.
We don’t know whether or not Lot discussed this with anyone else in his family, or whether he made a unilateral decision. This wasn’t the point of the story. The point of the story is that Lot was willing to give what was dearest to him to protect those to whom he was extending hospitality.
Of course, the next argument modern man will make is that it was very inhospitable of Lot to bar his door to the townspeople and deny them whatever it was they wanted that was inside his house. They will argue that of course Lot, in the name of hospitality, should have turned over his current visitors in order to welcome that next set of visitors and all their demands.
Where do you say Lot should have drawn the line? Lot thought his first duty was to his visitors. He put them before family. That’s kind of like Jesus and those 99 sheep he leaves to go after the one, isn’t it?
Now I’m seeing Reb Tevye in my mind’s eye, fingers pointing skyward:
Why do you believe atheists feel the need to bow to anyone or anything? I respect you feel the need to bow to your diety. Please respect the fact that I and many others don’t believe in any higher power we need to bow to.
Even property is usually afforded more respect than being offered up to the howling mob for mass rape.
Your mind may be emphasizing something I never intended anyone to emphasize. My point is that there is something greater than government, which should be acknowledged as greater than government. In this case, my use of ‘bow’ is synonymous with yield–that government itself must yield to a higher power, a greater good, an ideal–however, you as an atheist, wish to paint it.
Or, you can flat out declare government is the highest power, and everyone under that government better yield to anything and all the government decrees.
Sure. The constitution.
They fail miserably in that regard but the constitution is a higher authority than the federal or state governments.
I don’t believe government is the highest power. I believe the individual is the highest power. Government is merely a collection of individuals.
When you have more than one individual, which individual has the highest power? Or, is ‘highest’ a bit of hyperbole and you are saying we all have equal power? Which…we don’t. Or, if we do, I certainly am not seeing it.
You could ask the same question about gods.